ENIC

[Jurgen the German]

Unnecessary dig mate .. we get it, some people think Levy has done a good job, some think he's literally the devil

Have a reasonable conversation
- Would a stadium sponsorship of £15-£20M/year help? = sure
- If it's so obvious, why do only 6 teams in the PL have stadium sponsorship, and only 2 of the top teams? (United the best team in the world in off field commercials, no sponsor)

I guess it’s harder to tie up naming rights for stadiums that are decades/hundreds of years old. Plus there’s sentimental value to the likes of Old Trafford. I would take WHL over the Tottenham Hotspur stadium personally. The Tottenham Hotspur stadium holds no meaning or sentimental value to me. Most new ish stadiums have sponsors tied into naming rights.

I’d be interested to know if anyone on here actually refers to it as the Tottenham Hotspur stadium. If a mate/someone at work asks you who we are playing on Saturday do they say “we’re playing at the Tottenham Hotspur stadium”. Doesn’t really roll off the tongue. I just say we’re at home or the game is at “the lane” or “WHL”.

 

[Bishop]

Unnecessary dig mate .. we get it, some people think Levy has done a good job, some think he's literally the devil

Have a reasonable conversation
- Would a stadium sponsorship of £15-£20M/year help? = sure
- If it's so obvious, why do only 6 teams in the PL have stadium sponsorship, and only 2 of the top teams? (United the best team in the world in off field commercials, no sponsor)

I do find it interesting that you preface it by saying one group sees Levy as doing well and the other other sees him as the devil. Not exactly an equivalence, a little disingenuous and shows your own bias.

Regarding stadium sponsorship it tends to only happen with new stadiums as existing stadium's already have a name and sentimental attachment. Our new stadium was an opportunity to create a new synergy with a sponsor but as has been surmised we haven't found a deal that we've found acceptable.

That's fine but we can't pretend it was NOT our intention to benefit from such a deal. It just hasn't happened.

 

[Grays_1890]

I bet most on here would absolutely love it. They’d probably get a semi. The fact that people have convinced themselves that the stadium being called “the Tottenham Hotspur stadium” is more valuable than having actual money from a sponsor speaks volumes. I’m not his biggest fan but it would be very churlish to argue he hasn’t done many great things for us. But it’s almost like his fans just can’t accept when we get things wrong they have to go to such weird lengths to defend him

TBF some who work in marketing understand the value reasoning behind not though. The money would be useful but to deflag the stadium of your own name or identity should be at a cost or its really not worth it, you soon burn through that 20m a year. There is a real trade off on it. If the money is not right at what the club see as that line then so be it. If the money was really that important we would reduce that amount to get the deal done

For people like me I much prefer it to be as it is or a name that associates with the club anyway, I would prefer WHL personally as it still is, its become a weird subject at Spurs when in fact many clubs round the world live without it, Levy takes the blame for that in making a rod for his own back for even mentioning it.

There is a counter argument that those who didn't even want the move to the new stadium and talk about traditions are those who use naming the ground after a massive corporate and lose that identity as some kind of stick to bash him with, I can't square that circle

 

[parklane1]

I bet most on here would absolutely love it. They’d probably get a semi. The fact that people have convinced themselves that the stadium being called “the Tottenham Hotspur stadium” is more valuable than having actual money from a sponsor speaks volumes. I’m not his biggest fan but it would be very churlish to argue he hasn’t done many great things for us. But it’s almost like his fans just can’t accept when we get things wrong they have to go to such weird lengths to defend him

Of course he gets things wrong just like everyone alive, as for fans who scream and shout about him and starting petitions to get him out we are lucky on here as most of us can see both sides of the debate. However there are plenty of muppets on other forums ( SC especially) that go crazy everytime he is mentioned and start up petitions to get him out.

As for those who you suggest would get a semi its better then getting a raging hard on for those who bitch about him.

 

[Grays_1890]

Of course he gets things wrong just like everyone alive, as for fans who scream and shout about him and starting petitions to get him out we are lucky on here as most of us can see both sides of the debate. However there are plenty of muppets on other forums ( SC especially) that go crazy everytime he is mentioned and start up petitions to get him out.

As for those who you suggest would get a semi its better then getting a raging hard on for those who bitch about him.

