Stadium Naming Rights

Naming Rights

  • For

    Votes: 635 66.8%

  • Against

    Votes: 315 33.2%
  • Total voters
    950
Show us the money. Not a fu*k what they call it as long as we get weighed in with loads of dosh. It’ll always be Ibrox to the fans.
 
Now and forever said:
I'm telling you everyone in Scottish football apart from us would call it the new name. As would every media outlet both at home and abroad
Click to expand...

And who really cares - are you suggesting our business decisions should be influenced by what the media say?

Never mind the transfer budget, the Daily Record have called Ibrox by [sponsor name]!
 
I'm not against it if Ibrox is included in whatever it is renamed to. Put it this way, it's infinitely preferable to make extra money from this than it was to arrange a friendly against that lot.
 
BrooklynBlue said:
And who really cares - are you suggesting our business decisions should be influenced by what the media say?

Never mind the transfer budget, the Daily Record have called Ibrox by [sponsor name]!
Click to expand...
No and can you point me to where anyone on the entire forum stated anything close to that?
 
Brian_Fantana said:
I’d be against it. There has to be a line in the sand with this stuff. Why not go the whole hog and change the team colours to suit a sponsor?

This isn’t a new build or a big shitey bowl like the nou camp. It’s Ibrox. The main stand is an historic work of art.

If we need a million a season then a squad player can be sold and a youngster take his place. I realise I’m in the minority with this stance but
Click to expand...
The Nou Camp is more iconic than Ibrox.
 
GovanFront4 said:
The Nou Camp is more iconic than Ibrox.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. You don't hear people getting the words round the wrong way for Ibrox. For example, no one has ever said Rox-bi. But you do hear people calling the Nou Camp - Camp Nou.
For that reason, Ibrox is more iconic.
And the Nou Camp is a shit tip. So there .
 
The Jeanie said:
Incorrect. You don't hear people getting the words round the wrong way for Ibrox. For example, no one has ever said Rox-bi. But you do hear people calling the Nou Camp - Camp Nou.
For that reason, Ibrox is more iconic.
And the Nou Camp is a shit tip. So there .
Click to expand...
I call it Birox all the time al have you know B-)
 
How many times has this post been regurgitated, got to stage its boring, plain to see it’s the closed season.
 
The Jeanie said:
Incorrect. You don't hear people getting the words round the wrong way for Ibrox. For example, no one has ever said Rox-bi. But you do hear people calling the Nou Camp - Camp Nou.
For that reason, Ibrox is more iconic.
And the Nou Camp is a shit tip. So there .
Click to expand...
It's only since 2001 it's officially been recognised as the Camp Nou. Both were correct prior to that.

There is absolutely no chance that Ibrox is more iconic than the biggest stadium in Europe. It's not even close. There is a reason Spotify spent so much on the naming rights.
 
What a disappointing response to the poll so far. In one respect we need to consider the stadium naming rights but in other it’s the slippery slope we end up on where we whore ourselves out in every aspect.

It’s Ibrox just now and it will be immediately after the name is sold but every media outlet will use the new name. Over a short period of time that will become the norm. Even if it’s an okay name at first, it might not be at the next renewal, and the one after that, and so on. It will no longer be Ibrox.

Once everyone is fully lubed up from the stadium rename, we’ll be well primed for the name of the club being sold off, right? After all, it’s another revenue stream…

We need a line in the sand. The shirt sponsorships at the moment are fucking horrendous and should have been a step too far but they’re now the norm. Selling the name of our stadium should be a definite ”no”.
 
perthshireblue said:
What a disappointing response to the poll so far. In one respect we need to consider the stadium naming rights but in other it’s the slippery slope we end up on where we whore ourselves out in every aspect.

It’s Ibrox just now and it will be immediately after the name is sold but every media outlet will use the new name. Over a short period of time that will become the norm. Even if it’s an okay name at first, it might not be at the next renewal, and the one after that, and so on. It will no longer be Ibrox.

Once everyone is fully lubed up from the stadium rename, we’ll be well primed for the name of the club being sold off, right? After all, it’s another revenue stream…

We need a line in the sand. The shirt sponsorships at the moment are fucking horrendous and should have been a step too far but they’re now the norm. Selling the name of our stadium should be a definite ”no”.
Click to expand...
Stadium rights is a far cry from renaming the club. I can only think of a handful of clubs across the world named after a sponsor.
 
