Babylon Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 The owners provided us the league title, I don't care if they call it the "Muhammed I'm hard Bruce Lee" Stadium.
zealot Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 1 minute ago, StanSP said: what you want and what they can do/what they want are 2 very different things though. 1 minute ago, pSinatra said: I agree completely, but if we want the best players we can afford (or attract) I guess that's the price we have to pay I think what I'm trying to say is we have plenty of dosh right now and that that's not the issue.... This isn't going to affect players we can buy nor FFP. That's just the argument they'll hide behind to keep the money streaming in a King Power direction. What about our history? What about if King Power go under? That's what I care about.
TiffToff88 Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 1 minute ago, Babylon said: The owners provided us the league title, I don't care if they call it the "Muhammed I'm hard Bruce Lee" Stadium. Exactly. After what they have done for the club, they can rename the Kop after the kings dog for all i care. Who even pays too much attention to the name of a stadium during the game anyway??
StriderHiryu Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 I would prefer Filbert Way as it's the name of the place, and more reflective of our history as a club. However, the King Power Stadium has quite a ring to it actually given that they are our primary sponsor and we wear the label on our shirt, I don't have a problem with it. In fact Martin Tyler's "And the surge of power at the King Power goes on!" line will always stay with me so I am kind of fond of it after our incredible story! I do wonder if we moved to a new stadium if we would call it "The King Power" / "The New King Power", or if we would change the name.
zealot Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 6 minutes ago, TiffToff88 said: Exactly. After what they have done for the club, they can rename the Kop after the kings dog for all i care. Who even pays too much attention to the name of a stadium during the game anyway?? Seriously, have a bit of a think about what you just said there. You would re-christen our theatre of dreams and rebrand in the name of some pampered pooch?!
StanSP Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 7 minutes ago, zealot said: I think what I'm trying to say is we have plenty of dosh right now and that that's not the issue.... This isn't going to affect players we can buy nor FFP. That's just the argument they'll hide behind to keep the money streaming in a King Power direction. What about our history? What about if King Power go under? That's what I care about. What about it? It's still there. It's not vanished just because the stadium name has been changed. The owners have already done a fvck load of amazing stuff for us. If you don't want it called King Power Stadium, don't call it that if it makes you happy.
zealot Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 7 minutes ago, StanSP said: What about it? It's still there. It's not vanished just because the stadium name has been changed. The owners have already done a fvck load of amazing stuff for us. If you don't want it called King Power Stadium, don't call it that if it makes you happy. I don't call it that if I can help it. It helps... a little.
The_77 Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 2 minutes ago, StanSP said: What about it? It's still there. It's not vanished just because the stadium name has been changed. The owners have already done a fvck load of amazing stuff for us. If you don't want it called King Power Stadium, don't call it that if it makes you happy. This. Or pretend it's named after Andy King and King Richard III if that helps you go to sleep at night. The owners have have made significant investments into the club; having the naming rights for the stadium help them continue to make those investments. They also care about raising the profile of their country, company, and their foundation, which the naming rights help them accomplish. If the owners didn't do the same for the club, the city, and local foundations, that's one thing, but it's hard to argue that one should have a problem with the name King Power Stadium.
TiffToff88 Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 10 minutes ago, zealot said: Seriously, have a bit of a think about what you just said there. You would re-christen our theatre of dreams and rebrand in the name of some pampered pooch?! I don't need to think about it. I really couldn't care less what the stadium is called. It's just a name. It's the team i care about, not the name building they play in
zealot Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 1 minute ago, The_77 said: This. Or pretend it's named after Andy King and King Richard III if that helps you go to sleep at night. The owners have have made significant investments into the club; having the naming rights for the stadium help them continue to make those investments. They also care about raising the profile of their country, company, and their foundation, which the naming rights help them accomplish. If the owners didn't do the same for the club, the city, and local foundations, that's one thing, but it's hard to argue that one should have a problem with the name King Power Stadium. But that's exactly what I'm trying to debunk here The_77! The naming rights are EXTRA cash for them. It's not necessary any more. They're doing fine and can make investment without the naming rights. Our club will not fall if that money goes away. I'm going to dig around some stats for naming rights costs but it's pocket cash for them and is not going to make or break our club. I agree absolutely they are respectful in the main and I absolutely love that about them. This is pretty much the only issue where I feel they have got it slightly wrong.
zealot Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 Just now, urban.spaceman said: Filbert's Treat. Anything with 'Filbert' in it and I'm happy urban.spaceman
stevelcfc Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 Someone's started early, tough day at the office?