Purple and gold nonce cases are the worst

He gets ALOT wrong but I stick to the Simon Jordan explanation of it, Lewis was not giving him money so he had to grow the club as he has, but he is also being prove right with the way he has done it. The lack of trophies is a massive frustration but you can't deny now that some of the decisions taken for the long term gain were not right for the club, everything he said about the game and how it was going to go has come true and we sit in the best shape now to take advantage of that long term. We now need to walk through the door and do that

 

[billyiddo]

Don't see the need to fixate on stadium sponsorship or why it is used as a stick to beat the club over/seen as a negative on the clubs part that we don't have one tbh

We have a new stadium which means there is a sponsorship opportunity available for a business should they want it - we'll have an idea of what the value of that should be based on the level exposure we envisage the stadium recieving over the next ten years or so, it's likely to be quite high, relatively speaking, due to the unique multi use nature of the stadium and the projected reach any sponsor will have as a result - if no one is willing to meet that figure then what? We should under sell ourselves just to have one? Just a really confusing complaint if I'm honest.


And to reiterate a point I've made previously - if we expect outside companies to value having their name attached to the stadium to a degree that they are willing to pay 10m+ a year to benefit from - why is it so hard for some of our supports to understand that having our name on the stadium in place of a sponsor holds a value too?

 

[Grays_1890]

And to reiterate a point I've made previously - if we expect outside companies to value having their name attached to the stadium to a degree that they are willing to pay 10m+ a year to benefit from - why is it so hard for some of our supports to understand that having our name on the stadium in place of a sponsor holds a value too?

This said better then I could.

It's also not like thr club couldn't negotiate a lucrative shirt sponsorship so the idea there is a blind sport on Levys business acumen is slightly laughable TBH

 

[Raziel]

I do find it interesting that you preface it by saying one group sees Levy as doing well and the other other sees him as the devil. Not exactly an equivalence, a little disingenuous and shows your own bias.

Regarding stadium sponsorship it tends to only happen with new stadiums as existing stadium's already have a name and sentimental attachment. Our new stadium was an opportunity to create a new synergy with a sponsor but as has been surmised we haven't found a deal that we've found acceptable.

That's fine but we can't pretend it was NOT our intention to benefit from such a deal. It just hasn't happened.

Actually no mate, I could have gone on and on re people who have an issue with Levy, lets walk it through

- I don't know anyone who is a "Levy fan" (weirdly there probably are Poch fans) there are people who can see what he has done for the club (mostly), everyone in this group will accept that he has made mistakes, that there were moments that could have been pivotal to the club progressing even more, they are bad manager hires and odd decisions from a PR perspective. That the self funded model will probably not take us to the top of the elite.
- There are people, not only on this board, who will argue all day long that nothing, literally nothing Levy has done is good, that anything, any buy, any hire was pure luck and literally you could have put a blind donkey in charge of the club and got the same or better results. People have said on this board, they would take anyone, any chance instead of Levy. I know, because we have had this conversation 1000X on this board, and if you dare ask, what clubs have done better? same brick circle.

Everyone can have their opinion, and I'm not saying mine is right, but I don't feel the need when someone makes a obvious joke "we should call the stadium the Levy" to fudging dig ...

Re the stadium, don't know, it was widely reported that we were looking at sponsorship, we clearly haven't closed a deal
- One group says "don't know why, can we compare and see what others are doing, think about if anything has changed"
- Other group "I knew it, Levy is a fudging macaron, reason #900 why he's the worst chairman in the PL, insert how much he's being paid as proof"

You really don't see the difference?

 

[Jurgen the German]

TBF some who work in marketing understand the value reasoning behind not though. The money would be useful but to deflag the stadium of your own name or identity should be at a cost or its really not worth it, you soon burn through that 20m a year. There is a real trade off on it. If the money is not right at what the club see as that line then so be it. If the money was really that important we would reduce that amount to get the deal done

For people like me I much prefer it to be as it is or a name that associates with the club anyway, I would prefer WHL personally as it still is, its become a weird subject at Spurs when in fact many clubs round the world live without it, Levy takes the blame for that in making a rod for his own back for even mentioning it.

