Naming rights cont.

[dave.woodhall]

Some interesting valuations here:

http://www.american-appraisal.co.uk/UK/Home-Page-Features/Feature-1.htm

[pauliewalnuts]

Those figures appear to be plucked from thin air.

[Greg N'Ash]

they do seem rather daft really, both the high figures and the low.

[Vanilla]

I can see us being banded a lot lower than some clubs. Simply because we aren't one of the favoured Sky 4, we aren't based in London and we aren't involved in many national and European competitions for prolonged periods etc.

However, to place us in the same bracket as Blackburn is a right slap in the chops. Our fan base and brand here and abroad, must reach out further than Blackburn? Unless of course they are taking into account the Indian market being opened up to them.

[atomicjam]

Arsenal= 14.9m
Man City= 10m
Liverpool= 9.3m
Man U= 7.9m
Chelsea= 6.4m
Stoke= 3.9m
Spurs= 3.4m
Blackburn= 2.7m
Aston Villa= 2.7m
Bolton= 2.3m
Fulham= 1.6m
Everton= 1.6m
Swansea= 1.3m
Newcastle= 1m
QPR= 0.8m
Wigan= 0.7m
Wolves= 0.5m
Sunderland= 0.4m
WBA= 0.4m
Norwich= 0.2m

Stoke are doing bloody well! More than Spurs or us- I doubt that very much...

[pauliewalnuts]

However, to place us in the same bracket as Blackburn is a right slap in the chops. Our fan base and brand here and abroad, must reach out further than Blackburn? Unless of course they are taking into account the Indian market being opened up to them.

Blackburn calling Ewood the Venkys Stadium would have an obvious value to an obvious market.

The most interesting thing in that list is the valuation of Man City's naming rights versus what Etihad paid.

[pauliewalnuts]

Personally, I'm waiting for the Swiss Rambler's take on things.

[Greg N'Ash]

well i think we can safely say carrow road isn't going to be renamed in the forseeable future if those figures are right. 200k a year? probably a month's wage bill

[AV82EC]

As someone who works for the organisation who sponsor Stoke's stadium, and I've seen the figure on a spreadsheet, they get about £500k a year for a combined Shirt/stadium sponsorship.  I'd say the figures are definitely plucked from thin air.

[Greg N'Ash]

As someone who works for the organisation who sponsor Stoke's stadium, and I've seen the figure on a spreadsheet, they get about £500k a year for a combined Shirt/stadium sponsorship.  I'd say the figures are definitely plucked from thin air.

Could be wrong but weren't they Championship or lower when they signed that deal? Different ball game once you're in the premier

[ozzjim]

If anyone thinks United would get less than Arsenal or indeed Man City they are off their rocker. City may have money, but their naming deal was a very creative one that had nothing to do with the value of their name. United would make double everyone else with such an iconic brand and stadium. As for us below stoke, what do the yanks know about football again?

[Mister E]

Well, the MCFC actual is - we know - part of the FFP blag.
I'd  like to know the basis of the valuations - is it reported fan base? Or the number of times the club appears on TV? Or the number fo times the ground is mentioned in print / in social media, etc?

Seems arbitrary, right now.

[Vanilla]

However, to place us in the same bracket as Blackburn is a right slap in the chops. Our fan base and brand here and abroad, must reach out further than Blackburn? Unless of course they are taking into account the Indian market being opened up to them.

Blackburn calling Ewood the Venkys Stadium would have an obvious value to an obvious market.

The most interesting thing in that list is the valuation of Man City's naming rights versus what Etihad paid.

We all know why that is. And we all know the PL and the FA will do nothing about it.

[Chris Harte]

If anyone thinks United would get less than Arsenal or indeed Man City they are off their rocker...  United would make double everyone else with such an iconic brand and stadium.

I'm not so sure, Ozz.

Arsenal and Citeh have homes that have either always had a sponsor name or had an original name that was such a mouthful that an alternative in the form of a sponsor would make a welcome simplification.

Meanwhile, Old Trafford will always be Old Trafford to United fans. In much the same way as Newcastle's support will stick with their home's moniker regardless of what Mike Ashley tries. Any company that doesn't recognise this is likely to get their fingers burned.

[midnite]

But the counter argument to that is, does it matter what we all call said stadium? The money they pay is surely for media purposes. Surely price of a stadium will be based on column inches a team get so how many times the stadiums name will be in print and the coverage it will get on SSN or the BBC with he reporter outside the "? stadium"
As well as logistics to where he stadium is. The fact you can see villa park on the main motorways or stadiums being on flight paths etc.