• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

New Kit?

On the face of it I understand the concern about no naming rights yet and potential missed revenue, but Levy is no mug on the business side PLUS… he’s employed one of the best branding consultants in the business 18 months or so ago. I’m pretty confident they’ve all done the sums and this is in the best of hands, hence why I’m pretty relaxed about it.
 
greatwhitenorf said:
It's not the quantity of advertising I am referring to.

It's the quality of having your brand name constantly being repeated by people who aren't advertisers. In this case, it's media - broadcasters and journalists, speaking or writing the venue's name. Viewers and readers have a natural wariness, if not outright disregard, to anything that's part of an overt advertising element. That perception changes - positively - when presented in broadcasts or news reports.
Click to expand...
I understand that, but its not actual money is it.

I'm not one of these that wants us to spend money all the time either.
 
Anyone can correct me. But did juve give half their naming rights deal to the company that arranged it with allianz?

In total they got €75m for 12 years. So they probably got less than £4m a year from it.
 
If companies are willing to pay big bucks for stadium sponsorship then they must do so knowing that the outlay is worthwhile to them and will bring about a financial return via the association - so us having our name as the stadium name would theoretically also bring about similar benefits.

Not really a concern for me - we either get an extra 10-20m a year to grow revenue or the club benefits through having it's name plastered all over the world via NFL/Concerts/F1 whatever else
 
billyiddo said:
If companies are willing to pay big bucks for stadium sponsorship then they must do so knowing that the outlay is worthwhile to them and will bring about a financial return via the association - so us having our name as the stadium name would theoretically also bring about similar benefits.

Not really a concern for me - we either get an extra 10-20m a year to grow revenue or the club benefits through having it's name plastered all over the world via NFL/Concerts/F1 whatever else
Click to expand...

Yep. There are people who make a good living figuring this stuff out. I'm sure they know a bit more about it than some randoms on the internet. Say what you want about levy, but he isn't an idiot. He'll know what the best deal is.
 
monkeybarry said:
NFL London at the Tottenham Hotspur stadium
Vs
NFL London at the Home Depot Stadium, London
(Note, London - not Tottenham)

Exchange NFL London for Guns N Roses, Beyonce etc.

Go and ask someone from around the world where the Emirates stadium is. London is the answer. Nothing to do with Arsenal.

Compare with Wembley Stadium. What is the area of Wembley known for?
Being a brick hole. Having a stadium. If it were called the B&Q stadium, it would just be in London.

Tottenham Hotspur is the name of our club. It is also the brand. Brand awareness is created by good product, but mainly by keeping the name out there.
If you buy Dunlop or Karrimor from Sp.Direct it's because that brand means something. Those brands don't have the quality the companies did before folding. They are nothing more than Sp.Direct own brand products. But no-one would buy them if they said Sp.Direct on them.
Click to expand...

I’m sure Arsenal would rather have the millions of pounds they get from actual sponsorship. We’re not Real Madrid and don’t have the luxury of not having a sponsor. We have to utilise every commercial opportunity there is. If naming the stadium after the team was that lucrative then more teams would do it.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I’m sure Arsenal would rather have the millions of pounds they get from actual sponsorship. We’re not Real Madrid and don’t have the luxury of not having a sponsor. We have to utilise every commercial opportunity there is. If naming the stadium after the team was that lucrative then more teams would do it.
Click to expand...
There is clearly a point where one is more valuable than the other.
But there certainly hasn't been an offer so far thats more valuable than the name Tottenham Hotspur.
There will be a calculation that determines the value of the name and how it correlates to income streams.
 
monkeybarry said:
There is clearly a point where one is more valuable than the other.
But there certainly hasn't been an offer so far thats more valuable than the name Tottenham Hotspur.
There will be a calculation that determines the value of the name and how it correlates to income streams.
Click to expand...

I half agree. Clearly the club feel they haven’t had the right offer yet, but I don’t think it’s got anything to do with not being more valuable than the Tottenham Hotspur stadium.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I half agree. Clearly the club feel they haven’t had the right offer yet, but I don’t think it’s got anything to do with not being more valuable than the Tottenham Hotspur stadium.
Click to expand...
Of course it has. Combined with brand association for THFC image.
Otherwise Dave's burger van would be the stadium sponsor for a tenner.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I don’t agree. I think they’re just trying to save face because we haven’t tied up the naming rights yet.
Click to expand...
I think there might be an element of that, and it would appear the value to our own name comes across as a bit of an afterthought.

But the reality is, that value is a thing. Whether it's as much as someone paying the going rate to have their name on the stadium is debatable, and in my opinion, it isn't.

But the kicker is, no-one is, or has offered to pay that going rate, so we are where we are.

Has DL asked too much? The price someone will pay or the commitment they will make is often times affected by external factors beyond the deal itself...the general economic outlook being the obvious one.
From a pricing up pov...DL is offering one of, if not the best stadiums in the world...hosting the 2 most watched and moneyed leagues in the world. A unique, unprecedented offering....and that deserves top money.
 
GFbp_m2W0AACgbC
 
Daisuk said:
That brown/gray kit we have now and for some reason use way too often is hands down one of the worst looking kits we've ever had. Terrible! We used to have yellow third kits ffs, not this brown gray abomination!
Click to expand...

It's not just about look though. Those stats to show that our passing is way off when we play in it. Like Alex Ferguson kicked off about back in 1996 - grey kits make players blend in with the crowd, causing missed passes. It makes us statistically perform worse
 
Gutter Boy said:
GFbp_m2W0AACgbC
Click to expand...

There’s so little difference in those stats, especially when you consider we wore it away to Brighton and Emirates Marketing Project who press a lot more than most teams. We also seemed to play well in it away to Luton, where the smaller stadium would surely contribute to this idea that the players blend in to the crowd.

Not to mention a stupidly small sample size of 5 games in taupe and only 3 in navy.

It’s laughable how people look for any and every reason for something. Occam’s razor.
 
Gutter Boy said:
It's not just about look though. Those stats to show that our passing is way off when we play in it. Like Alex Ferguson kicked off about back in 1996 - grey kits make players blend in with the crowd, causing missed passes. It makes us statistically perform worse
Click to expand...
He made the players change to a different kit at half time if i remember.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back