• 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

New New Manager Poll (The Lets Get It Right This Time Edition)

Who Do You Want Then?

  • Poch

    Votes: 58 43.3%

  • Gallardo

    Votes: 7 5.2%

  • De Zerbi

    Votes: 2 1.5%

  • Enrique

    Votes: 1 0.7%

  • Carrick

    Votes: 1 0.7%

  • Kompany

    Votes: 1 0.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 23 17.2%

  • Tuchel

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Nagelsmann

    Votes: 24 17.9%

  • Slot

    Votes: 17 12.7%
  • Total voters
    134
thfcsteff said:
How would you have kept him for the rest of the season when several players were clearly not going to play for him? Who would you have replaced him with? Don't say Poch, we both know...
Click to expand...
Which players weren’t going to play for him?

who would I have replaced him with?…. Well for a start I wouldn’t have sacked him for telling a few home truths about the club and if I was going to do so I would’ve lined somebody up first to take over.
 
thfcsteff said:
That is, indeed, a matter of discussion (we did play some great stuff at times and we had some amazing players). What I meant was that Levy brought Redknapp in thinking it was a bridge for the season to keep us up, but Harry did so well he found he couldn't sack him, even though he didn't really want him long-term.
Click to expand...
Though he did sack him anyway eventually…. Even though he’d just overachieved again with a 4th place finish.
 
Finney Is Back said:
We already know how many non football events can be hosted, up to 16, no more than y of which can be concerts.
Click to expand...

More reliable data (in terms of global reach of the brand?) off of the back of actually hosting events than when it's all potential, shown that the events can actually be hosted to a certain level of success, tie ins with big names in entertainment and sport which weren't there before.
 
scaramanga said:
In emerging markets such as the US, it will be generating new fans. They'll be buying merchandise, watching matches, increasing marketing value, etc.
Click to expand...
It's also to some end a negligible amount of yearly income to just accept a brand that you don't think fits the brand or the vision that you are feeding into.

I've mentioned it loads on here about the clubs push towards America and how all the angles feed into that including coverage and he end game of all the stars aligning in one direction, for that reason the clubs not going to sell out to an Aldi or Lidl level of sponsor even if they stump up the cash.

There has definitely been a push to the luxury market, cars, watches, clothing and there is brand association to protect with those brands, that's how many marketing deals are structured, bigger your collection of luxury brands, the more you can command and trigger.

Better to over value your brand for these kind of sponsors than sell out for a quick 25m a year IMO

Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk
 
billyiddo said:
More reliable data (in terms of global reach of the brand?) off of the back of actually hosting events than when it's all potential, shown that the events can actually be hosted to a certain level of success, tie ins with big names in entertainment and sport which weren't there before.
Click to expand...
Would also take a couple of years to work out the global reach of all those events and knock on through socials based on full operation and then calculate the value. Our stadium has more optics than any in Europe now because of our partnerships and events, only rivalled by the MLB and NBA by sheer volume of events they have per stadia.


Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk
 
Finney Is Back said:
So you’re a fan of the New York Yankees? Have you been to games and bought merchandise, etc?
Click to expand...
I remember as a kid I wanted to buy some US sports merch because I thought it would be cool. I ended up buying a Yankees cap and an LA Raiders top for no particular reason other than I’d heard of them.

The Raiders one was because of some association with a person that wasn’t even part of the sport. I ended up supporting them for a while until I got bored of the sport
 
thfcsteff said:
That is, indeed, a matter of discussion (we did play some great stuff at times and we had some amazing players). What I meant was that Levy brought Redknapp in thinking it was a bridge for the season to keep us up, but Harry did so well he found he couldn't sack him, even though he didn't really want him long-term.
Click to expand...

Bit of an assumption there. Seem to remember in jan them doing a share offer and giving redknapp the funds to strengthen the team with his choice players.
 
Lilbaz said:
Bit of an assumption there. Seem to remember in jan them doing a share offer and giving redknapp the funds to strengthen the team with his choice players.
Click to expand...
Was that just after he came in when we were threatened with relegation? If only the same funds were made available the January when we had a genuine chance of winning the league.
 
tommysvr said:
You seem like a bot setup to just automatically reply with a question from a negative stand point. GHod it’s boring.
Click to expand...
Sorry that I happen to have a different viewpoint to you, people are allowed to have different opinions you know.

I simply don't subscribe to the view that our stadium being named the "Tottenham Hotspur Stadium" is worth more revenue to us than it being named 'The Google Arena' (or any other corp title). The two reasons I have for taking this view are that pretty much all other newly built stadiums take on a naming partner and also that we have been in detailed talks with numerous corporations to sponsor the stadium.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Sorry that I happen to have a different viewpoint to you, people are allowed to have different opinions you know.

I simply don't subscribe to the view that our stadium being named the "Tottenham Hotspur Stadium" is worth more revenue to us than it being named 'The Google Arena' (or any other corp title). The two reasons I have for taking this view are that pretty much all other newly built stadiums take on a naming partner and also that we have been in detailed talks with numerous corporations to sponsor the stadium.
Click to expand...

The argument isn’t that Tottenham Hotspur Stadium is worth more though; as far as I can see, no one has said that - there was one ponderous question as to whether that’s the reason for the delay, but other than that only that there is still a lot of value in the name being attached to massive events, which is true.

Nothing wrong with having a different opinion, but there seems to be a pretty consistent “the club can do nothing right” theme from you, which is why I described it as boring. We’re battling for a Champions League place in the best competition in the world, whilst remaining in a very stable position financially. We have problems and could definitely be doing better, but you’d think we were Wigan on the verge of another relegation with the way you and others carry on.
 
Lilbaz said:
Bit of an assumption there. Seem to remember in jan them doing a share offer and giving redknapp the funds to strengthen the team with his choice players.
Click to expand...

Paul Kemsley told Levy to get him in to ensure we didn't end up going down. This is a fact mate.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Which players weren’t going to play for him?

who would I have replaced him with?…. Well for a start I wouldn’t have sacked him for telling a few home truths about the club and if I was going to do so I would’ve lined somebody up first to take over.
Click to expand...

So you don't believe Conte talked himself into a corner which surprised all parties?
 
Finney Is Back said:
Sorry that I happen to have a different viewpoint to you, people are allowed to have different opinions you know.

I simply don't subscribe to the view that our stadium being named the "Tottenham Hotspur Stadium" is worth more revenue to us than it being named 'The Google Arena' (or any other corp title). The two reasons I have for taking this view are that pretty much all other newly built stadiums take on a naming partner and also that we have been in detailed talks with numerous corporations to sponsor the stadium.
Click to expand...

You are failing to acknowledge that brand awareness is a thing and has a considered value (now if you think it's worth £xM/year is a different conversation)

The main reason this actually looks like it had some consideration is because it's the "Tottenham Hotspur Stadium" not WHLv2. Somewhere in the build of the new stadium the club decided for whatever period of time we didn't have a sponsor, it would be helpful for the club brand to be tied to stadium name. There is also a surprising number of EPL stadiums without a sponsor, so either the money isn't there or clubs see some inherent value to keeping an association of club/old name.

And finally mate, the issue people have with you isn't difference of opinion, it's your thought process, it's often argumentative and seems based off whatever viewpoint can be used to paint the club as completely incompetent in everyway possible. You do you mate, we all do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back