• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Daniel Levy - Chairman

Jurgen the German said:
More believable than having our name being more valuable than having real money for the naming rights.
Click to expand...

It is very odd. This was virtually the central reason Levy said we needed a new stadium. He would go back to the importance of naming rights all the time...

I can see why there might be an argumet that our club gets more coverage in American markets from having our name attached.

But I do think it is a bit depressing that we still have a very generic filler stadium name.
 
Perhaps Levy feels leaving the stadium name + sponsor blank commands more investor interest.

That investors are more likely to purchase the club, or a stake, if they are able to place their own sponsor to skirt FFP... LIke Emirates Marketing Project
 
Craig_J said:
It is very odd. This was virtually the central reason Levy said we needed a new stadium. He would go back to the importance of naming rights all the time...

I can see why there might be an argumet that our club gets more coverage in American markets from having our name attached.

But I do think it is a bit depressing that we still have a very generic filler stadium name.
Click to expand...
I agree with all of this apart from the name filler bit… as a fan I’d always prefer my club name rather than something like the AIA stadium or the emirates
 
Craig_J said:
It is very odd. This was virtually the central reason Levy said we needed a new stadium. He would go back to the importance of naming rights all the time...

I can see why there might be an argumet that our club gets more coverage in American markets from having our name attached.

But I do think it is a bit depressing that we still have a very generic filler stadium name.
Click to expand...

did he?

iirc it was all about higher gate receipts, increased concessions and merchandising
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I agree with all of this apart from the name filler bit… as a fan I’d always prefer my club name rather than something like the AIA stadium or the emirates
Click to expand...

I of course would have preferred it to be called WHL… and regardless I think all of us on this forum will all call it The Lane.

Not once have I ever referred to it in conversation as Tottenham Hotspur stadium. I always say the new ground or new WHL.

I personally understand why the filler name is there. So the media and fans don’t refer to it as an alternative name and detract from the naming rights value.

Each to their own but for new it sounds very generic and like a place holder

The kind of stadium name you get when you build a new stadium on Football Manger
 
Baleforce said:
did he?

iirc it was all about higher gate receipts, increased concessions and merchandising
Click to expand...

It would be difficult for me to prove otherwise but I am certain that when he announced it in 2007 I think - that a key reason for the move was selling stadium rights. Obviously having increased gates was as another reason.

But he seemed to explain often having a new ground with a name we could sell was something which would make us more competitive. He never said maybe we won’t have stadium sponsors. It seemed a formality we would

I remember because I was a very excited 14 year old who saw this in match day programmes and Hotspur magazines eagerly read every announcement
 
We have better commercial revenue than anyone in the prem apart from utd, liverpool and city.
2 teams much bigger than us historically and the other owned by a country.
We've had offers for naming rights but we've decided we're better suited not taking them and prefer keeping the tottenham hotspur stadium.

Not sure what the issue is? Using juve as a bench mark it's £5m a year.
 
thfcsteff said:
You have to feel that every time our name gets tagged as the venue for, say, Beyonce, it further amplifies the name beyond 'sport' and adds recognition to the club/brand. Which must mean that whenever selling is discussed, it adds value as the buyer can either self-sponsor or sell the naming rights for a higher value due to greater profile. In music/entertainment circles our gaff is establishing itself as the venue in London for major gigs, taking gigs from Twickenham, Olympic, and Wembley recently.
Click to expand...
Yep, it's a point being missed by many, I sometimes think purposely to stick the boot into the "we can't negotiate a deal".

Everytime our club gets a mention on a social feed or on TV or is mentioned on radio for say the NFL there is a monetary value which is equal to us and our brand as it would be another, maybe more so if the brand sponsoring us is not actively in that market (I.e a product not sold in that region etc) and also maybe less if its a brand thats highly active in that market.

The club has to weigh up if that value 200m cash or XYZ amount of exposure in markets that we are actively trying to expand our own brand. The US is clearly a market we are trying to crack given the appearance with the stock market bell, the advertising on Times Square and the NFL agreement etc.

So of course there is value to the club keeping its own brand flying.

If you look round the game it's actually not as common as made out, smaller clubs do it regularly because it's a stream they generally have to maximise, bigger clubs don't always and many won't.
 
Last edited:
metalgear said:
wasn't he trying to do this before the new stadium was built?
Click to expand...

Yes.

It isn’t a criticism of Levy at all. Obviously things change over the years. And hopefully we will benefit from a more beneficial deal. Just oddity it has not occurred yet

But he did mention quite a lot about the importance of having a stadium sponsor.

Perhaps with this being in the decade following Arsenal’s moved to the Emirates it indicated that was the key money maker and we have found more profitable alternative routes which negate the need

And uncertainty during Covid probably didn’t help either

Personally I do suspect he feels we are more attractive if a foreign investor can decide on the sponsors themselves

If you had a sponsorship deal with a Saudi firm it could be off putting for Qataris etc…
 
Last edited:
Craig_J said:
Personally I do suspect he feels we are more attractive if a foreign investor can decide on the sponsors themselves

If you had a sponsorship deal with a Saudi firm it could be off putting for Qataris etc…
Click to expand...
There is that as well.

If they sell to Americans they will leverage that to go out to an Amazon or U-Haul or *insert American Brand haha

Middle East owners like to have brands that can sell their destination. The reason Abu Dhabi bought City is because Manchester is one of the UKs largest hubs for Emirates and Etihad (hence they sponsor the Cricket Ground too). So its brand associations and also the ability to manipulate the money as proven at City.

If we were to be bought by Qatar, no doubt in my mind the stadium changes to Qatar Airways or Visit Qatar........
 
Baleforce said:
I read that as they were looking to sell naming rights on the old stadium to make money for the new build.
Click to expand...
If you look sat the top headline it explicitly says says “Club confirm naming rights opportunity AT NEW stadium”. I definitely cannot recall Levy wanting to sell stadium rights for WHL. I think that is a boundary he knew not to cross

It is quite difficult because of passage of time for me to find more mentions n google. If you ask chat GPT it might give you more articles with mentions than I can
 
Of course naming rights would have been part of the thinking/planning from the outset, not sure where the argument is there or what it proves?
 
Grays_1890 said:
There is that as well.

If they sell to Americans they will leverage that to go out to an Amazon or U-Haul or *insert American Brand haha

Middle East owners like to have brands that can sell their destination. The reason Abu Dhabi bought City is because Manchester is one of the UKs largest hubs for Emirates and Etihad (hence they sponsor the Cricket Ground too). So its brand associations and also the ability to manipulate the money as proven at City.

If we were to be bought by Qatar, no doubt in my mind the stadium changes to Qatar Airways or Visit Qatar........
Click to expand...

Indeed. I could be wrong but the only other alternatives are that Levy from the bottom of him heart believes the club name on the stadium brings us more revenue, the right sponsors have not come in or Levy is asking too much for what company’s want to pay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back