The problem with St James Park

We wont be able to sell the rights for what they're worth because of all the negativity surrounding the decisions...

What perplexes me the most however, is that it is the same fans who are up in arms about the lack of a new striker, who will be complaining about trying to raise 10m a year to buy one..

I know i will get slaughtered for this but... If you want St James to stay, fine, good, excellent. But dont tear down the board for not investing when they have said they want to club to be self sufficient AND MOST OF YOU AGREE THIS IS A GOOD IDEA. In order to be economically efficient, you must look for and exploit all possible revenue streams, its sad... But, its football...

Insert negative comments below

 

<negativecomment>It's that annoying rain today. The type that takes you a few hours to get wet in. I'm not a fan of it and wish it would just stop. I prefer heavy rain. It knows what it's doing and just gets on with the job.</negativecomment>

 

yea, light rain is a fat ****

 

I've heard that heavy water is better too.

 

TBH I agree with everything you say. Changing the name isn't ideal but if it means moving with the times it has to been done. The only thing that worries me is Ashleys intentions,is the money we would get honestly for a striker, or really just to line his pockets.

 

This seems to be the sticking point for most, but don't forget that at the moment nothing coming into Newcastle is lining Ashleys pockets. It's either going back out in player purchases and other costs or is paying back Ashleys loan to the club. Both are beneficial to Newcastle United in the long term.

 

like i said earlier everyone goes on about tradition but no one moaned when they changed the European cups format(European,uefa,cup winners cup) tradition by passed for cash there are many other examples of money over tradition and not a word is said but when it's your own club everyone is up in arms.
This is modern football what surprised me was everyone being shocked/angry it happened here,like a few others i saw this coming a mile of especially as it was already stated about naming rights etc.plus the fact our owner is a **** was sort of a clue.

 

Well, that and the fact he already did it two years ago.

 

I think its the way he did it. He could have said look weve tried but we are going to have to be more drastic in the name changing to make revenue. Instead of **** you lot we are doing it

 

The board isn't spening the funds it has currently raised. It does not therefore need the additional income to generate a pool for capital investment.

The club is currently breaking even/operating a a small profit. The funds aren't therefore needed for operating expenses.

The club has no stated policy of spending the capital resources currently available to it, raising a justificiable suspicion as to whether the club will in any way benefit from any income stream.

Finally, I would rather sit in St James Park watching the current squad, rather than in the SDA watching the current squad plus one £10 million player. Others may differ on that point. £10 million players come and go. Up til now, SJP has laways been there

 

is, it's called Sports Direct Arena. That's the problem with SJP

 

I am not sure that I fully accept the distinctione between "lining Ashleys pockets" and "paying backAshleys loans".

 

Lining Ashley's pockets - he buys a new ferrari
Paying back loan - new investors pay less to buy the club off him

 

In all but name, its a big chuffing debt that needs to be paid off. If it wasn't for Ashley that would be stacking up interest like most clubs in the league (and yes, he should've done due diligence, but that's where we are thanks to ffs). If you want shot of Ashley the club is a more attractive proposition if its making profit and debt free, especially as he would accept a lower fee with that paid off.

Edit: and what tommytoon said...

 

Must admit I'm not up in arms about it. I think its a ****ing disgrace and the name should not be touched, but surprised I am not. I'll be honest though there is one thing that is really grinding on me. People saying this is "moving with the times", "we need to exploit all revenue streams" etc etc. Sorry but that is a crock of **** for me. This is about one man making a quick buck and being happy to trample all over tradition to get it. As I say I'm not up in arms because we all know Ashley would sell his mum if the price was right. If by moving with the times, people mean that we continue ripping the soul out of football in this country is the way forward, then I'm sorry but I'm completely against this notion. Its happening at various clubs (not all as some would have you believe), but you don't have to be part of it to survive or buy players. This supposed 10m a year (which they've no hope of getting by the way), isn't going to enable us to challenge any higher up the league than we are currently and I very much doubt its linked to buying players. It would be naive in the extreme to think it is. We make profit on player trades (which I think is great by the way). The club is not poor, indeed it is one of the most healthy financially in the league according to our board.

There are plenty of clubs around the world that treat club history and tradition with respect, we've just chosen to become one of the ones to sell our soul for money. As I've said many times since the decision was announced, this is akin to changing the club name or colours, would folk support that for another 10m? Its already happened at other clubs so don't think it can't happen and there's no difference to trampling over that bit of tradition too. It is traditional for the team based in Newcastle to play their home games at St James Park, wearing black and white, being called Newcastle United. It just doesn't feel the same to me if we're wearing red and blue, playing at the Sports Direct Arena (with no roof?), being called Sports Direct United.

 

@warm pouch i don't think anyone disagrees with you about it being a ****ing disgrace but it doesn't matter if me,you or whoever thinks it's a crock of **** it's the modern game no longer do we have local owners but money men,investors and all they can see is pound signs unless everyone is willing to stay away and not buy club merchandise which would be pointless as it would **** the club (and doesn't ashley know it) we have to lump it i'm afraid.as for the many clubs around the world most of them come from leagues where the same two or three teams constantly play European football/win the league we don't

 

I don't expect any of the 10 million to be spent on players unless we sell more than 10 millions worth at the same time.

 

i do but i expect it as an excuse for why we didn't buy anyone in jan due to not selling the naming rights ..hope i'm wrong but time will tell (times snidey like that)


put the wrong thing at the front

 

I fully understand where you're coming from, and I'm not hugely in favour of it myself (indifferent is too passive, but I'm not hugely against it either), but at what point did we decide that this was crossing the line? We've had sponsors on our shirts for three decades, the league is sponsored, we have player, ball and dressing room sponsors and have previously named our stands after sponsors. Why is the ground one step too much? Is it just that its the one we're around for, having been too young for the others? Walking from town or if we park on Richardson Road I don't to my knowledge pass a single sign that says St James Park, so it'll make no difference whatsoever to my matchday experience, and I will continue to call it thus.

Personally I think if a firm does come in they'll likely just leave it as St James Park with their logo above anyway, which is not much different from what we already have.

Changing the name, kits etc is going into hyperbole for me. Yes, there's Salzburg, but an established successful English club? Not even Ashley is that stupid.

Finally, given that our previous administration mooted the possibility of a new stadium in Leazes Park would you not consider that a greater break from tradition. Arguing over where the moneys going aside I'm happier in St James Park whatever its called, and on a purely selfish note I'm happier with this move than a ticket increase.

 

what about the proposed new stadium with the mackems that hall came up with? the difference being it got knocked back by the mackems which hall turned to spin by saying he listened to the fans but if he'd got the go ahead i'm sure it would now be standing