naming rights

An archive of news, events and discussion leading up to and post West Ham United's historic move from Upton Park to Stratford in 2016.

Moderators: Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks, Gnome

Locked
User avatar
BillUp
Posts: 1230
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:35 pm
Location: If God wanted us to play football in the clouds, he would have put grass there. Brian Clough.
Has liked: 1 like

Re: naming rights

Post by BillUp »

Whether you like it or not is irrelevant
The club will make a fortune from selling lots of other sponsorship deals and naming rights to West Ham products and services.

I am guessing the club will have to pay a % back to the LLDC though. This is probably what She mean't when saying what the club could offer in naming rights.
User avatar
HamburgHammer
Posts: 4020
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Too far away from Upton Park, Hamburg, Germany, to be precise
Has liked: 2 likes
Total likes: 7 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by HamburgHammer »

I'm sure we will get a share of the naming rights. As for the question of if we should get a hare at all due to us not being the owner let me remind you that Man City didn't build their stadium either.
Yet their council allowed them to negotiate and keep the income from naming rights for a mere 2 million a year on top of their yearly rent.

Not long after that they sold the naming rights for 400 million. I don't quite get why people get upset about West Ham getting a free ride in the public eye while nobody seems to be bothered about Manchester City and the way they moved into 'their' stadium...
gavrosh
Posts: 1275
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:28 pm

Re: naming rights

Post by gavrosh »

Bill, did you actually read what I posted before? The GLA's Regeneration Committee has it on record TWICE that West Ham get a share of the naming rights. That was after her Lord's testimony. Karren Brady, before the Lord's testimony, said we get a share of the naming rights. I think her performance at the Lords was a sleight of hand; the LLDC do the tender for and receive all of the naming rights, but then under the agreement a share of that is distributed to the club.

Oh here's another one, this time December 2013

"She says she was part of the China delegation ‘because West Ham are trying to expand our brand in China’. She adds: ‘West Ham are in 300 million homes across China. And we have the Olympic Stadium naming rights to sell and there are a couple of Chinese companies that are very interested.’"

If West Ham are to have no involvement whatsoever in terms of generating interest in and benefitting from the revenues of naming rights, why are we aas a club involved in trying to flog them?

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news ... z3TdIRjR58
User avatar
War Pony
Posts: 1063
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:15 am
Has liked: 23 likes
Total likes: 86 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by War Pony »

the pink palermo wrote:In all fairness we shouldn't get ANY naming rights money , we've built the square root of **** all .

Hopefully the tax payer who has funded this enormous white elephant will get a chunk .
Why do you even bother with our new stadiums forum? You are becoming quite the troll with your posts here.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45005
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 747 likes
Total likes: 2911 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by the pink palermo »

War Pony wrote:[Why do you even bother with our new stadiums forum? You are becoming quite the troll with your posts here.
f*** off .
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45005
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 747 likes
Total likes: 2911 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by the pink palermo »

gavrosh wrote:Whether you like it or not is irrelevant - and frankly I'm amazed that any West Ham fan would want us to have a weaker financial deal for the stadium -
Frankly I'm amazed at how many people have bent over and let themselves get mugged ......not hearing too many comments about cheaper tickets these days are we ?

And now the reality on naming rights is dawning .........
User avatar
HamburgHammer
Posts: 4020
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Too far away from Upton Park, Hamburg, Germany, to be precise
Has liked: 2 likes
Total likes: 7 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by HamburgHammer »

If you actually believe that Gold, Sullivan and Brady would have negotiated a deal for West Ham to become anchor concessionaire of the OS for 99 years, yet NOT get a single penny of the naming rights of the OS over the duration of that deal, should get their health checked immediately.

West Ham playing Premier League football in there will actually be the main if not the sole reason why a big sponsorhip deal for the OS can be struck. No need at this point to fight over percentages, we don't know yet due to confidentiality agreements, but West Ham will get their bit, whether some fans on here may like it or not.
And let me again remind you of the very favourable deal Man City got for their stadium despite not owning it:
They paid 2 million a year on top of their rent to the council for the right to keep all naming rights income, then they struck a deal worth 400 million.

I don't hear too many complaints about the taxpayer not getting their fair share in that instance...
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45005
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 747 likes
Total likes: 2911 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by the pink palermo »

Actually Hamburg I do believe they may have done a deal whereby we don't get any naming rights , mainly because it isn't the be all and end all .

The majority of clubs in the top flight do not benefit from naming rights so how are we disadvantaged ?

If you really believe this stadium is going to eradicate the gap between us, City and Arsenal you're kidding yourself .

I don't think Sullivan is that bothered about a naming rights windfall .
User avatar
Doc H Ball
Posts: 14669
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: on parole
Has liked: 914 likes
Total likes: 1902 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by Doc H Ball »

gavrosh wrote:... the LLDC do the tender for and receive all of the naming rights, but then under the agreement a share of that is distributed to the club.

Oh here's another one, this time December 2013
Not according to the LLDC rep I spoke to at a GLA meeting last November. He was adamant that all naming rights go to them. They are acutely aware that the taxpayer must be seen to recoup as much as possible.

Brady's reference to 'share' is either wishful thinking, a reference to incidental sponsorship (The Emirates Club London) or just the politician in her.

Talking of which, the December 13 quote is from her accompanying Cameron to China looking for some Communist Yuan. 'We' is the Government.

She probably also said we get one of the Senkaku Islands as part of the deal.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45005
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 747 likes
Total likes: 2911 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by the pink palermo »

Doc H Ball wrote:.

She probably also said we get one of the Senkaku Islands as part of the deal.
Part of the Carrick deal maybe .
User avatar
BillUp
Posts: 1230
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:35 pm
Location: If God wanted us to play football in the clouds, he would have put grass there. Brian Clough.
Has liked: 1 like

Re: naming rights

Post by BillUp »

So to sum up.