There is a counter argument that those who didn't even want the move to the new stadium and talk about traditions are those who use naming the ground after a massive corporate and lose that identity as some kind of stick to bash him with, I can't square that circle

If Levy had said from day one that the plan was to proceed without a sponsor all along then fine, I would have disagreed but that’s fair enough. He made it very clear the plan was to try and gain naming rights. It just comes across that we’ve struggled to get naming rights nailed down so they’re trying to save face. I just don’t see why we have to pretend that the plan was to always be called the Tottenham Hotspur stadium and act like it’s better than having a named sponsor who pays us. I don’t know, maybe levy is ahead of the curve and other European clubs will rename their stadiums, the Arsenal stadium or the Chelsea stadium.

 

[Grays_1890]

If Levy had said from day one that the plan was to proceed without a sponsor all along then fine, I would have disagreed but that’s fair enough. He made it very clear the plan was to try and gain naming rights. It just comes across that we’ve struggled to get naming rights nailed down so they’re trying to save face. I just don’t see why we have to pretend that the plan was to always be called the Tottenham Hotspur stadium and act like it’s better than having a named sponsor who pays us. I don’t know, maybe levy is ahead of the curve and other European clubs will rename their stadiums, the Arsenal stadium or the Chelsea stadium.

Its not the preferred plan though its the default name of the ground post completion or what would we have it as, the stadium that should not be named?

It was clearly outlined in September the nuances of the deals to get naming rights.....right, he isn't lying about it

Like I say, if our shirts were sponsorless because of an inability to get deals done, a space where deals are clearly critical to revenue, I would be more inclined to agree that its a fudge up and we are useless, if it was critical the club would move their expectations and cash grab what they could given the climate, like we have everywhere else.

The fact we have not cashed in on the name probably flies in the face of most opinions of Levy, most would have expected him to have grabbed the pound note already, the fact he talks about protecting the brand and getting the right deal for the benefit of the club should really be applauded IMO, not used as a stick. But abit like protecting the long term financial future of the club as "custodians" comment, that was widely manipulated all over the shop, but he has delivered on that

 

[tommysvr]

If Levy had said from day one that the plan was to proceed without a sponsor all along then fine, I would have disagreed but that’s fair enough. He made it very clear the plan was to try and gain naming rights. It just comes across that we’ve struggled to get naming rights nailed down so they’re trying to save face. I just don’t see why we have to pretend that the plan was to always be called the Tottenham Hotspur stadium and act like it’s better than having a named sponsor who pays us. I don’t know, maybe levy is ahead of the curve and other European clubs will rename their stadiums, the Arsenal stadium or the Chelsea stadium.

I honestly think it's weird you care so much about this.

 

[Jurgen the German]

I honestly think it's weird you care so much about this.

It’s a football forum where people discuss things. Or would you prefer we only talk about the things that are going well?

 

[DeanoAustin]

Its not the preferred plan though its the default name of the ground post completion or what would we have it as, the stadium that should not be named?

It was clearly outlined in September the nuances of the deals to get naming rights.....right, he isn't lying about it

Like I say, if our shirts were sponsorless because of an inability to get deals done, a space where deals are clearly critical to revenue, I would be more inclined to agree that its a fudge up and we are useless, if it was critical the club would move their expectations and cash grab what they could given the climate, like we have everywhere else.

The fact we have not cashed in on the name probably flies in the face of most opinions of Levy, most would have expected him to have grabbed the pound note already, the fact he talks about protecting the brand and getting the right deal for the benefit of the club should really be applauded IMO, not used as a stick. But abit like protecting the long term financial future of the club as "custodians" comment, that was widely manipulated all over the shop, but he has delivered on that

Wouldn't go as far as applauding him for it - we clearly wanted to sell the naming rights and haven't managed to do it in 4 or 5 years which is a failure on his part. However, that doesn't completely damn him, like you say, he's clearly trying to do the best thing for the club.

 

[Grays_1890]

Wouldn't go as far as applauding him for it - we clearly wanted to sell the naming rights and haven't managed to do it in 4 or 5 years which is a failure on his part. However, that doesn't completely damn him, like you say, he's clearly trying to do the best thing for the club.

TBF I meant specifically the protectionism of the club/brand to be applauded more than not doing the deal. The fact the stadium has our name on it, we are in fact Tottenham Hotspur so the stadium carries a significant name in our history, that means more than any other sponsorship opportunity IMO

 

[Jurgen the German]

Its not the preferred plan though its the default name of the ground post completion or what would we have it as, the stadium that should not be named?