ScouseFox Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 33 minutes ago, TiffToff88 said: Am i the only person who doesn't care what the stadium is called? I've never lost sleep over it. As long as the team performs on the pitch, they can call it whatever they want as far as i'm concerned. this. don't think i've ever really mentioned the name of it in conversation. what type of conversations are people having to get annoyed about it? think i mention the ground once every two weeks and that is to ring or text whoever i'm going the game with and i would say "yeah meet you at THE GROUND kid", not "hi, i'll be meeting you outside turnstile 21 of the singha south stand at the king power stadium, thank you".
Bayfox Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 29 minutes ago, zealot said: I think what I'm trying to say is we have plenty of dosh right now and that that's not the issue.... This isn't going to affect players we can buy nor FFP. That's just the argument they'll hide behind to keep the money streaming in a King Power direction. What about our history? What about if King Power go under? That's what I care about. We have plenty of dosh for a reason. And the fact that it's called the KP is one of those. Does anyone actually know from the accounts how much they pay for the naming rights. For all we know that figure alone could cover the off the field wage bill alone. Psg and man city have vastly inflated deals for naming rights as a way to avoid FFP rules. They run into millions a season. Paying a good few players wages along the way. Unless the owners get a huge offer from a major brand that makes it worth while. Unlikely I know. Then it's the KP till they get bored and move on.
Babylon Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 3 minutes ago, Bayfox said: We have plenty of dosh for a reason. And the fact that it's called the KP is one of those. Not sure I've even seen anything re naming rights listed in the accounts. Wouldn't be shocked if they pay nothing for shirt and stadium sponsorship. They probably see it as part and parcel of pumping their money into the club in the first place.
Bayfox Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 1 minute ago, Babylon said: Not sure I've even seen anything re naming rights listed in the accounts. Wouldn't be shocked if they pay nothing for shirt and stadium sponsorship. They probably see it as part and parcel of pumping their money into the club in the first place. Well in that case sod the KP Really missing a trick there. I know they want it as a marketing tool. But they could easily use it help with FFP and if they make profit. Just return a larger dividend to get it back. Or sell it to someone else and take there money. I guess they don't see the need too. Lucky rich bastards
Viva Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 More than happy with King Power Stadium. Helping the owners improve their brand is fine by me after all they have done for us. As and when they leave, then the stadium name can be discussed further.
Babylon Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 1 minute ago, Bayfox said: Well in that case sod the KP Really missing a trick there. I know they want it as a marketing tool. But they could easily use it help with FFP and if they make profit. Just return a larger dividend to get it back. Or sell it to someone else and take there money. I guess they don't see the need too. Lucky rich bastards What would have been worth more, say £10m quid or having king power mentioned around the globe, front and back page of almost every publication going last year.
Richardgill Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 22 minutes ago, Babylon said: Not sure I've even seen anything re naming rights listed in the accounts. Wouldn't be shocked if they pay nothing for shirt and stadium sponsorship. They probably see it as part and parcel of pumping their money into the club in the first place. Before the Tresteller deal, sponsorship income was 6m, post Tresteller, sponsorship income was 16m. KP is safely paying anything over 10m-11m for naming rights
Bayfox Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 14 minutes ago, Babylon said: What would have been worth more, say £10m quid or having king power mentioned around the globe, front and back page of almost every publication going last year. I understand the reasons. But from a football club point of view. Which is my concern as a fan. The money. But as I haven't read our accounts in a few years I don't know how much the owners do put in. If anything or if we are now sustainable from TV income and matchday etc exclusively. Anyway. We are stuck with KP. But I agree with others generally it's just the ground when topic of conversation.
AKCJ Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 Just call it the KP myself. Or 'the ground/stadium'.
The_77 Posted 12 January 2017 Posted 12 January 2017 49 minutes ago, zealot said: But that's exactly what I'm trying to debunk here The_77! The naming rights are EXTRA cash for them. It's not necessary any more. They're doing fine and can make investment without the naming rights. Our club will not fall if that money goes away. I'm going to dig around some stats for naming rights costs but it's pocket cash for them and is not going to make or break our club. I agree absolutely they are respectful in the main and I absolutely love that about them. This is pretty much the only issue where I feel they have got it slightly wrong. They've shown themselves to be pretty brilliant at leveraging the brand to money around for the club's benefit. Even if there is no necessary financial benefit to holding the naming rights, it helps them promote this, which is very dear to the owners' hearts: https://www.kingpower.com/en/corporate/social-events-activities/king-power-foundation
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.