Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Rick_avfc on July 08, 2011, 09:32:18 AM
-
Apologies if this topic has been started somewhere else but just wanted to know people's feelings about if Villa Park was to be renamed for a large sum of money. Man City apparently have agreed a deal with Eithad Airways to rename their stadium for £150m? Would Villa fans accept a name change of some sort or maybe keeping the name Villa Park and possibly getting companies to sponsor the different stands?
-
No way, I'm a traditionalist. What makes Aston Villa FC unique is the touch of class that radiates from it.
-
While I hate the idea I guess you have to do what you can to keep up. I'm dreading who the sponsors for the ground name might be though.
-
Absolutely NO on principle, but for £150mill, I could always get some different principles
-
No way I like the fact that we play at Villa Park couldn't get use to it being called by any other name.
-
No way I like the fact that we play at Villa Park couldn't get use to it being called by any other name.
But it will always be Villa Park, whatever the naming rights say.
-
£150m is a lot of cash. I don't think we'd get anywhere near that amount if we did - if someone offered us £150m for it we'd be foolish to turn it down.
-
No way I like the fact that we play at Villa Park couldn't get use to it being called by any other name.
But it will always be Villa Park, whatever the naming rights say.
True. Just because someone owns the naming rights to it, it will always be known as Villa Park to the die hard fans. Say if Villa got £120M for it? Would people change their minds then? I doubt this will ever happen tho.
-
I think with newer grounds like Citeh's it's less of an issue. We'd always call it Villa Park of course but it would grate a little to hear in the media, "over to Pat Murphy at the Forex Pro Stadium" or whatever. What I do find a bit of a farce is when new stadiums immediately get a sponsor so that's what the ground's known as, then that sponshorship deal runs out. What's the McAlpine called these days? And what will the Emirates become?
-
I think this will start to become more common over the next few years and although I don't like the idea, we'll get left behind if we can't keep up.
-
Wash your mouth out for even suggesting it
-
Leicester City have just done it as well right? I do believe moving forward, more and more clubs will start renaming their stadiums for more money. I guess you have to move with the times to keep up.
-
The Doug Ellis is Great Stadium
-
Villa Park will always be Villa Park but I'd have no problem buying a ticket to sit in a new Rover Stand rather than the current North Stand.
-
We have to remember though that the Man City thing is just a scam by the sheikh to get around the FFP rules. I'm not sure we could command £150M for the naming rights to VP. When you think about it that's virtually the cost of an entire new stadium.
-
Maybe a combination somehow? In the same way that it's the 'Carling Premiership' we could call B6 the 'Forex Pro Villa Park'?
-
Absolutely NO on principle, but for £150mill, I could always get some different principles
exactly , I wouldnt mind 5 new £30 million pound players in the team ...
-
Maybe a combination somehow? In the same way that it's the 'Carling Premiership' we could call B6 the 'Forex Pro Villa Park'?
I think that's what would be done. I can't see the words Villa Park being dropped completely, after all there is a certain amount of history there.
-
Yes but for a combination, you'd probably have to accept considerably less money for it...
-
If they want to call it The Exxon Mobil stadium , they can for the bucks . But we the fans will always call it V.P .
-
We have to remember though that the Man City thing is just a scam by the sheikh to get around the FFP rules. I'm not sure we could command £150M for the naming rights to VP. When you think about it that's virtually the cost of an entire new stadium.
Exactly - a genuine deal would be worth a fraction of £ 150m. This is just the arabs moving money from one pocket to another to cheat the new rules
-
p,s nothing less than £150, 000 ,000 thou and for 5 years only ;-)
-
No bloody way.
£150m then? Carry on, tell me more.
-
No way, no how.
No amount of money could persuade me. I dont care if we fall even further behind the rich clubs, we already have and its not likely to change.
Would you accept us changing our home kit to blue & white if some rich arab gave us £500mil?
Or how about us changing our name to Birmingham Utd?
No?
Thought so!
-
Well said sg. Some things are sacred, Villa Park is one of them.
-
How about turning it around ? A company changes its name and rebrands itself using our name....for example Norwich Union renamed itself Aviva, they could have paid us by allowing them to rebrand themselves as 'Villa Park' instead.
