Jump to content

St. James' Park


The SD signs are no more. What should happen now?   

343 members have voted

  1. 1. The SD signs are no more. What should happen now?

    • The ground should be kept as 'clean' as realistically possible, with any replacement signs erected only in the most subtle fashion, with the most visually prominent sections remaining clear
    • Some significant/large signs would be fine, but not to the same amount/extent as the SD signs - providing that NUFC actually benefits from those revenue opportunities
    • The SD signs can be replaced with something else exactly like-for-like - providing that NUFC actually benefits from those revenue opportunities
    • They own the club, they can do whatever the hell they like, paint it green for all I care
  2. 2. Is it important that the 'Newcastle United' text on the East Stand is changed to something not in the SD font?



Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Yorkie said:

Biggest issue for me was the sheer abundance of it, and the fact it looked crap. That it wasn't paid for was obviously awful too but definitely the secondary issue for me. 

 

I desperately hope the East Stand and Gallowgate fascias are left relatively untouched. There's plenty opportunities for advertising without being totally obnoxious about it.

 

 

 

It was the whole package that came with Ashley though, it's definitely not just the signs themselves. The SD signs reminded you every time you saw them of the neglect, hatred and tackiness of Ashley and his brands. 

If we were competing at the top end of the table, winning stuff and being Champions League regulars, I highly doubt people would be as against the SD signs would be as hated as they are. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SD signage was, for me, objectionable mainly because we received nothing for it. And even if we did, or when we did towards the end, you just knew MA was taking the money back out the other side again somehow.

 

Although it's a shit brand, I'd have been OK with it if it had bought us a few players here and there. Having it on places like the front of the East Stand and the roof of the Gallowgate was just awful though. He was just trying to cover every square inch of the place for the minimum possible cost because that's the kind of cheapskate he is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LV said:

It was the whole reason he bought the club tbh

 

The advertising 

 

It's certainly what we became, just a glorified advertising hoarding whose sole purpose was to exist in the PL so that he could get maximum exposure for his tat emporium with minimal outlay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chris_R said:

 

It's certainly what we became, just a glorified advertising hoarding whose sole purpose was to exist in the PL so that he could get maximum exposure for his tat emporium with minimal outlay.

Absolutely. We were no longer a sporting entity, just part of Sports Direct existing purely to serve the needs of SD

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Yorkie changed the title to St. James' Park: SD signage being removed today (Confirmed) - Poll Added

Personally I feel like I could live with something going up under the big screen, or maybe even the Gallowgate fascia, but the East Stand has to be clean for me. There's plenty parts of the ground in good competition but it's that section which has been soiled the worst for me. Bring back the proper text and stick the four beautiful crests up there, in colour, alongside it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good effort but it's really quite nuanced as for me its about identity. Ashley bizarrely as a sports brand owner endeavoured to strip the club of any sense of sporting identity, or that of a regional hub to be proud of. Heritage? Fuck that - Sports Direct Arena. Achievement ? Fuck that - look at my share price. It's not really about what they are replaced with or quantity but the intent behind it. SJP's name was cast away without forethought. Wonga ffs. I mean in terms of morality there's still issues - but it's two sides of the same coin in terms of 'using' a football club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather there was no branding on the top of the stands etc, but thats probably not viable unless we want no sponsorship money. I wouldn't mind something on the East Stand as long as its more towards the corners so the shot from the tunnel only shows NEWCASTLE UNITED

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd prefer not to have huge sponsorship signs plastered everywhere like SD was, but tbh money is going to talk. If a company is putting in big money, then we can't really expect the club to turn it down. And by big money, I'm not talking about the piss take stitch up we had under Ashley. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like stadium sponsorship generally especially old stadiums, but after 10-20years of it I'm desensitised to a degree

with us it was that it didn't benefit us in anyway and benefited a bloke deliberately hurting the club (what he made in sponsors is money the club was cost) - if SD sponsorship gave the club an advantage it would have been more tolerable, that it didn't and in fact was nothing but damaging to the club - was basically just defacing grafitti

 

 

Edited by Wolfcastle

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Thomson Mouse said:

I think the new owners seem to have a good understanding of what we’re about.

 

I’d be shocked if they replaced those with other signs, it’s an easy PR win for them

 

They did say they wanted to run the club as a business though, ultimately they are ploughing a lot of money into NUFC, stadium sponsorship would be too lucrative to pass up I'd have thought. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

They did say they wanted to run the club as a business though, ultimately they are ploughing a lot of money into NUFC, stadium sponsorship would be too lucrative to pass up I'd have thought. 

 

They don’t need it though really. Culturally they’ll be sensitive as we should to them

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thomson Mouse said:

 

So you should’ve voted yes then

Not important to revert back to the old font. Another font, another design for the new era,yes.  Keep the old font for the Keegan and pre-Asley era. If they keep the current one, i'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nufcjb said:

Not important to revert back to the old font. Another font, another design for the new era,yes.  Keep the old font for the Keegan and pre-Asley era. If they keep the current one, i'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

 

That'll have been my wording at fault, particularly the use of 'returned'. At the heart of the question was 'should we get rid of the SD font.' I think you can change it if you click 'show vote options' and vote again, if you're bothered. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Rich changed the title to St. James' Park
  • Rich changed the title to St. James' Park: SD signage removal underway
  • Rich locked this topic
  • Rich unlocked this topic

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...