This is entirely reversible, if a few people are actually interested

The decision to rename St James will be fairly simpe to reverse. It requires about 300 people willing to devote 4 hours a fortnight for a couple of months.

We know protesting at St James is pointless and also disruptive to the team. We also know that calling for people to not shop at Sports Direct doesn't work by itself - - most have a very short attnetion span.

If there were a simple peaceful, quiet picket line requesting people not to shop at Sports Direct until it reverses its decision, quite a few people will go on to JJB or wherever instead. Sales will fall noticeably, perhaps a quarter or a third.

There will be absolutely no need to show any negativity at St James or on match day.

If we targe the two city centre locations, project a picket line of 10 people 8 hours per day with 4 hour shifts to be put it once a fortnight, that requires about 300 people. it will need to be maintained for a while. We are fortunately in the run up to Christmas.

If Ashley sees an adverse impact, he will be motivated to reverse the decision. Equally importantly, if sponsrs see that the result of purchasing the rights is a reduction in sales, they will not sponsor the stadium. The decision will be reversed, or allowed to die a quiet death.

So, of the 50,000 fans, are there about 300 willing to devote half a day a fortnight to this cause ?

Does anyone have any idea where to find them ?

 

That Nufc supporters club that keep saying they want to buy the club off Ashley with £7 and a pack of hula hoops.

Try them.

 

Sorry Fred but picketing 2 shops out of the total number of Sports Directs in the country will achieve very little and will not have any adverse affect on the company’s sales.

By simply picketing in Newcastle, the media attention will only be local. Sure, this would put off a local company from sponsoring the stadium but to any others it wouldn't matter a jot because their name would be projected globally to a potential TV audience of about 1.5 billion people.

That, to a business is worth the investment even if sales in one part of the country drop.

What is the answer to preserve the name of St. James' Park?

To me it's to never let it die. Tell everyone that it's St. James' Park. When the kids start going to matches or following Newcastle, tell them it's St. James' Park and tell them why it's always going to be that way. Instil it into them. St. James' is tied up in the history of Newcastle United and will be forever.

A name change is not going to wipe out 119 years of history in one swoop and many in the media won't let it fall by the wayside either.

 

As I live in StHelens and the new RL stadium has just been built and the subject of naming/sponsorship rights is a hotbed of debate locally too. Ther old stadium - Knowsley Road was sponsered by a local firm GPW recruitment for the last 2 years it was up. In over a hundred years the stadium was never sponsored, but when it was, it put money into the club, and was only ever refered to as "the GPW recruitment stadium" by media presenters and in fixture lists.

Yes it does feel like wrong, but it's cash in the club, and the people that matter, the fans of NUFC and football in general will still refer to it as St.James' Park. So rather than fighting a fight that's not going to be won, just accept that it's part of modern football and take it as a moral victory that you'll never refer to it by it's sponsored name. Could be worse we could be West Ham, with David Gold's business sponsorship.....welcome to be Rampant Rabbit Arena!!

 

I tend to disagree.

The name of Newcastle United's stadium is of only minor interest to people outside Newcastle. Very few people in Manchester or Cornwall are going to be influenced in the choice of anything by a change to what the place our team plays is called.

While you are quite correct that the effect will be local only, it is primarilly the local effect that a sponsor will be interested in. A negative local affect and nil national effect will collectively amount to something not worth paying for.

Ashley is stubborn but not irrational. There is no question of driving him ot his knees by a boycoutt {mis-spelling intentional} but if we can render the product he is trying to sell unattractive, he will cease to market it.

Unless of course no one's bothered

 

I disagree that the sponsor will be interested primarily in the local affect. By sponsoring a name change to the tune of £8-10 million per annum they are looking above and beyond the local effect. It's an advertising vehicle to generate coverage and interest globally. Don't forget that this 'sponsor' will be tied into a 10 year deal so they'd be forking out £80-£100 million overall. That sort of money is only available to a large corporate.

A global TV audience would see and hear the name of the stadium, see the branding throughout and even if a fraction of them have an interest in the business or product (i.e. Ethiad) and follow through with a purchase then the company really isn't going to be massivly concerned about the local effect.

We are a trapped market to Mike. We don't change 'brands' at the drop of a hat. We are not attacted by new designs from rival firms vying for our cash. Some may opt not to attend matches when SJP is changed but the vast majority will still turn out and that will nullify the local effect.

 

I have to disagree. You think how many people around the world watch Premier League matches. Sponsors don't care about the local effect, they're interested in global attention.

 

So let's be honest with ourselves then.

We don't really care.

 

By changing it now for free he's cashing in . If no-one steps up at end of the season the name won't change back so in effect he's milking the club PR for himself.

 

I mentioned on another thread that it would be better for all if Sports Direct contributed some funds to the club even during this trial period or until an official sponsor is in place.

Will they? Probably not but if they did it might just soothe the transition.