Why pay copious quantities of cash to Paul Whitehouse and the TV stations for air time when their name/brand would get massive exposure every time we are mentioned ?
"Car Insurance ? Go direct............get the Villa Park deal".
-
If that Man City deal is allowed under the new Financial Fair Play rules, it will anything but Fair Play.
Etihad pay £2.3m a season to sponsor Abu Dhabi City's shirts, why would they possibly pay 5 or more times that to re-name the stadium?
-
The price of everything, the value of nothing.
-
No to renaming Villa Park. But if the owners of Tata stumped up the cash for the new North Stand then I could live with the new "Jaguar Witton End".
-
If that Man City deal is allowed under the new Financial Fair Play rules, it will anything but Fair Play.
Etihad pay £2.3m a season to sponsor Abu Dhabi City's shirts, why would they possibly pay 5 or more times that to re-name the stadium?
My thoughts exactly
Are they going to generate in excess of £150 million in extra business?
It's one way around the fair play rules
-
Well, getting past those fair play rules wasn't exactly difficult, was it?
-
No. It's Villa Park and that's how it should be.
It was bad enough when the Witton Lane name was changed.
And while we're at it, let's make sure we don't fill in the corners of the stadium. Let's not be an indentikit of others.
-
Following the Man City interpretation of the rules, every time Roman Abramovich has a glass of vodka at Stamford Bridge, he will probably charge himself £2million.
-
The deal with Citeh is 150m over 15 years, So thats 10m per year or just under Yaya Toures wages per year, They will still need more money.
-
Yes but for a combination, you'd probably have to accept considerably less money for it...
Not necessarily. Since Villa Park is a historical name I think it would be of more value for the sponsor to be associated with that name, rather than trying to replace it and then having their name ignored by fans who simply continue to refer to the ground as Villa Park.
-
How about turning it around ? A company changes its name and rebrands itself using our name....for example Norwich Union renamed itself Aviva, they could have paid us by allowing them to rebrand themselves as 'Villa Park' instead.
Why pay copious quantities of cash to Paul Whitehouse and the TV stations for air time when their name/brand would get massive exposure every time we are mentioned ?
"Car Insurance ? Go direct............get the Villa Park deal".
As an ex Norwich Union employee can I immediately veto this idea? The name of our good club should never be sullied with those bastards - be like a Barton/Bowyer/Bellamy triple signing!
-
I've no problem with selling the naming rights. If done correctly, the words "Villa Park" can be retained
Microsoft Stadium @ Villa Park
Budweiser Stadium @ Villa Park
Either work for me
-
Following the Man City interpretation of the rules, every time Roman Abramovich has a glass of vodka at Stamford Bridge, he will probably charge himself £2million.
That's quite cheap by London prices.
-
Since Villa Park is a historical name I think it would be of more value for the sponsor to be associated with that name, rather than trying to replace it and then having their name ignored by fans who simply continue to refer to the ground as Villa Park.
They won't care what the fans who go call it, just what the media does everytime we're mentioned.
-
How about turning it around ? A company changes its name and rebrands itself using our name....for example Norwich Union renamed itself Aviva, they could have paid us by allowing them to rebrand themselves as 'Villa Park' instead.
Why pay copious quantities of cash to Paul Whitehouse and the TV stations for air time when their name/brand would get massive exposure every time we are mentioned ?
"Car Insurance ? Go direct............get the Villa Park deal".
As an ex Norwich Union employee can I immediately veto this idea? The name of our good club should never be sullied with those bastards - be like a Barton/Bowyer/Bellamy triple signing!
So your time as an employee at Norwich Union wasn't a happy one then?
-
If we're renamiing it we should call it Brian.
-
isn't our ground called aston lower grounds? villa park was the nickname given to it by fans, or is it time for me to stop toking? :)
-
How about turning it around ? A company changes its name and rebrands itself using our name....for example Norwich Union renamed itself Aviva, they could have paid us by allowing them to rebrand themselves as 'Villa Park' instead.
Why pay copious quantities of cash to Paul Whitehouse and the TV stations for air time when their name/brand would get massive exposure every time we are mentioned ?
"Car Insurance ? Go direct............get the Villa Park deal".
As an ex Norwich Union employee can I immediately veto this idea? The name of our good club should never be sullied with those bastards - be like a Barton/Bowyer/Bellamy triple signing!
