BOF Posted August 21, 2006 Moderator Share Posted August 21, 2006 So you could end up with 888.com stadium. Punchy! With 32red.com on the jersey. No chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmygreaves Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 I think the price drops a lot if it is called the xxxxx villa park, as opposed to just xxxxx park, as most people would just drop the xxxxx part. Are we being sponsored by the adult channel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted August 21, 2006 Moderator Share Posted August 21, 2006 ANy chance the Mods could add a poll for this? What do you want done. A poll on this thread ? Which options do you want ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Well be interesting to gauge opinions on if the ground name shoulf be sponsored, so Should we sponsor Yes or No maybe the options! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runetune Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Perhaps add in a Undecided. Might be worth a look. The front page poll is now outdated - an ideal one to replace it with perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 As PB suggested a while ago....RL is involved with Fortress (finance?) so the ideal name change would be Fortress Villa Park. Tbh i'd feel guilty taking their money for that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MR.Smalljob Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Make a Poll here on villa talk to see what folks thinks .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
journeyman Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Maybe take into account people's willingness to accept for the naming rights. I for one would be happy to sell it for an additional £5m per season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chips'ngravy Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 No way. Rather not have the money than completely sell our soul. I'd like to think that some things are still more important than money. There are other avenues which can be explored to raise revenue than selling the naming rights of a stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 I'd like to think that some things are still more important than money. Like not winning anything and never investing properly into team strengthening perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 No way. Rather not have the money than completely sell our soul. I'd like to think that some things are still more important than money. There are other avenues which can be explored to raise revenue than selling the naming rights of a stadium. So if it was re-named Fortress Villa Park for £100 million you would object and see it as selling our soul? Noy having a go, i'm just surprised at such an adamant no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villasquare Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 It will always be Villa Park to fans anyway, we all still call the Witton the Witton dont we. I wouldnt give a f@#k what i was called for 100m in readies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Interesting response. I voted no, because I very much doubt the amount of money we're talking about would be anything more than a quick fix, one transfer windows worth of cash as apposed to the £100m some are banding around. We're more than capable of generating cash in other areas, areas that will put this little windfall into the shade. Too much history folks...... I for one would be happy to sell it for an additional £5m per season. Seriously? £5m a year? That sort of money is chicken feed for the big boys, the boys we're aiming at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Interesting response. I voted no, because I very much doubt the amount of money we're talking about would be anything more than a quick fix, one transfer windows worth of cash as apposed to the £100m some are banding around. We're more than capable of generating cash in other areas, areas that will put this little windfall into the shade. Too much history folks...... I for one would be happy to sell it for an additional £5m per season. Seriously? £5m a year? That sort of money is chicken feed for the big boys, the boys we're aiming at. A 10 year deal for £50 million. Exactly the same but sounds so much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 A 10 year deal for £50 million. Exactly the same but sounds so much better. Sounds better, but isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Especially when the 50Mill comes at once Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Especially when the 50Mill comes at once That makes the deal interesting, and I'd guess with amortisation it's possible to spend that cash straight away even if the money isn't there immediately. I'd warm to the idea then I guess, but I'd want to see the details in full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 A 10 year deal for £50 million. Exactly the same but sounds so much better. Sounds better, but isn't. Fair enough....I'd bite someones hand off for that. Out of interest if someone said we're going to rename Villa Park to Fortress Villa Park for 10 years and heres Gravesen Saviola Malbranque Milner Bale Klose and Hargreaves Would that make any difference. Sorry to nag, i'm just interested if when you can actually see the goods - as opposed to a random sum of money - it's any more tempting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snatches Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 If this hasn't been brought up before, the Learner family was adimate about naming the new Browns stadium "Cleveland Browns Stadium" to let people know that it was theirs, and to quash bad feelings of the last ownership that up and left the town in the middle of the night. Sponsorship money is always good, as it means the Front Office doesn't have to nickel and dime the fans as much to make a profit. I'm sure Randy will come up with a clever solution, similar to what they did in Cleveland. Instead of selling the rights to one company for the whole stadium, he sold the rights to name each of the 4 gates which are proudly branded for all to see. Lots of people file in and out of each of those gates for every event, which makes them valuable advertising spots without giving up the rights to the name of the stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Interesting response. I voted no, because I very much doubt the amount of money we're talking about would be anything more than a quick fix. Well, i voted undecided, because it depends on so many things. I wouldnt want to come down on one side or the other until i saw the details. I would be for the right deal, against the wrong deal, so undecided, as there is no deal at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts