What's new

The Naming Rights Thread

CowInAComa

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
7,293
18,237
Has anyone actually said it is google or summat? Or are we just making stuff up?

Genuine question, ive skim read the last few pages and cant find a source.
 

McFlash

In the corner, eating crayons.
Oct 19, 2005
12,740
45,361
Has anyone actually said it is google or summat? Or are we just making stuff up?

Genuine question, ive skim read the last few pages and cant find a source.
Someone on somewhere hinted at something and others assumed they were hinting at Google or Facebook. ?
 

absolute bobbins

Am Yisrael Chai
Feb 12, 2013
11,649
25,962
Has anyone actually said it is google or summat? Or are we just making stuff up?

Genuine question, ive skim read the last few pages and cant find a source.
ITK from someone on FTL and then a load of users thought it was either FB or Google because their EMEA offices are based in Dublin.

THen a lot of fapping from people here thinking that a company that is so popular it's a verb or another that has 2.3 billion monthly active users needs an occasional namecheck during a domestic football match
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
46,679
104,956
The whole thing about cornerstone sponsorship seems to have disappeared. There was a big deal made of that a couple of years ago.
 

tototoner

Staying Alert
Mar 21, 2004
29,387
34,059
ITK from someone on FTL and then a load of users thought it was either FB or Google because their EMEA offices are based in Dublin.

THen a lot of fapping from people here thinking that a company that is so popular it's a verb or another that has 2.3 billion monthly active users needs an occasional namecheck during a domestic football match

I seen this on twitter, not sure how reliable it is

 

arunspurs

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
8,807
35,543
The whole thing about cornerstone sponsorship seems to have disappeared. There was a big deal made of that a couple of years ago.

I still think this is how we will do the naming rights. 4 or 5 partner sponsor with 1 main sponsor partner.
 

Pellshek

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2015
2,509
7,289
The Google-Stadia theory doesn't really work. Stadia is a gaming platform, so Google would be muddling their message by sponsoring a sports stadium. The two spheres sorta-kinda fit, but sorta-kinda don't at the same time, which'd be a marketing nightmare. Questions arise like...So, is Stadia a sports thing? Sorta sounds like it. Is Stadia just the name of a football ground? Why are the words Stadia and stadium kinda the same, but not really? Is gaming a sport? Etc. Dumb shit, but it'd be a mess.

Also, women. Sponsoring a sports stadium is a pretty lousy way of reaching women in terms of bang for buck - it might even be a slight turn off for them. Not sure what %age of prospective Stadia users will be women & girls, but it won't be negligible by any means, and is likely a growing demo.
 

punky

Gone
Sep 23, 2008
7,485
5,403
THen a lot of fapping from people here thinking that a company that is so popular it's a verb or another that has 2.3 billion monthly active users needs an occasional namecheck during a domestic football match

I keep seeing this argument - why would Google/Facebook/Amazon advertise? Yet, recently I have seen adverts for all 3 in various places.

Arguable Coca Cola and Pepsi both have more recognition due to the demographics. They still advertise. A lot.

I'm not a financial guru but isn't advertising a convenient tax write-off for most companies anyway?
 

chaching

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
602
1,431
I keep seeing this argument - why would Google/Facebook/Amazon advertise? Yet, recently I have seen adverts for all 3 in various places.

Arguable Coca Cola and Pepsi both have more recognition due to the demographics. They still advertise. A lot.

I'm not a financial guru but isn't advertising a convenient tax write-off for most companies anyway?

A bit off topic but something I know a little bit on.

Coca Cola and Pepsi advertise as they are competing with each other for market share if one stopped advertising and the other carries on. The one that has stopped will lose market share. Google, Facebook and Amazon will advertise a bit to make sure their name is out there but do not have to go massively overboard as they have a huge percentage of their market share. If one of their competitors started going big on advertising then I am sure they would blow them out of the water with marketing. This is a bit simplified as that is only taking into account the areas that they are most famous for. So it might make sense for Google to go big on advertising Stadia as it is in competition with other big companies.


When tobacco advertising was banned the tobacco industries profits increased as they were mainly advertising to be seen more than their competitors. suddenly no need for that expenditure and everyone is on a (sort of) even footing.
 

absolute bobbins

Am Yisrael Chai
Feb 12, 2013
11,649
25,962
I keep seeing this argument - why would Google/Facebook/Amazon advertise? Yet, recently I have seen adverts for all 3 in various places.

Arguable Coca Cola and Pepsi both have more recognition due to the demographics. They still advertise. A lot.

I'm not a financial guru but isn't advertising a convenient tax write-off for most companies anyway?
You see amazon ads because amazon are a cloud service platform with a FMCG gift shop tacked on, You see FB ads because they publicly shit the bed, You see google ads to move individual products, hardware or stadia and if you’re in tech you might see an occasional Adsense of GCP ad.

A peasant may be have awareness of coke or Pepsi but google and FB aren’t FMCG and that peasant is of no value to them, they’re not of much value to Amazon either. You can also bet that if that peasant ever gets a computer they will find their way to google.

The Tax write off is true, however a write off £200 million over 10 years against Alphabet Inc’s EBIT of $26ish billion per annum, FB’s $20ish billion and Amazons $10ish billion is nothing.

In the unlikely event that it is Google, it will most likely be for Stadia as I said earlier in the thread, however it is still far more likely to be Accenture or Johnson Controls if it is even an Irish based company.

To be clear, I’m not trying to upset anyone, Spurs are great, the stadium is too but we don’t really have anything that the big five in tech would want.
 

whitesocks

The past means nothing. This is a message for life
Jan 16, 2014
4,652
5,738
I keep seeing this argument - why would Google/Facebook/Amazon advertise? Yet, recently I have seen adverts for all 3 in various places.

Arguable Coca Cola and Pepsi both have more recognition due to the demographics. They still advertise. A lot.

I'm not a financial guru but isn't advertising a convenient tax write-off for most companies anyway?
Coca Cola and Pepsi have a product that is killing 1000s of people a day - and they are scared of further regulation. They are paying to be associated with youth, health, and fun rather than obesity and heart disease.

Likewise how much would it be worth to Huawei to have their ceo doing a cool handshake with the captain of England in the newly branded stadium? Instead of being a hostile enemy trying to spy on us, perhaps they are nice guys after all. Have those 5G contracts.

AIA is interesting in that they are not selling anything to us in the UK or europe. Their only interest is the asian market and prem football is popular with many young people there who they want to sell their insurance to. Sponsoring the stadium probably doesn't give them much more exposure, but it blocks some other company sharing the limelight and if they make £100's mil on our unexpected run to the CL final, it would be rude not to invest a bit more back into the club, surely...
 
Top