So your time as an employee at Norwich Union wasn't a happy one then?
I think Dickens said it best:-
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times."
-
No way, I'm a traditionalist. What makes Aston Villa FC unique is the touch of class that radiates from it.
Yeh that's great and all - but, I'm sure Man City fans will get over selling the name of the stadium when they've secured a few more trophies over the next 5 years...
Whereas we'll have our traditional name, do everything by the book - writing letters to ask to speak to managers/players etc. and remain 7th-10th.
Good that...
-
People say they would still call it Villa Park, but how many still refer to the Witton Lane stand as such rather than the Doug Ellis stand? Over time the name would fade. At the very worst it should be the sponsor's name plus Villa Park but the reference to VP should never be removed
-
Great Ellis Park?
-
No way, I'm a traditionalist. What makes Aston Villa FC unique is the touch of class that radiates from it.
Yeh that's great and all - but, I'm sure Man City fans will get over selling the name of the stadium when they've secured a few more trophies over the next 5 years...
Whereas we'll have our traditional name, do everything by the book - writing letters to ask to speak to managers/players etc. and remain 7th-10th.
Good that...
...and of course, by selling the name of the stand, it'll mean we win the league and then the champions league will surely follow...
-
People say they would still call it Villa Park, but how many still refer to the Witton Lane stand as such rather than the Doug Ellis stand?
I do as a point of principle.
-
At least we would still be playing in the same ground, unlike Arsenal moving to a new stadium entirely. Moving location I would find harder to accept, you just can't beat approaching Villa Park, past the Church or the Hall or the park.
-
I would love it if we ended up as thẹ only premier club without a shirt/stadium sponsor. I think that would show a certain sense of style! (i know we'd lose out financially before anyone comments.)
-
The reason why we'd get very little if we tried to sell our naming rights is because it is not a new stadium.
New stadia do not have names which have been around for over a century - like Villa Park - and as such are likely to get widely called by their sponsored name
Sponsor somewhere like Villa Park or Goodison or Old Trafford, and nobody would use the new name, thereby rendering it less attractive. Case in point - isn't St James' Park called "sportsdirecttattyshellsuits.com@st james park these days?
-
The money would be nice but I just don't like the idea. It's Villa Park and it always should be Villa Park.
I think City fans might be a bit more unhappy about it if it was Maine Road rather than the new built Council House they currently play in.
-
I have no problem with selling the naming rights in a "genting stadium/arena @ villa park" style arrangement. I'd also happliy sell the naming rights to the doug ellis and the north stand and I'd negotiate on the trinity as well. The Holte End is the 1 you really shouldn't mess about with.
We need to embrace the commercial aspects of the sport better than we do, it's all well and good wanting to be traditional and wanting to keep our heritage but we have to work in the real world. Football is a big commercial machine, if we try to hold back from that we're just putting ourselves at a disadvantage compared to everyone else.
-
Sell your soul once and your dammed for an iternity
-
No way, I'm a traditionalist. What makes Aston Villa FC unique is the touch of class that radiates from it.
Yeh that's great and all - but, I'm sure Man City fans will get over selling the name of the stadium when they've secured a few more trophies over the next 5 years...
Whereas we'll have our traditional name, do everything by the book - writing letters to ask to speak to managers/players etc. and remain 7th-10th.
Good that...
...and of course, by selling the name of the stand, it'll mean we win the league and then the champions league will surely follow...
Nope, not necessarily at all - but it'd give you a bit better chance - don't you think?
ie. If not for Mr Lerners millions in his tenurship thus far, we would have been up shit creek a few years ago, and probably doing well to compete with the likes of Forest.
You can like it or lump it - there's no soul, tradition, or loyalty in football anymore. If you think there is, you're wrong and you had better get over that sad fact - and fast. Otherwise be vastly disappointed.
A club in this century will get nowhere without the almighty £ / Euro / Dollar, or whatever currency they use in the oil rich middle east.
The only way a bit of sanity will come back into football, is when the bottom falls out of it - which doesn't look like it's too far around the corner.
-
Great Ellis Park?
Ellis Island?
-
Wouldn't bother me at all. It's Villa Park to us, and always will be. If Genting want to stick their name on the outside and give us £100 million to invest in our future all the better.
