Topic: Corporate branding of new stadium: Yes/No

[Red Lust]

This whole "It won't be Anfield" argument is bemusing.

Anfield hasn't been Anfield for a long time, it has changed and metamorphised over the years until it is unrecognisable compared to what it once was. Can you really compare it to the days of the terraces, or before the reconstruction of the stands, or all-seating? It just happens to be in the same physical location, but we still call it by its historic name.

The Kop is no longer what it was in many respects, yet we still choose to call it The Kop, and it will again be called The Kop in the New Anfield. Why does it have to be any different for the stadium name itself? It does not necessarily mean the end of the tradition. Why are many people so blinded by bricks and mortar? The things that really matter are those that cannot, and should not be given away. Bricks, steel, concrete, these things are material, transient. The things each supporter carries in their hearts into the new stadium, are the thigns we hold dear now, and hope to pass on to others.

The Anfield name is legendary, and there is no logical reason it cannot be carried over to the New Anfield and become just as renowned. Allowing it to be besmirched by sponshorship is denying future reds a chance at a new history, a possible new history that can be as glorious as it has so far.

"ADIDAS STADIUM ANFIELD" is no kind of history to begin with. Selling out the anfield name is selling out the future.

[jonesyb]

Agreed with that Red Lust. Said everything I had in mind.

[¡Basta Ya!]

Thankfully 62% of the voters agree that our future is more important that what name our new stadium has.

[kopite789]

Thankfully 62% of the voters agree that our future is more important that what name our new stadium has.

41 people ffs, with a mandate like that, whoring out our stadium name is obviously the way to go.

[Jonny5]

Thankfully 62% of the voters agree that our future is more important that what name our new stadium has.

i think the marketing people at the club need a good kicking up the backside, Anfield is famous all over the world and so is the This is Anfield sign, instead of losing a piece of what we are why are we not making better use of it

thank god we have people at the club now who know how to run a club and with a bit of hope they`ll show a little bit more backbone than some of the Chelsea wannabe`s around here.

[Red Lust]

Thankfully 62% of the voters agree that our future is more important that what name our new stadium has.

Thankfully at least 62% of the general population probably has the requisite common sense to understand that a poll such as this cannot be taken scientifically - not only that, but that it is quite reasonable that fans can disagree on matters of importance and still get along. Then again simplistic mindsets will latch on to any scrap of evidence to assert their fundamentalist viewpoint and isolate those who disagree.

Having said that I could easily have skewed the poll question to favour a "no" vote (its easy, marketers and pollsters do it all the time, its how you pose the question that matters) but I chose to make it as general as possible. "branding" could mean anything, it could mean leaving the anfield name in there somewhere. If I had asked "would you want the name "Anfield" completely replaced by a sponsor's name?" I am confident the results would be different.

If you take anything seriously from these polls you need a lobotomy, its the discussion that matters here, the results are not a stick to beat people with.

Even if that statistic can be extrapolated to the general fan-base, since when does popular opinion make a difference? I am certain close to 100% of people would agree tickets are too costly, but do you think prices will be reduced? Unlikely. I think the club is smart enough to consider wisely the cost of selling the stadium name.

[Jin]

Well said Red Lust, we need to carry over the legend of Anfield onto the new stadium and start our new era on the right foot. Some people are too willing to throw away such an integral part of our history and culture. Hicks and Gillette are paying for the stadium, let them find soem other way to fund our transfers

[¡Basta Ya!]

Thankfully at least 62% of the general population probably has the requisite common sense to understand that a poll such as this cannot be taken scientifically - not only that, but that it is quite reasonable that fans can disagree on matters of importance and still get along. Then again simplistic mindsets will latch on to any scrap of evidence to assert their fundamentalist viewpoint and isolate those who disagree.

What on earth are you going on about now. I said 62% of the voters, which represents the members of this board that are arsed enough to vote, no more. I never suggested that it was the consensus of the population, did I. So get down off your soap box. It's a long fall from a high horse.

I think the club is smart enough to consider wisely the cost of selling the stadium name.

I agree, I think they are. I will be stunned if we turn down a massive amount of money for the new stadiums name (whatever that is). You can get all uppity about the 62% comment I made but the only people that really count are the CEO and the owners and they have all said on public record that it would be lunacy not to at very least consider it.

It is like people are opposing selling our current stadiums name. Which is ridiculous. It makes me laugh that people think we are "whoring out" buy selling the name of the new stadium. Then they go and buy an adidas shirt with a carlsberg sponsor on it.

STOP WHORING OUT THE FAMOUS SHIRT.

We are moving away from our spiritual home, into a stadium with no history. A generic bowl that doesn't deserve to be associated with the old stadium.

[Red Lust]

We are moving away from our spiritual home, into a stadium with no history. A generic bowl that doesn't deserve to be associated with the old stadium.

That's your opinion, and certainly shared by many. But many others do not share it and think the new stadium should be given a chance to start a history of its own.

Why don't you feel the same way about The Kop? No difference if we are using your argument that "it won't be the same". According to the same logic, the Kop name should also not be transferred across.

Please show some consistency - at least I am consistent and draw a line, which is that all our traditions are sacred and a simple move from one stadium to another should not stand (pardon the pun) in the way of the continuance of those traditions. At least not selling out any further than is the case now.

However, I have always felt the stadium should reflect both the old and the new: NEW ANFIELD.

Honour the past and give the future a chance.

As far as it being "a generic bowl" well so fucking what? Welcome to reality. (Then again Anfield is no oil painting itself). You seem to be writing off the whole fucking concept before a spade is dug, that doesn't really show much concern for the future now does it? Some of us have confidence in the club and in the fans to create a stadium and an atmosphere to rival the best. If you think the new stadium will be the end of the good and the beginning of the bad, why stay a red at all?

