Would you take, say, Quatari cash injection to allow transfer competition?

[Spursalot]

its going to be 25 metres closer to White Hart Lane

without sponsorship, I'm guessing it will be called White Hart Lane.

Tottenham, we are Tottenham, super Tottenham from the Finger Lickin Good stadium.

and repeat

I would be against this. Because it will not be the current stadium, naming it the same would be disrespectful to the old stadium.

 

[ArcspacE]

There is no way we could finance this monster / service the debt without selling naming rights - sad reality and one fans need to accept

On the positive - unless the sponsor is one of the CL ones - it would be called Tottenham Stadium on Tuesday/Wednesday nights

 

[mick cooper]

I would be against this. Because it will not be the current stadium, naming it the same would be disrespectful to the old stadium.

Despite the fact that the old stadium was never on White Hart lane? Or that its not really that old, or.........

I think you are right though, move up , move on.

Its should have a new name

The Nicholson Stadium, or somesuch.

but it won't, as we all know, it will be the Meaty Chunks Dog Bowl

or some other embarassing sponsor

The Anne Summers Rampant Rabbit Dome

the club mascot would be interesting.....

 

[Spursalot]

Despite the fact that the old stadium was never on White Hart lane? Or that its not really that old, or.........

I think you are right though, move up , move on.

Its should have a new name

The Nicholson Stadium, or somesuch.

but it won't, as we all know, it will be the Meaty Chunks Dog Bowl

or some other embarassing sponsor

The Anne Summers Rampant Rabbit Dome

the club mascot would be interesting.....

Because the 'White Hart Lane' Stadium is more then just a location. It is an Emotional Ideal, so not entirely explainable.

 

[Leeds Spur]

Because the 'White Hart Lane' Stadium is more then just a location. It is an Emotional Ideal, so not entirely explainable.

Naming rights is the way the stadium will likely be paid for.

The value of these deals has increased greatly, it's not unreasonable to think we could get ?ú15-20 million per year for 20 years, hey presto, stadium paid for!!

The stadium will always be referred to as The Lane anyway. Possible 'The XXXXX Stadium @ White Hart Lane

 

[mick cooper]

Because the 'White Hart Lane' Stadium is more then just a location. It is an Emotional Ideal, so not entirely explainable.

you big soppy old thing you

 

[clevelandspur]

Money has ruined the game already, there is no turning back now,so if someone was to come along and offer to fund the new stadium and also heavily invest in the team, then im ready to take the cash

I am the same been Tottenham before the cash be Tottenham after it seeing us win the league would be a dream.

 

[thfcsteff]

Bayern Munich president Hoeness fuming at Abramovich's Chelsea 'oil mafia'By Matt Barlow
PUBLISHED: 10:30, 16 May 2012 | UPDATED: 20:53, 16 May 2012
Comments (48) Share
Bayern Munich president Uli Hoeness has attacked Roman AbramovichÔÇÖs ownership of Chelsea.

Hoeness branded Abramovich one of the ÔÇÿoil mafiaÔÇÖ who take money from the public at petrol pumps to fund their football clubs.

He cited this as one reason why Bayern must beat Chelsea on Saturday and contrasted the clubÔÇÖs reliance upon their Russian billionaire with BayernÔÇÖs solid financial foundations.

ÔÇÿI get angry every week when I go to buy petrol,ÔÇÖ fumed Hoeness. ÔÇÿThe oil mafia takes money out of my pocket to invest it in footballers. For me this stinks to high heaven and I include Mr Abramovich in all this. We need to beat clubs like Chelsea on the field of play. Chelsea are a club with their backs to the wall as a result of their patchy league season. If they lose they wonÔÇÖt be in the competition next year.

ÔÇÿIf Bayern win it, we will make around ?ú20million. That is what the game is all about: sporting success based on sound economic sense. Mr Abramovich has put ?ú900m into Chelsea. If he pulls the plug on them, youÔÇÖll be able to pick the club up for the price of a puzzle magazine from a newsstand.


ÔÇÿI think itÔÇÖs important for everyone at Bayern to feel that the club belongs to them. They must not have any fear that we will sell out to a Russian or Arabian consortium.

ÔÇÿWhen the financial fair play rules come in it will be a golden era for GermanyÔÇÖs clubs.ÔÇÖ


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...amovichs-Chelsea-oil-mafia.html#ixzz1v88MQ9s8

Clubs such as Bayern and Man Utd will make sure FFP works

Forgotten which paper it was last week but one of them ran a chart comparing the ownership stats of Bayern and Chavski...great reading...Bayern owned by 180,000 shareholders or something, Chelski by one oligarch, etc, etc...even if we'd finished 3rd I would wholeheartedly want Bayern to win. Chelski are a disgrace, a tin-pot club who are only "competing" at this level because they had the right post code...I absolutely detest them, and everything they stand for.The three mates of mine who are old school chelski are conflicted; they know what we know.