-
So do Ethan Airways is owned by same family who own Man City ?
Why else spend silly money on sponsorship or naming right.
-
Wouldn't bother me at all. It's Villa Park to us, and always will be. If Genting want to stick their name on the outside and give us £100 million to invest in our future all the better.
I agree. To me, it will always be known as Villa Park and the added investment surely is a good thing for the club?
-
Be like selling my soul. Cringe at the thought of hearing a commentator saying crossing over to the go (enter business name here) stadium
Its Villa park, its traditional, its classy, its home.
-
The trouble is we are owned by an American and they like all this stadium naming rights stuff, just look at their stadiums
chances are were going to be call the MBNA arena or similar very soon :(
-
I'm sure you could sell the naming rights but I doubt you'd get a good enough deal to make it worthwhile.
The same goes for any existing stadium - unless you're a state-owned club like Man City with a state airline to manipulate.
-
noooooooo
-
No. No chance. No way. Definitely not. Nein. Non. Ne. Nei. Nej. Ez. Nangaa. Po. Nee. Anio. Naumi. A thousand times over.
-
Sell your soul once and your damned for an eternity
The noses did the whole naming the ground thing years ago (St Andrews Liver Salts) and theyv'e been damned ever since.
-
No way.
The £150million would soon disappear down the trouser pockets of players and agents.
-
I could cope with the renaming of the North Stand to something more fitting as well as the Witton Lane Stand (I cannot bring myself to referring to the current name). When this was discussed a while back, someone came up with the idea of sponsoring specific sections such as the turnstiles. That would not bother me at all.
-
When this was discussed a while back, someone came up with the idea of sponsoring specific sections such as the turnstiles. That would not bother me at all.
And why would any company want to do that?
-
The trouble is we are owned by an American and they like all this stadium naming rights stuff, just look at their stadiums
chances are were going to be call the MBNA arena or similar very soon :(
Randy's been here 5 years or so. Chances are he'd have done it by now if that was ever part of his plans! I think there's a difference when a team have a memorable name to fit the ground - who else is ever going to call their ground Villa Park? (er- just did a quick check on google and came up with 2 junior teams and a historical reference to Swansea Villa!)
But agree with the idea of sponsoring stands or parts of stands for a game or season. Could be quite funny matching them up - the 'specsavers' top tier, 'Vorsprung durch technik' written around the dugouts, 'Quavers' for the visiting fans section...
-
£150m to spend on new players? Fuck yeah. I'd call it villa park anyways
-
I have no idea. I'm not an expert in marketing. It was just an idea posted by someone. Perhaps it might raise the profile of small businesses? Their logo and details emblazoned on the wall as you enter the ground?
-
I doubt we'd get £30m, let alone £150m. I can't see any situation where I'd be in favour of it.
-
Sell your soul once and your damned for an eternity
The noses did the whole naming the ground thing years ago (St Andrews Liver Salts) and theyv'e been damned ever since.
Did they? I never heard. I just thought they played at the sty. That's what I've seen it called here....
-
NEVER.
-
I wouldn't like it at all but can understand it in terms of revenue for the club, as others have said I'd still call it Villa Park anyway
-
People have said that Man City'd deal makes a mockery of the FFP Rules. Does it?
It works out at roughly £10m a year and it's not just for the stadium but the whole "campus" or whatever it'll be called. We've just signed a £8-10m shirt deal pet season so I think sits in line with the man city deal.
Furthermore the rules state that such income can be adjusted if the accountants think the sponsorship is in excess of the market rate. This could still happen
But I have no idea what the Market rate for stadium sponsorship is.
-
Yes, it makes a mockery because it's effectively the owners of the club (Etihad being the airline owned by the owners of Citeh) sponsoring their own club for as much as they think it takes to buy the players they need to circumvent the rules.
Need more cash? Change the shirt sponsorship to another of their companies for another astronomical amount, or sponsor the fucking floodlights for half a billion or something.
It's a loophole a lot of us saw, that UEFA obviously knew about, and it shows how pointless these regulations are.
-
We don't know what UEFAs response will be yet.
The Etihad deal might be worth £400m but UEFA don't have to account for the full amount in their assessment. If they have cause to believe it's worth half that amount, FFP gives them the power to account for half the amount.