GovanFront4 said:
It's only since 2001 it's officially been recognised as the Camp Nou. Both were correct prior to that.

There is absolutely no chance that Ibrox is more iconic than the biggest stadium in Europe. It's not even close. There is a reason Spotify spent so much on the naming rights.
Click to expand...
It was tongue in cheek. Realistically, more high profile matches have been played there due to the home team and as you said, it's size. Blue tinted glasses off, Nou Camp would be more "iconic" to those of a non-Rangers background.
 
rez1872 said:
Arsenal get £40m a year from Emirates.

Dortmund get around €11 million from Siguna
Click to expand...
I wouldn't want a sponsor name, but if your talking £40 million???

Ibrox is still one of the most famous, in the world. Arguably in the top 5. Highbury never commanded nearly as much attention by a country mile and then some.
 
I’m absolutely amazed bisgrave hasn’t already done this. Wouldn’t mind myself it’s always Ibrox to me.even if we could coin in an extra £2million a year it’s worth doing.
 
There are fans spinning in their graves at the thought of this heresy.

First there was John Greig and a couple more running out sporting moustaches.

Then there was shirt sponsorship.

The naming of stands, ffs.

Now the final insult, renaming Ibrox...

Next it will be Red Bull Rangers; Daily Record Rangers...

Be careful what you wish for...
 
Last edited:
immortal7 said:
On the proviso it was a decent name and not one of Bisgroves Del Boy specials, then yes, Ibrox is Ibrox to everyone.

Ideally not arms dealers, sheiks or CCP owned.

Ibrox is, to a certain extent, the memorial to the fallen in the 3 tragedies, so the sponsor has to be right.
Click to expand...
I dunno, BAE Systems Arena has a ring to itB-)
 
As most people have said no matter that the name was changed to, everyone would still call or Ibrox. So not got an issue if it’s changed to a sponsor name even if Ibrox was dropped from it. It would be extra money and could even go toward upgrading/ increasing capacity. I still refer to the stands and the Govan and Main stand and will always call them that.
 
We just turned down £5 million for playing scum in a tidgy one off tournament in Oz. Yet, here, this notion of rebadging the stadium is mooted. Is there any consistency here?
 
Vidmar said:
We know it’s up for grabs from the recent litigation. Cinch claimed Bisgrove had sent them a ‘menu’ with associated rates for sponsorship, one of which was the stadium.

Cinch Ibrox. Really? Second hand cars?

It’s not for me. Although the fans wouldn’t use it, all the broadcasters, sponsors, press, UEFA etc would have to. It’d be really weird.
Click to expand...
UEFA would not. Hence why we played in the ‘city of Manchester stadium’ in 2008
 
perthshireblue said:
What a disappointing response to the poll so far. In one respect we need to consider the stadium naming rights but in other it’s the slippery slope we end up on where we whore ourselves out in every aspect.

It’s Ibrox just now and it will be immediately after the name is sold but every media outlet will use the new name. Over a short period of time that will become the norm. Even if it’s an okay name at first, it might not be at the next renewal, and the one after that, and so on. It will no longer be Ibrox.

Once everyone is fully lubed up from the stadium rename, we’ll be well primed for the name of the club being sold off, right? After all, it’s another revenue stream…

We need a line in the sand. The shirt sponsorships at the moment are fucking horrendous and should have been a step too far but they’re now the norm. Selling the name of our stadium should be a definite ”no”.
Click to expand...
Some good points there.
 
If revenue is the only argument in favour of this, then why would anyone object to the club's name changing for extra revenue, and for increased transfer funds?
 
Would always be Ibrox to me anyway so if a company wants to pay the club millions of pounds to have their name on the stadium then fine
 
Of the people saying it wouldn’t bother them, or in favour of it, how many hated the idea of Green doing this?

I just can’t get on board with the idea. Don’t hate, but not itching for us to pursue it either.
 
Tell me how much before I answer that,
Every player has a price we can’t turn down,If we are offered loads of money to name a stand or loads and loads of money to name the stadium then it’s worth our consideration,
It will always be Ibrox to me regardless .
 