Your arguments range from ad-hominem attacks, to straw-men, and blatant over-generalisations. Why don't you for a minute put on your sensible hat, think logically (I know it might hurt) and answer my question re The Kop name:

If your stand by your position that selling out is ok and anything goes to win, you would admit than that replacing all the old names and traditions with corporate sponsors is a viable option - anything goes, including the Kop. If not for some but for others then why? I think the onus is on you to make clear your position.

[¡Basta Ya!]

That's your opinion, and certainly shared by many. But many others do not share it and think the new stadium should be given a chance to start a history of its own.

A history of it's own... is that not what I've been saying all along? Let it have it's own history, don't give it a different stadiums name, let alone the name of a stadium that has earned it's own history. I've said it once and I'll say it again, This stadium can be called what ever you want, but it will never BE Anfield

]Why don't you feel the same way about The Kop?

I do. Stop making (and I quote you on this) "blatant over-generalisations"

No difference if we are using your argument that "it won't be the same". According to the same logic, the Kop name should also not be transferred across.

Stop making "blatant over-generalisations"

Please show some consistency - at least I am consistent and draw a line

I am being consistent. So please stop making"blatant over-generalisations"

which is that all our traditions are sacred and a simple move from one stadium to another should not stand (pardon the pun) in the way of the continuance of those traditions. At least not selling out any further than is the case now.

That, in my opinion, is the first sensible, credible argument that you have made. Not something I agree with but I can accept that.

Honour the past and give the future a chance.

To quote Aerosmith "the past is gone". IT should be remembered and cherished but not hold us back in any way. I'm with you on giving the future a chance.

As far as it being "a generic bowl" well so fucking what? Welcome to reality. (Then again Anfield is no oil painting itself).

Well, if you read some of the other threads in this sub forum, you will see I am very much for this new stadium and defend it at all costs. However, there is no denying it is a generic design for a new stadium.

You seem to be writing off the whole fucking concept before a spade is dug, that doesn't really show much concern for the future now does it?

Jesus Christ. I'm not writting anything off. I'm the want that actually wants to move forward with this.

Some of us have confidence in the club and in the fans to create a stadium and an atmosphere to rival the best.

When have I suggested anything different. I have more than enough confidence.

If you think the new stadium will be the end of the good and the beginning of the bad, why stay a red at all?

You are making wildly presumptuous comments, based on nothing that I've written. I've never said or indicated anything other than that this is an exciting new step, but it is a NEW step. I'm the one that is in favour of selling the name (if we get a good deal for it) so that it insures we have money every year for the next 15/20 years to boost up transfer fees. I'm the one looking toward the bright future.

Your arguments range from ad-hominem attacks, to straw-men, and blatant over-generalisations. Why don't you for a minute put on your sensible hat, think logically (I know it might hurt) and answer my question re The Kop name:

How about you put on your goggles and look to what is best for the club, a name or money.

If your stand by your position that selling out is ok and anything goes to win, you would admit than that replacing all the old names and traditions with corporate sponsors is a viable option - anything goes, including the Kop. If not for some but for others then why? I think the onus is on you to make clear your position.

I'm not saying we should sell our soul, I'm not saying rename everything and forget our history. I AM saying that we are moving to a new stadium, one that has nothing to do with our old stadium. I think it is OK to call it something different for money IF that supports the clubs ethos of winning.

Look, I don't particularly want the stadium to be called the cokacola stadium or whatever, but I do want our team to be the best in the lad and if selling the name helps us bring in better players and gives us money for the future - just for a name, then I am willing to do that.It isn't upto us, but I would bet money on the new owners and rick parry backing uo what they have already said.

[Red Lust]

You don't half go on.

[¡Basta Ya!]

You don't half go on.

It's in my genes.

I can see your point, I hope you can see mine.

[Red Lust]

It's in my genes.

I can see your point, I hope you can see mine.

Yep, but you know deep down I'm right.

[stueya]

Whether we like it or not we must embrace the inevitable and for all we will want to call it Anfield, the simle fact is it won't be Anfield and I'm sure in time it will come to hold it's own memories and hopefully in twenty years or so be as revered as Anfield is now. The only thing I would say is that the club are careful as to the name of the Stadium/Sponsor, The Emirates Stadium, The Allianz Arena even the Reebok Stadium are names that don't come across as to in your face compared with names like the Walkers Stadium, the Ricoh Arena or the Galpharm Stadium and even worse  Minute Maid Park in the US (home of The Houston Astros MLB side).

[kopite789]

Whether we like it or not we must embrace the inevitable and for all we will want to call it Anfield, the simle fact is it won't be Anfield and I'm sure in time it will come to hold it's own memories and hopefully in twenty years or so be as revered as Anfield is now. The only thing I would say is that the club are careful as to the name of the Stadium/Sponsor, The Emirates Stadium, The Allianz Arena even the Reebok Stadium are names that don't come across as to in your face compared with names like the Walkers Stadium, the Ricoh Arena or the Galpharm Stadium and even worse  Minute Maid Park in the US (home of The Houston Astros MLB side).

We might have to accept but i for one will never embrace it.

Hows the Emirates stadium or the reebok stadium any less in your face than the walkers stadium.

[all_funkt_up]

I would love to be idealistic and say NO to corporate branding and big business. But if it is a choice of my club being saddled with debt but having the name Anfield preserved, or having the new ground named the Billy Big Bollocks Arena but being debt free - then I'd go for the latter.

Branding is everywhere in the ground. From the cup of tea, to the boardings to the announcements and players themselves. Why not the name of the stadium too. We will always call it Anfield. Why not sell the name for a few quid and let them call it what they like.

[Red Lust]

The branding I would have least problem with is:

"Virgin Anfield"