-
I couldn't care less, frankly. The 'game' is dead anyway.
-
I still call the North Stand the "Witton End" and can never quite remember which is supposed to be the "Doug Ellis" stand so it doesn't matter to me ;-)
This may be my age of course...
-
Villa Park has to be one of the most famous names in the game. F.A. Cup semi finals, the World Cup, European Championships and the UEFA Cup final all at VP over the years. If we can sell the naming to rights to, I don't know, Coca-Cola Villa Park or Honda Villa Park and we make millions, I don't think we'd mind as long as the team on the pitch is given the funds to improve. VP will always be known as VP to us, come what may, just like Eastlands will be called Eastlands by the fans. It's only the media who give a shit about these things.
-
If there is money to be made then it will happen!
The premier league clubs are £3.1billion in debt (on paper) spending beyond their means. I think if a decision was made to ban all fans from the grounds to have a "Sky TV season ticket" for your favourite club then they would consider it, the fans count for nothing anymore. Look at the Arsenal 6% increase in the ticket prices! Over £2300 for the most expensive season ticket! joke!
The premier league needs reshaping and bring the fans back on side. Same as in Germany, grounds are full every week. Even Man Utd struggled to sell out every week at the end of last season.
-
I've not read the whole of this thread, but what have the Man City fans made of it?
I'd be appalled if Villa Park's name was changed. Unless the offer was seriously silly money, i don't think Randy would anyway.
-
I have had a rethink. If Aston Manor brewery was to become a global giant like Carlsberg or Carling than we could have an association like the "Aston Manor Park"
-
If there is money to be made then it will happen!
The premier league clubs are £3.1billion in debt (on paper) spending beyond their means. I think if a decision was made to ban all fans from the grounds to have a "Sky TV season ticket" for your favourite club then they would consider it, the fans count for nothing anymore. Look at the Arsenal 6% increase in the ticket prices! Over £2300 for the most expensive season ticket! joke!
The premier league needs reshaping and bring the fans back on side. Same as in Germany, grounds are full every week. Even Man Utd struggled to sell out every week at the end of last season.
They could always cut costs...
-
What an absolutely vile idea. Never in a million years.
-
villa park is one of the few great stadiums in the country...
it has history, tradition, heritage... to even think of changing the name is nonsense...
its different for manchester citys plasitc identikit stadium... they dont even own it, and it is a crap plastic bowl full of crap plastic fans...
they have only been borrowing it for a few years, so it makes perfect sense for them to get around the so called "financial fair play" rules and help keep themselves into the "top tabl", despite eufa doing their best to keep the status quo as it was and keeping the rich rich, and the rest of us, scrapping around beneath their impossible to break into diamond strength glass ceiling unnoficial european super league...
the game is in a huge mess, and if it ever implodes on itself, i for one will piss myself with laughter... i hope its one of these clubs who have bent the rules to keep themselves within the "status quo" that goes out of business that then forces eufa to do something about the game... i wont hold my breath though...
-
"etihad" is apparently the arabic word for "United".
Now THAT's selling your soul.
-
villa park is one of the few great stadiums in the country...
it has history, tradition, heritage... to even think of changing the name is nonsense...
The last of Villa Park's "history, tradition, heritage" went when the Trinity Road was demolished ( and, in my opinion, to a lesser extent, when the Holte went). There's not a stand at Villa Park now that's older than 35 years.
Why not finish off the job and sell the naming rights?
-
its different for manchester citys plasitc identikit stadium... they dont even own it, and it is a crap plastic bowl full of crap plastic fans...
I think that's a bit harsh. Citeh fans aren't to blame for the current situation and they stuck by their club when they were in the doldrums
-
Mail on Sunday web site say
The fact that Etihad was set up by the Emir of Abu Dhabi, Sheik Khalifa, who is the brother of City's owner, Sheik Mansour, has also fuelled their suspicions.
Etihad is the national airline carrier of Abu Dhabi and itself has never made a profit since it was formed in 2003, though it is expected to make money this year.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2013014/Top-clubs-want-Manchester-Citys-400m-deal-vetoed.html#ixzz1RixkbZpN
-
Didnt Manure change Old Trafford to the Theatre of Dreams * finger down throat*