I brace myself for the day we get taken over. I don't think Levy wants it to happen and I think it will take some time, but I think (sadly) it's inevitable, and I somehow know that when it happens, some of my passion will die with it.

I will be sad when we move from the Lane...delighted it's going to be next door, and aware that it has to happen, but when I look at the ground, when I look at the outside of the East Stand, which is the last stand to have some integrated part from the old thunder dome which was White Hart Lane with The Shelf and the old west stand and the wood and the roar, I get melancholic. Burky said it and I listened...there used to be a football club over there...where Keith was wrong is that in today's context, Tottenham Hostpur is one of the last ones standing in the Prem.

Regardless of opinions, we have to accept that Levy has worked wonders to make us competitive without hitching our kickers up and becoming some soiled plaything for an oligarch or oil...

 

[thfcsteff]

Despite the fact that the old stadium was never on White Hart lane? Or that its not really that old, or.........

I think you are right though, move up , move on.

Its should have a new name

The Nicholson Stadium, or somesuch.

but it won't, as we all know, it will be the Meaty Chunks Dog Bowl

or some other embarassing sponsor

The Anne Summers Rampant Rabbit Dome

the club mascot would be interesting.....

1899 Mick...with the East Stand outside wall still the link to those times...that's pretty old to me, although yes, the Leitchian beauty of The Shelf went with Scholar...

 

[yidarmy107]

Its come to the stage now where if we were to get a cash injection, it wouldn't be cheating, it would just make it fair.

For that reason, yes, I do want a cash injection. Just look how ecstatic city fans were. And I am sure all of their 'old school fans' were going mental too.

 

[Jordinho]

A lot of City (and Liverpool) fans consider it just that someone bought them the title because they were competing against United. United may have spent billions over the years, but it's been their money through a bit of good fortune and by taking full advantage of the position they were in. I think it's wrong that clubs that have managed to fudge themselves up through years of bad management should not only get a bail out, but be given a championship winning squad, all because their new owner is some bored billionaire.

 

[mick cooper]

1899 Mick...with the East Stand outside wall still the link to those times...that's pretty old to me, although yes, the Leitchian beauty of The Shelf went with Scholar...

yeah but its the old broom theory isn't it. We had the broom for years, its had 3 new heads and 2 new handles. Maybe you're talking about the nail that holds the head on.

Most of the ground is new, give or take a few bits of brickwork

I still love it, despite how much its changed since I first went there, its a bit like Kings Cross station to me. I remember the thrill of pulling into the station, and that real old "Railway" smell of KX and I still feel a bit excited whenever I get off a train there, despite that the old station has gone.

I can't wait to walk into the new place, particularly if they stick with the design they have been touting, moreso if they can make it safe for standing like they do in Europe and it gets clearance.

That way all the dappy tacos who want to stand up, can feck off out of my field of vision and let me watch the game whilst polishing the arse of my jeans.

plus, it will mean even bigger gate receipts.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

yeah but its the old broom theory isn't it. We had the broom for years, its had 3 new heads and 2 new handles. Maybe you're talking about the nail that holds the head on.

Most of the ground is new, give or take a few bits of brickwork

I still love it, despite how much its changed since I first went there, its a bit like Kings Cross station to me. I remember the thrill of pulling into the station, and that real old "Railway" smell of KX and I still feel a bit excited whenever I get off a train there, despite that the old station has gone.

I can't wait to walk into the new place, particularly if they stick with the design they have been touting, moreso if they can make it safe for standing like they do in Europe and it gets clearance.

That way all the dappy tacos who want to stand up, can feck off out of my field of vision and let me watch the game whilst polishing the arse of my jeans.

plus, it will mean even bigger gate receipts.

I have no interest in standing anymore either, maybe an age thing.

 

[Skinhead in a Suit]

Regardless of who "owns" the club, be it a foreign investor or our very own English billionaire, I'm glad to see that the club is being run as a self-sufficient business and want it to continue that way. At some point, one of these so-called "big" clubs fuelled by oil money (no pun intended) is going to implode a la Leeds Utd. I want my club to be here for the next 20, 50, 100 years. Whether we end up winning the CL or not, I would rather have the pleasure of knowing my club will be around at a competitive level for the remainder of my life rather than selling out for silverware now and risking the long-term stability of the club. We've always been a classy organisation and I want that to continue.