Quite happy as happy as Ibrox remains in the title (ie) emirates @ Ibrox. Would have to be a proper reputable company though and not some dodgy pyramid scheme type
 
Would there be scope for the fans to buy the naming rights? As a mechanism for putting money directly into the club? Possibly even ring fenced for transfers?
 
I just don’t think every aspect of the club should be whored.

I get the ‘money for nothing’ angle but it’s not ‘nothing’ is it? It’s a fundamental alteration to a club cornerstone.

I don’t get the commmercial strategy at all. Our most profitable and longest-running partnership is with 32Red, and Charles Green brough them in. Since then we’ve any number of partners that come and go with little fanfare.

Can you even remember the name of the energy drink we had during 55? Two cans placed strategically behind Emma Dodds on RTV every week but they’ve disappeared. We had a different energy drink the season before. You could buy neither in the stadium.

Black Rooster. What’s happened there? The Hummel Training Centre lasted about three months.

BiowaveGo, Seko, Carrick etc are all run by Bears.

Then we’ve got Energy Check (bust), Sportmongo (bust), Bitci (alleged fraudsters and going bust)….. no matter which way we spin it we aren’t getting a ‘blue chip’ name on the stadium so for me, it’s off the table.
 
Bowery Boy said:
I really hope that none of the posters who voted against have been stamping their feet in the transfer thread.
Click to expand...
If I was in favour of changing the name of the club itself for extra income, I could then turn and say that you can't stamp your feet about transfers, if you objected to it?
 
JMCK said:
If I was in favour of changing the name of the club itself for extra income, I could then turn and say that you can't stamp your feet about transfers, if you objected to it?
Click to expand...
How often do clubs change their name? It really isn't the same thing.
 
Of course.

Money is money.

If it improves the stadium and team, then all for it.

No one is going to refer to it as the Tomket Tires Stadium anyway.
 
I don't see what difference it would make: we'd still refer to it as Ibrox. Although annoying broadcasters probably wouldn't
 
rez1872 said:
If someone gave us a million a year to call something else then I’d be fine with that. It’ll always be Ibrox .
Click to expand...
I think I read somewhere, that BT paid Scottish Rugby 25 million over 10 years, for the naming rights to Murrayfield stadium. Money like that would surely be welcomed. Whatever the name that was chosen, my only stipulation would be that the word Ibrox , must be included in the new name.
 
If it was for good money
If it was a respectable brand
If it was called the ________ Ibrox stadium where Ibrox stays in the name

Then yes for me

Would also look to get more money by adding the same sponsor to edmiston House and training centre

Only problem is how much is good money? and what brand is a professional partner to have?
 
Now and forever said:
Ask yourself where Man City play.

Or where Arsenal play.

Our stadium would be called the new name on tv, radio and in publications
Click to expand...
City is a valid point, Arsenal is not.

City's was called City of Manchester Stadium before the current owners of the club (and owners of Etihad Airways) bought the club and subsequently renamed the stadium.

The Emirates Stadium was that name since it opened and they also plowed millions into the cost of the actual stadium build, so that can't be classed a stadium rename / rebrand.

As for Ibrox itself, I'd rather we didn't, but it would depend on the company involved and how it would be named. For me, the rebranded title would need to be <insert company name here> Ibrox Stadium.
 
Our TV audience is not big enough for this to generate enough money to be worthwhile. As much as we go on about how huge we are, outwith Rangers fans, noone watches Scottish Football as the product is dire, sponsoring stadium probably only marketable at a few hundred thousand.

European football is different, so a sponsor would base how much they pay against the coverage. Better, but could just pay for an advert at the side of the pitch and achieve the same cheaper as again, its not a lot of games each season taht will attract huge audiences

So, it's a no for me, calling it the Spotify arena for a couple of hundred k per season isn't appealing
 
No, some things shouldn't be for sale.

If everything has a price, where do we draw the line? What isn't off limits? Seriously.
 
vinnie said:
Of the people saying it wouldn’t bother them, or in favour of it, how many hated the idea of Green doing this?

I just can’t get on board with the idea. Don’t hate, but not itching for us to pursue it either.
Click to expand...
I posted before I was against it under Green because of the context of their leadership. I wouldn't say I was 'for it' but I think I would be more open to it now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top