Sifu Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 It'll surely signal the end of the SportsDirect signs though. Probably not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Something tells me an O2 sponsorship wouldn't get a very good reception. Aye, why would they want all this negative COVERAGE? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 It'll surely signal the end of the SportsDirect signs though. Probably not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Oops Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Telegraph Sport understands the mobile phone company O2 is one possible partner, particularly as Llambias wants to turn the 52,000 capacity stadium into a multipurpose venue, capable of hosting concerts and shows in the summer. Something like the St.James o2 Arena is a possibility then. They can't call it the o2 Arena as thats already taken! o2@sportsdirect arena.cjb.net F Y P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Advertising phones at the exact time and place where no-one is capable of using the product, great idea. Might as well rename the Stadium of Light the Imperial Leather Arena. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Any reputable company are going to look at the level of negative publicity this has generated and run a mile. It'll be the SDA until he f***s off. Not too sure about that tbh. Similar to the Barcelona shirt thing. They tested the water with the charity getting everyone used to their shirt having a name on it then bang, first shirt sponsor in history. I think any other company would have had second thoughts about renaming St James' Park, I think they'll find it far easier to rename Sports Direct Arena. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Advertising phones at the exact time and place where no-one is capable of using the product, great idea. Might as well rename the Stadium of Light the Imperial Leather Arena. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
binnsy Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Just got round to listening to Llambiar's interview from this morning on radio Newcastle, he's not very good at his job is he? already admitted he was unable to get a striker "over the line" and now after 2 years of trying couldn't get a sponsorship deal over the line either..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenham Mag Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Hope to hear something on question time tonight about it. It's held in Newcastle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Any reputable company are going to look at the level of negative publicity this has generated and run a mile. It'll be the SDA until he f***s off. Not too sure about that tbh. Similar to the Barcelona shirt thing. They tested the water with the charity getting everyone used to their shirt having a name on it then bang, first shirt sponsor in history. I think any other company would have had second thoughts about renaming St James' Park, I think they'll find it far easier to rename Sports Direct Arena. That's a fair point like. Still think they'll be put off though. They won't want to antagonise a large number of people and pay for the privilege of doing so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 They're covering this on ITV, they got that mong with the face paint on man and edited some other bloke so he looked like an idiot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 That woman on BBC who was told about it on-camera Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Huh, Steve Wraith talking sense?? Fair play actually. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 It's the way that Llambias talks about it that annoys me. "Well the fans want more players" "We have to buy a striker in January" Boo fucking hoo. It's your job! Yous own a FOOTBALL club, it's not a favour to us - it's what you have to do. As this is all because of us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I get so pissed off with all this self-righteous hysteria. The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I'm as pissed off about this as anybody but I'd be more annoyed if negativity causes the team to start floundering. Really hope it doesn't impact our season in any way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Wonder if it'll be mentioned no question time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I get so pissed off with all this self-righteous hysteria. The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make. In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 If this helps, then I'm fine about it. I imagine you won't be fine about it, then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I've not read the whole thread, but here's my 2p worth: I'll not be lauching any protests or shouting at the players or ruining the atmosphere inside, but I'll quietly make sure that I never spend another single penny inside a Sports Direct shop as long as the club is called something other than St James' Park. And on top of that, if they sell the rights on and call it after another company then I shall avoid giving that company a single penny for as long as that deal lasts as well. I'd suggest that everyone considers doing likewise. Vote with your wallets, it's all this greedy cunt will understand. Shouting won't work, protesting won't work, hit the fucker in the pocket and make sure that any company that takes over the rights KNOWS that they'll be hit in the pocket as well, it'll act as a nice deterrent. I'm sure that between all of us we can take more than £10m profit each year from Sports Direct, the touted sum that this bell-end is trying to raise by selling the name, thus making it a loss-making venture for him. It's the only language he understands, profit and loss. Let's make it a loss for him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I get so pissed off with all this self-righteous hysteria. The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make. In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club? You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I get so p*ssed off with all this self-righteous hysteria. The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make. In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club? You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field. Look, forgetting the distastefulness of renaming the stadium, they haven't even managed to spend the Carroll money yet. They're not short of cash, they're fucking rolling in it at the moment. Suggesting that they need more money to not spend on top of the money they're already not spending is hardly going to do anything to increase our chances of success on the pitch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I've not read the whole thread, but here's my 2p worth: I'll not be lauching any protests or shouting at the players or ruining the atmosphere inside, but I'll quietly make sure that I never spend another single penny inside a Sports Direct shop as long as the club is called something other than St James' Park. And on top of that, if they sell the rights on and call it after another company then I shall avoid giving that company a single penny for as long as that deal lasts as well. I'd suggest that everyone considers doing likewise. Vote with your wallets, it's all this greedy cunt will understand. Shouting won't work, protesting won't work, hit the fucker in the pocket and make sure that any company that takes over the rights KNOWS that they'll be hit in the pocket as well, it'll act as a nice deterrent. I'm sure that between all of us we can take more than £10m profit each year from Sports Direct, the touted sum that this bell-end is trying to raise by selling the name, thus making it a loss-making venture for him. It's the only language he understands, profit and loss. Let's make it a loss for him. I can understand people being unhappy about the situation, but now that the proposal is out there, and the club is committed to it, do you want it to succeed or to fail? That's the real question now. It strikes me that the likely consequences of failure would be instability and uncertainty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I get so p*ssed off with all this self-righteous hysteria. The part of our heritage that I really want to ditch is the last 40+ years of failure. If this helps, then I'm fine about it. It would be nice to keep the name, but it's a sacrifice that I'd be prepared to make. In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club? You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field. Having the stadium as Sports Direct Arena will not increase the club's income, nor will it lead to it increasing its income. The name rights were on sale two years ago - nowt has changed, noone is interested. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now