 

[southstand1882]

The right answer is "We wouldn't have a choice"

 

[nw7 yid]

Selling advertising is 'selling out'?

I see no difference between a name on a shirt and a name on a stadium. Plus we wouldn't be 'giving up' a stadium name, our new stadium is un-named.

I consider the stadium name to be part of the fabric of the club. OK, it's less important than the team's name, but it's still a big deal. Whilst I accept that you wouldn't be selling


I don't particularly like sponsor logos splashed all over shirts either (especially when the sponsor logo is bigger and more visible than the club logo).


There is no way we could finance this monster / service the debt without selling naming rights - sad reality and one fans need to accept

 

[Spursalot]

I consider the stadium name to be part of the fabric of the club. OK, it's less important than the team's name, but it's still a big deal. Whilst I accept that you wouldn't be selling


I don't particularly like sponsor logos splashed all over shirts either (especially when the sponsor logo is bigger and more visible than the club logo).


There is no way we could finance this monster / service the debt without selling naming rights - sad reality and one fans need to accept

I can agree that the current stadium name is a part of the fabric of the club.

However there is currently no new stadium name, it has no part of the fabric of the club, therefore i am not bothered if someone pays us to name it.

 

[nw7 yid]

Selling advertising is 'selling out'?

I see no difference between a name on a shirt and a name on a stadium. Plus we wouldn't be 'giving up' a stadium name, our new stadium is un-named.

I consider the stadium name to be part of the fabric of the club. OK, it's less important and fundamental than the club's name or colours, but it's still a big deal. Whilst I accept that you wouldn't be giving up any particular name when it comes to a new, unnamed stadium, by giving it a sponsored name you are denying the chance to give our new home a worth name. You might not being selling off your history, but you're effectively selling off part of your future.

Look at the gooners - their stadium name is the Emirates. What a joke. I see it as 'selling out' in the sense that the club has prioritised commercial gains over traditional values. Ashburton Grove would have been a far superior name, but this was ignored in the pursuit of money.

I understand the need for us to do it (keeping up with the Jones / Arsenal), but that doesn't mean that it isn't selling out. It might feel a bit less wrong because everyone else is doing it, but it's still wrong IMO.

I don't particularly like sponsor logos splashed all over shirts either (especially when the sponsor logo is bigger and more visible than the club logo).

 

[Spursalot]

I consider the stadium name to be part of the fabric of the club. OK, it's less important and fundamental than the club's name or colours, but it's still a big deal. Whilst I accept that you wouldn't be giving up any particular name when it comes to a new, unnamed stadium, by giving it a sponsored name you are denying the chance to give our new home a worth name. You might not being selling off your history, but you're effectively selling off part of your future.

Look at the gooners - their stadium name is the Emirates. What a joke. I see it as 'selling out' in the sense that the club has prioritised commercial gains over traditional values. Ashburton Grove would have been a far superior name, but this was ignored in the pursuit of money.

I understand the need for us to do it (keeping up with the Jones / Arsenal), but that doesn't mean that it isn't selling out. It might feel a bit less wrong because everyone else is doing it, but it's still wrong IMO.

I don't particularly like sponsor logos splashed all over shirts either (especially when the sponsor logo is bigger and more visible than the club logo).

You are selling off the right to have a future. Without the income from this, we will not be able to build it. Our new home will grow into whatever name it is given, Levy won't allow them to name it something stupid.


As for the Emirates being a joke name, in actual fact i think it's a complete failure of an advertisement. Whenever i hear 'Emirates' I do not think of the Company, i instantly think of the Arsenal stadium.

It just doesn't feel wrong to me. It's a means to an end. Either do it and get a new stadium, or don't do it and stay where we are with limited revenue streams.


Edit: I would much rather we were able to Expand WHL, but that is not an option.

 

[mick cooper]

You are selling off the right to have a future. Without the income from this, we will not be able to build it. Our new home will grow into whatever name it is given, Levy won't allow them to name it something stupid.


As for the Emirates being a joke name, in actual fact i think it's a complete failure of an advertisement. Whenever i hear 'Emirates' I do not think of the Company, i instantly think of the Arsenal stadium.

It just doesn't feel wrong to me. It's a means to an end. Either do it and get a new stadium, or don't do it and stay where we are with limited revenue streams.


Edit: I would much rather we were able to Expand WHL, but that is not an option.

Why cant it be called (for example)

Autonomy's New White Hart Lane