We haven't a clue if we get naming rights as there is no clear answer. :D

I too agree that not getting any naming rights £ would be a kick in the teeth for the club (owners), and the owners would have pushed to get something sorted. On the other hand, they wanted the stadium so bad and they were getting such a good deal anyway, they bent over and took it no questions?
gavrosh
Posts: 1275
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:28 pm

Re: naming rights

Post by gavrosh »

They'd be absolute idiots to give up on naming rights, given how important they have become in the FFP era.

Absolute. Idiots.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45005
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 747 likes
Total likes: 2911 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by the pink palermo »

gavrosh wrote:They'd be absolute idiots to give up on naming rights, given how important they have become in the FFP era.

Absolute. Idiots.
I disagree .

Naming rights generally are windfall payments that offset the capital outlay involved in building a stadium .

West Ham have dodged that capital outlay in total , so we don't need the naming rights windfall .

Arsenal only got some money back, Spurs will only get some money back .

And anyway, the truly iconic national stadiums don't have naming issues - Twickenham, Lords, Wembley , and our new home will always, always be known as the Olympic stadium .

In truth we've given up nothing .It was never there.
gavrosh
Posts: 1275
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:28 pm

Re: naming rights

Post by gavrosh »

what on earth has building a stadium got to do with its naming rights? Man U have a huge stadium naming rights deal, and they dont have a new stadium. Same thing with Chelsea, Spurs and Newcastle, all have decent stadium sponsorship deals. Sponsorship of a stadium is a function of its visibility, to both a domestic and international audience, not whether its new or not. Both Spurs and Liverpool's deals are currently worth £6 mil to them, and Spurs expect at least £10 million when they move to their new ground (probably a lot more).

If you can manage to de-link the stadium itself and its sponsorship, and look at the actual financial numbers, then you can get some idea of whether it makes sense for the club to give up sponsorship revenues. In fact you can get some idea as to whether they have via the deal struck (£2.5 million rent plus share of matchday and sponsorship that takes it to £10 mil). So youre looking to make up £7.5 mil from those two other streams. Lets assume matchday revenues of £2 mil (revenue of £2 per person per game assuming 50k avergae capacity over the season). That then leaves £5.5 million from stadium sponsorship to go to the LLDC. You would have to incredibly pessimistic to expect that the London Olympic Stadium would only attract £5.5 million a year in sponsorship. Hence, the conclusion is that some of the stadium sponsorship revenues go to the club.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45005
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 747 likes
Total likes: 2911 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by the pink palermo »

Gavrosh i'm ok on football finances and understand the revenue streams .

I'll put it simply .

To make sure they got the keys to the OS the club gave up the naming rights .Haggling over them may have stopped the deal going through, either by LLDC getting cold feet for political reasons. or because of the fear of a state aid challenge .

And had we not got the stadium , Sullivan at some point would have to find the money to build one .

Believe me when I say he is happy to give up the naming rights as it's the lesser of two evils .
User avatar
HamburgHammer
Posts: 4020
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Too far away from Upton Park, Hamburg, Germany, to be precise
Has liked: 2 likes
Total likes: 7 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by HamburgHammer »

You sound very assured there Pink, can we assume you have seen the contract between West Ham and the LLDC then, clearly stating that West Ham will not get any naming rights share over the tenure of their 99 year lease as anchor concessionaire ?

Because I don't think the LLDC was in such a strong negotiation position to demand the entire naming rights income generated by West Ham committing their future to that stadium and bringing massive exposure to the OS by playing Premier League football there...
Last edited by HamburgHammer on Sun Mar 08, 2015 4:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
MD_HM
Posts: 7677
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:00 am
Location: London
Has liked: 38 likes
Total likes: 339 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by MD_HM »

:lol:

To make sure we got the keys?

We were and always were the only viable financial option to stop it being another white elephant.

It's much more believable we are being very quiet as to what we are getting financially given the world and his wife were shouting how unfair it was and wanting hearings left right and centre.

Imagine if Spurs and Hearn had details of how much of the naming rights we were getting on top, wouldn't have been able to shut them up.

I believed all we have said is we wil get a share... That could be 5% it could be 49%

One thing for sure if we were not there playing premiership football they would be getting f*** all in comparison
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45005
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 747 likes
Total likes: 2911 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by the pink palermo »

So now having been given a brand new stadium , converted to our spec , "world class" , iconic , etc etc we have the people who have been the cheerleaders for it complaining over the terms of the deal and suggesting Brady was a weak negotiator ?

You couldn't make it up .

MD-MM, I bet there are a few wasps fans who would rather be watching London wasps in London, not Coventry .

And , given the cost of chucking a roof on it , it would have been cheaper to bulldoze it and sling up a smaller version

Or

Stick to the original plan and shrink it .

West Ham were not the only option regardless of what the PR spin may suggest .
User avatar
HamburgHammer
Posts: 4020
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Too far away from Upton Park, Hamburg, Germany, to be precise
Has liked: 2 likes
Total likes: 7 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by HamburgHammer »

My question again Pink: Have you seen the contract details between West Ham and the LLDC specifically stating West Ham will not get any share of the naming rights over our 99 year tenure. Yes or no ?
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45005
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 747 likes
Total likes: 2911 likes

Re: naming rights

Post by the pink palermo »

HamburgHammer wrote:My question again Pink: Have you seen the contract details between West Ham and the LLDC specifically stating West Ham will not get any share of the naming rights over our 99 year tenure. Yes or no ?
No.

I haven't seen Jesus either and neither have you .I'm too polite to ask your religious views though ....

But

I'm more than happy to take Doc's version of events on the OS, I've never asked him if has seen Jesus though .
Locked