What's new

The Naming Rights Thread

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
I'm sure if Levy was offered close to what he was asking, he'd take it.
But his other thought might be that an unbranded stadium could be more attractive when it comes to selling the club.
It allows the new owner to put their mark on it. It allows them to dope the club with excessive funds from a partner business.

That will be more difficult with the new ffp rules that have just been introduced this summer.
 

Nerine

Juicy corned beef
Jan 27, 2011
4,756
17,217
It's probably a trade off between what you could get in terms of revenue from a third party naming rights deal, and what having "Tottenham Hotspur Stadium" as potentially one of the best stadiums in the world would do for our overall club exposure and marketability.

I think the Stadium potentially increases our global visibility in a very saturated marketplace.

Having it attached to a naming rights partner would perhaps take the onus off us, slightly.

Who knows...
 

absolute bobbins

Am Yisrael Chai
Feb 12, 2013
11,650
25,962
Yes.
- Identical typeface with only difference in kerning
- 'A' design
When you are a design professional, you do your research and not replicate the graphics of a brand extension by another world-famous sports brand like Nike. You can intelligently borrow from the Mercedes-Benzes or Rolexes of this world, or some obscure brands, but you don't rip off ESPN/Adidas/Roland-Garros knowingly since those occupy close market territories in sports.
Except when it's on purpose - to warm the place for Nike's naming rights deal until time strikes, as @yankspurs speculates.

Having said that, it makes no marketing sense for Nike to sponsor a club stadium. Nike's too big a brand to get associated with a single (almost-)heavyweight in the game. A deal for both Bernabeu and Camp Now, for example, would be appropriate in theory but not in line with Nike's strategy.
I completely agree and just to clear up any doubts from those who think it is Nike...

It isn’t going to be Nike, there is absolutely no commercial benefit to them for the amount of money we would expect from the deal.. Nike are a Global brand, Spurs aren’t. They have atheletes on the roster that are globally recognised super stars such as Lebrun James, Tiger Woods, Cristiano Ronaldo, Serena Williams and Neymar Jr. The one thing that they have in common, they’re all a far bigger deal than us
 
Last edited:

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Jan 23, 2006
26,895
45,043
I completely agree and just to clear up any doubts from those who think it is Nike...

It isn’t going to be Nike, there is absolutely no commercial benefit to them for the amount of money we would expect from the deal.. Nike are a Global brand, Spurs aren’t. They have atheletes on the roster that are globally recognised super stars such as Lebrun James, Tiger Woods, Cristiano Ronaldo, Serena Williams and Neymar Jr. The one thing that they have in common, they’re a far bigger deal than us
That's a good point and if you think about it the optimum benefit as a naming rights sponsor is someone who is pretty much unknown but with aspitarations, someone we don't even know about or have barely even heard of, surely that would be the kind of sponsor who would gain most from a deal.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
Everything about this build has been outside the box thinking. Wouldn’t surprise me if this applied to sponsorship as well. We may well see some sort of arrangement never seen before.
 

Geyzer Soze

Fearlessly the idiot faced the crowd
Aug 16, 2010
26,056
63,361
If naming rights are £20m a year and we are not getting that money then yes, we will not be able to spend that money, which will effect wages and transfer budget.
Well. we’ll get to call it white hart lane and have it stick without media steamrolling a brand over it
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
Well. we’ll get to call it white hart lane and have it stick without media steamrolling a brand over it

We can call it whatever we want. I might call it the Lilbaz megatron humperdink stadium and no-one can stop me.
 

Yid-ol

Just-outside Edinburgh
Jan 16, 2006
31,097
19,276
We know once a sponsor comes in they will try and re name the stadium anyway.

The branding is just for the logo to go on things associated with the stadium and club but the name will change.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
There must also be the possibility Levy is keeping his options open for a sale of the club. If a brand were interested in buying us they could be put off if stadium already has a 20 yr deal.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
There must also be the possibility Levy is keeping his options open for a sale of the club. If a brand were interested in buying us they could be put off if stadium already has a 20 yr deal.

Has a brand ever bought a football club?
 

Yid-ol

Just-outside Edinburgh
Jan 16, 2006
31,097
19,276
Leicester and man city to start with. Actually did read an article a while back that it would be the growing trend.

Are you taking about the " City football group"? If you are then you are wrong. The group was only created in 2013 while Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan bought Man City in 2008, so the brand never existed when City were taken over.
 

parj

NDombelly ate all the pies
Jul 27, 2003
3,586
5,861
I think the naming rights thing is much like how Levy operates in the transfer market. Pretty sure he's playing chicken with a few interested parties, who probably hoped that as the opening got closer they could squeeze him down on the price a bit.

The placeholder branding is just him showing that he's prepared to wait for the right offer, and won't take anything less.

Probably good to wait a year so the NFL games will be broadcast across the US with the games being played at the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium. That will enhance the brand through association with London and NFL.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
Are you taking about the " City football group"? If you are then you are wrong. The group was only created in 2013 while Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan bought Man City in 2008, so the brand never existed when City were taken over.

he as good as owns Etihad who sponsor the stadium.
 
Top