It was clearly outlined in September the nuances of the deals to get naming rights.....right, he isn't lying about it

Like I say, if our shirts were sponsorless because of an inability to get deals done, a space where deals are clearly critical to revenue, I would be more inclined to agree that its a fudge up and we are useless, if it was critical the club would move their expectations and cash grab what they could given the climate, like we have everywhere else.

The fact we have not cashed in on the name probably flies in the face of most opinions of Levy, most would have expected him to have grabbed the pound note already, the fact he talks about protecting the brand and getting the right deal for the benefit of the club should really be applauded IMO, not used as a stick. But abit like protecting the long term financial future of the club as "custodians" comment, that was widely manipulated all over the shop, but he has delivered on that

Yeah that’s fine. Obviously I’m not advocating levy should take any deal just to get it done. I get it’s more desirable to wait for the right deal than accept the wrong deal. But people were arguing it was more lucrative to have the stadium named after the club rather than having actual sponsors. That’s the part I disagree with.

 

[Grays_1890]

Yeah that’s fine. Obviously I’m not advocating levy should take any deal just to get it done. I get it’s more desirable to wait for the right deal than accept the wrong deal. But people were arguing it was more lucrative to have the stadium named after the club rather than having actual sponsors. That’s the part I disagree with.

There is def benefits to that but they don't outweigh the cash.

Nice middle ground to end on haha.....COYS

 

[Gutter Boy]

I guess it’s harder to tie up naming rights for stadiums that are decades/hundreds of years old. Plus there’s sentimental value to the likes of Old Trafford. I would take WHL over the Tottenham Hotspur stadium personally. The Tottenham Hotspur stadium holds no meaning or sentimental value to me. Most new ish stadiums have sponsors tied into naming rights.

I’d be interested to know if anyone on here actually refers to it as the Tottenham Hotspur stadium. If a mate/someone at work asks you who we are playing on Saturday do they say “we’re playing at the Tottenham Hotspur stadium”. Doesn’t really roll off the tongue. I just say we’re at home or the game is at “the lane” or “WHL”.

When there's a takeover in the future, the prospective new owners will propose renaming it WHL as a carrot to get our fans on side. The Saudis made a huge thing of this with St James Park.

 

[DaveT316]

There is def benefits to that but they don't outweigh the cash.

Nice middle ground to end on haha.....COYS

And linked to that, there will likely be a set of Commercial objectives linked the naming rights that they want to achieve, as well as Brand / Marketing objectives. It feels like we tend to focus on the former, as it has more obviously tangible benefits - i.e. potentially more players coming in - whereas with the latter it’s likely more nebulous to the average fan and possibly, to use a tossy marketing phrase, about driving ‘salience’ of the Spurs brand, which is more helpful in driving longer term ‘sales’ fans (‘customers’ eugh).

 

[tommysvr]

It’s a football forum where people discuss things. Or would you prefer we only talk about the things that are going well?

Odd response. I wouldn’t say not having a sponsor on the stadium is ‘going badly’. And there’s about a billion other potential discussion points but you keep hammering away on this one.

Not here to stop you, just think it’s weird and I’ll ignore this thread for a bit.

 

[Grays_1890]

And linked to that, there will likely be a set of Commercial objectives linked the naming rights that they want to achieve, as well as Brand / Marketing objectives. It feels like we tend to focus on the former, as it has more obviously tangible benefits - i.e. potentially more players coming in - whereas with the latter it’s likely more nebulous to the average fan and possibly, to use a tossy marketing phrase, about driving ‘salience’ of the Spurs brand, which is more helpful in driving longer term ‘sales’ fans (‘customers’ eugh).

Yeh absolutely and also there is and I don't mean it condescending, a lack of understanding about what marketing is and how it all feed into one another. You almost have to separate Tottenham the club out of it now and look at what makes sense and is joined up, for us that would be a brand that feeds into the NFL and F1 markets and is also a luxury level that benefits the club the brand association levels. In I mean if we went out and got Cash Converters or Greggs as a sponsor who paid the 250m over ten years we wanted, the likelihood is it would devalue every other deal we have and the overall balance would be more negative. Alot of it is about picking a brand that other brands want to be associated with at the minute being associated with Tottenham alone is more valuable IMO than if we flagged the stadium as any tom dingdong and harry brand just to make a bucks.

There is also no doubt in my mind that there is consultancy with the NFL on who we have as a sponsor considering they have a small stake holding into the ground when it was built