New Sponsor Next Season For Newcastle Utd

What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.

@#$%& hell do these people have no idea how much I have to keep forking out for @#$%& shirts?

If it says s@~~~ d@@#~ they can @#$%& off I'm not buying any.

it'll not be sports direct, MA will like the money coming in from another source, they've obviously found someone who wants the whole sponsorship package!

either way I am @#$%& sick of forking out yearly for these shirts.I mean personally I have merely bought old shirts (currently wearng a 50s one for matches) but the bairns insist on the new ones.

Frankly its getting stupid, what about offering new ones for the ones I was ripped off for from the club shop (that were meant to last two years I may add)

We can look forward to having SJP called the Greggs Pastydome or something next year then.


Get regular updates from one of TyneTalk's mintest posters, follow: [www.twitter.com] @adameverett92

If it was Greggs with the owner being local he might change it back to being St James' Park!

It would also make the food at half time a lot more appealing!

Dave, I think new shirts every season is going to be the norm for most clubs now, if your only buying the shirts your lucky, my wife insists on buying my 2 sons the full strip everytime it changes, i on the other hand haven't bought a new home shirt for about 10years, i wear an original 1981 shirt!

1994 is my shirt of choice.


Get regular updates from one of TyneTalk's mintest posters, follow: [www.twitter.com] @adameverett92

I am wearing apart from my 1950's one, the 1984 grey away shirt for no other reason than 1 I always liked it and 2 it was on sale from toffs a while back.

And yes I will concede that maybe a new shirt once a season is the way of things to come (don't agree but your right) but here is the thing it's only @#$%& October, I bought the new shirts 10 pigging weeks ago, at a combined cost of nearly 400 @#$%& quid.

It sticks in the @#$%& throat somewhat

Anyway back on topic, apparently it's going to be Wonga (a loan shark company that is legal for reasons I can't work out).


Get regular updates from one of TyneTalk's mintest posters, follow: [www.twitter.com] @adameverett92

I won't be buying that shirt. I whole heartedly disagree with WONGA and their products. I disagree with their 4214% APR.

I totally agree no way would I wear that shirt.

Apparently its an 8m a year deal over 3 years for the stadium and shirt deal.

It's a worse deal than the £10mill 2 year shirt sponosrhips deal we had witH Virgin

8 million per year, thus 3 years at 8 million per year totals 24 million for 3 years, apparently.

Quote:

andrew the mag
8 million per year, thus 3 years at 8 million per year totals 24 million for 3 years, apparently.

Oh you mean the monthly interest from a 20 quid bridging loan from them then?

I agree no way I am buying it either, and as I have never before typed this (on here or anywhere actually) it's morally wrong.

Just out of interest who would people like to sponsor the club?

Usually I honestly don't care, last sponsors that actually meant anything to me and who's products I used were scottish and newcastle breweries.

I didn't like the northern rock one or the virgin one because they took up about a third of the front of the shirt nothing to do with the products themselves (neither of which I actually used).

I only care about this one because I honestly believe what they do should be illegal.

Mind I don't buy the new shirts, but I think anything with wonga on the front will see a decrease in shirt sales, at least it will in my house, because even my eldest who has every shirt of the last 18 years (and I mean everyone, 3rd kits ect) has already nailed his colours to the mast and said he is not getting one, the younger ones will not have a choice becuase I am not paying.

While I appreciate this is a small percentage, I believe this conversation is going on all over tyneside and not particularly positively I would imagine.

And here is the thing, it will not make a blind bit of difference what we feel, so I shall just continue to support my side and ignore everything else, while giving them as little of my money as humanely possible.

Question is will the company last the three years of the deal ? From what I can gather they are treading a thin line legally and there are calls from government to investigate them and I'm pretty sure sooner or later they will be brought to justice .
Will we have cash up front should they go down the pan or will we end up with no sponsor midway through a season with an 8m financial black hole ?
Personally I will still probably buy the shirt but will remove /cover the sh#%e they place on the front if at all possible

Do what fred did, get the cash in advance, spend it, then ask for more.

Still I am willing to say more legal than wonga

I hadn't read it was £8mil per year for 3 years. I read £8m 3 year deal.

no I think it's 8 million a year. For gods sake I hope I'm right becuase to be honest I thought that was pretty @#$%&.

I mean we are talking stadium naming rights as well (like that @#$%& worked)

The deal is worth 24million over the 3 years, its a bit less than the 45million they were aiming for but its better than getting nothing off Sports Direct!

I dont think we'll need to worry about them disappearing, The government will do nothing, they may recommend they change some of their practices but other than that nothing will change!

I had an idea about the shirt sponsorship .
As the club issued the cover up patches for last seasons shirt when the sponsor changed shows it is possible wouldn't it be a good idea for someone with the contacts/ know how to produce a cover for the wonga logo and make it for sir bobby Robson foundation
Not only could the fans show their dislike of this sponsor but also raise money for a very worthy cause by buying the patch
Not much can be done about the stadium , and I don't think depriving the club of shirt sales will be beneficial . But I'll be damned if I'm gonna walk around with that on my chest promoting those legalised thieves

The reason I don't buy the current shirts is simple s''''@ d@@@.cnt.

Not buying them honestly doesn't make a bit of difference to the clubs finaces and makes me feel slightly better.

You have a decent idea there though with the cover up patch.

Well at least it's "officially" back to St. James' Park as a result of this move, even though fans never actually called it anything but. But seriously who wants to wear a shirt with wonga (what a ridiculous name!) on it? Being across the pond I know nothing of the company but from you lot's opinion they sound quite dodgy.

edit: apparently they exist over here as well, but I've never heard of them!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012:10:09:18:12:14 by CNDShearerFan16.

Them returning it to st James' park is a good gesture and made me a little less hostile towards the deal but something in my gut still doesn't trust this partnership.
I still don't wish to promote loan sharks on any shirt I wear and stand by my idea for the sbr foundation patch

We aren't promoting loan sharks or anything else, because we have a loan comapny's logo on our shirt we aren't telling people to go and take out a dodgy loan with them, if your stupid enough to take out one of these loans your going to do it whether its on the shirt or not! We've gone from one irresponsible loan company to one that hides behind a highbrow name to another dodgy one who doesn't hide what they are doing unlike most banks!

If we are sponsored by a brewery are we promoting and encouraging people to go out and get hammered?

It is promotion because its advertising.

Kind of yeah ! That's the whole point of advertising it's subliminal . You don't realise it but when you have to get something like a mortgage or a car loan you look for a bank for that loan and the fact we had northern rock/ virgin money as sponsor would of caused countless people to check their website or shops first without realising why they went there first . But that's a whole different argument

It's a form of endorsement. By putting the name on the shirts and affiliating them with the stadium, the club are saying "We are happy to be partners with these people. We agree with their practices".

Moving to an analogy - say the new sponsors were a company with very close affiliations to the Russian Mafia. A lot of the money from the company comes from criminal activities, including a significant drug trafficking trade.
Would the argument be the same?

I know that's an exaggeration, but in my eyes both industries harm their customers greatly to make a financial killing themselves. The difference is Wonga's service is legal (for reasons I don't quite understand).

I'm all for investment in the youth facilities and the club, but not at the expense of the people who would be footing the bill here.

Quote:

CNDShearerFan16
But seriously who wants to wear a shirt with wonga (what a ridiculous name!) on it?

Point missed being.

MM, please explain to me how we aren't promoting loan sharks? There is the logo of a loan shark on the front of our shirt (or their will be), that's not promotion?

'if your stupid enough to take out one of these loans your going to do it whether its on the shirt or not!'
Perhaps, but we're alerting the existance of the company to more people. Hence why they're paying us £8m a season.

Maybe a little extra reading might enlighten you:
[www.guardian.co.uk]


Get regular updates from one of TyneTalk's mintest posters, follow: [www.twitter.com] @adameverett92

Quote:

Note To Self
Moving to an analogy - say the new sponsors were a company with very close affiliations to the Russian Mafia.

A Premier League Club being associated with Russian corruption? Never!






Get regular updates from one of TyneTalk's mintest posters, follow: [www.twitter.com] @adameverett92