Stadium naming - where you stand

[Pat Butchers Ring]

So if the name of our stadium changed to a corporate sponsorship can anyone name anything that we are unique or identifiable for? Things I can think of:

Blue and white hoops (but these have far to many links to pre 1998 for RFC management)
Nickname (been changed once already)
Plastic fans

[LWJ]

As long as it wasn't a ghey name, would have no problem with it

[M-U-R-T-Y]

TSI @ Madejski Stadium

[Cobi]

TSI @ Madejski Stadium

But there's no money in that for us. TSI putting up sponsorship money just to get it back.

[melonhead]

51% - 47%


thought it would be less close

[Terminal Boardom]

I would not be surprised if there was a distinctive age split between those that don't care what the name is and those that are of a more traditional persuasion. I fall quite clearly into the latter group.

i'm also in the latter, however i feel no bond to the stadium or name above its head. at elm park i did. if we can make an extra million a season by having some sponsors name on the stadium then great, why not? it's another decent player coming in, or another 20k a week on the wage budget.

as mentioned, name the west stand after john madejski, stick a statue outside the ground of him arm in arm with steve coppell (picture from leicester). embrace and thank them both in that way. and as per the below, embrace our history and not be ashamed of it as we seem to have been since we left elm park behind.

For me the single most thing I would want to change about our club is the fact we we don't seem to value our identity. Perhaps the poll should have been what is unique about Reading. We don't value our hoops, nickname, ground or even as fans we don't have anything that is unique to us. Everything about us is pretty generic.

couldn't agree with that more. ever since we left elm park it was as if those years we left behind were a dirty word. i'd love to see former players names on the stands, and pride shown in where we came from - no matter how successful we were and weren't. we're proud if it, so embrace it!

So what is stopping Supporters from unofficially naming stands themselves? Have nominations put forward and the top 10 go into a poll. Whoever comes top gets the East Stand, 2nd gets the North and 3rd gets the West.

3 nominations per person methinks. Mine are:

Maurice Eddlestone
Steve Coppell
Robin Friday

[Seal]

Would you rather?

- A stadium naming rights deal and £20m more to spend on new players / salaries

- No deal and less money for such activities

A stadium naming rights deal doesn't preclude you from naming the stands, as long as there are no category exclusivity issues (which there wouldn't be in the case of any individual in any case).

The general rule of thumb for naming rights deals is it's fine for new stadiums (and Madjeski still counts), but a big no for old stadiums (hence Man Utd, the most commercially driven club of all, and Liverpool, desperate for cash, have not done it).

Chelsea are in the market for a naming rights deal, but Stamford Bridge has to be kept in the name and they can't find a buyer at a price that would make it worthwhile.

[Dare to Dr£am]

So what is stopping Supporters from unofficially naming stands themselves? Have nominations put forward and the top 10 go into a poll. Whoever comes top gets the East Stand, 2nd gets the North and 3rd gets the West.

3 nominations per person methinks. Mine are:

Maurice Eddlestone
Steve Coppell
Robin Friday

Put it to Jonny Fordham and see if he'll publish a poll on GetReading. Maybe the club would, or wouldn't. You don't know if you don't ask. Contact STAR and see if they'll drive it at the next meeting with the club?

IN for the Robin Friday Fosters South Stand.

[mr_number]

I would not be surprised if there was a distinctive age split between those that don't care what the name is and those that are of a more traditional persuasion. I fall quite clearly into the latter group.

i'm also in the latter, however i feel no bond to the stadium or name above its head. at elm park i did. if we can make an extra million a season by having some sponsors name on the stadium then great, why not? it's another decent player coming in, or another 20k a week on the wage budget.

as mentioned, name the west stand after john madejski, stick a statue outside the ground of him arm in arm with steve coppell (picture from leicester). embrace and thank them both in that way. and as per the below, embrace our history and not be ashamed of it as we seem to have been since we left elm park behind.

For me the single most thing I would want to change about our club is the fact we we don't seem to value our identity. Perhaps the poll should have been what is unique about Reading. We don't value our hoops, nickname, ground or even as fans we don't have anything that is unique to us. Everything about us is pretty generic.

couldn't agree with that more. ever since we left elm park it was as if those years we left behind were a dirty word. i'd love to see former players names on the stands, and pride shown in where we came from - no matter how successful we were and weren't. we're proud if it, so embrace it!

So what is stopping Supporters from unofficially naming stands themselves? Have nominations put forward and the top 10 go into a poll. Whoever comes top gets the East Stand, 2nd gets the North and 3rd gets the West.

3 nominations per person methinks. Mine are:

Maurice Eddlestone
Steve Coppell
Robin Friday

Quite a good idea actually. I'd add Roy Tranter to the list of nominees, possibly instead of Eddlestone.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

The 106 Stand

[sandman]

The Matt Mills East Stand.

[Hoop Blah]

Would you rather?

- A stadium naming rights deal and £20m more to spend on new players / salaries

- No deal and less money for such activities

A stadium naming rights deal doesn't preclude you from naming the stands, as long as there are no category exclusivity issues (which there wouldn't be in the case of any individual in any case).

The general rule of thumb for naming rights deals is it's fine for new stadiums (and Madjeski still counts), but a big no for old stadiums (hence Man Utd, the most commercially driven club of all, and Liverpool, desperate for cash, have not done it).

Chelsea are in the market for a naming rights deal, but Stamford Bridge has to be kept in the name and they can't find a buyer at a price that would make it worthwhile.

We're not going to be in the realms of £20m though are we (even with Premier League status)? That would presumably be on quite a lengthy contract too no? So it may only be a million a year or such like?

I'd still rather see the name remain to be honest.

[Terminal Boardom]

The 106 Stand

Why not rename the Jazz Cafe or whatever it is called to "106"?

[Seal]

Would you rather?

- A stadium naming rights deal and £20m more to spend on new players / salaries

- No deal and less money for such activities

A stadium naming rights deal doesn't preclude you from naming the stands, as long as there are no category exclusivity issues (which there wouldn't be in the case of any individual in any case).

The general rule of thumb for naming rights deals is it's fine for new stadiums (and Madjeski still counts), but a big no for old stadiums (hence Man Utd, the most commercially driven club of all, and Liverpool, desperate for cash, have not done it).

Chelsea are in the market for a naming rights deal, but Stamford Bridge has to be kept in the name and they can't find a buyer at a price that would make it worthwhile.

We're not going to be in the realms of £20m though are we (even with Premier League status)? That would presumably be on quite a lengthy contract too no? So it may only be a million a year or such like?

I'd still rather see the name remain to be honest.

Granted £20 is not a person season figure, but even over a long term contract useful additional cash.

As a more realistic point of ref, Stoke are in the market for a shirt + stadium deal for £4m per season (would take £3m).

Reading in the PL could command a similar figure....all helps that "black hole"!

[Dare to Dr£am]

When Bolton signed a renewal deal with Reebok for stadium rights it was worth £1m a year for about 5-10 years, and that was late 90's/early 2000's.

With Premiership football and in today's money hungry game we could expect more than a million a year, even if only £1.5m.

[Seal]

Market value will be £3-4m per year, as per my mail above D2D...

[under the tin]

FWIW, I'd just like to see the end of the soulless "East Stand, South Stand, etc malarkey"

I'd love to see the North renamed The Town End.

[3 veesinarow]

This.

About time we had named stands - start by making the East Stand the SJM stand when the stadium gets re-named. Maybe Edelston/Tranter/Hicks for the other three, with an OAP section in one of them named after our most-loved striker and goalkeeper of all time - The Senior Death Enclosure.

Just kidding...

[Hoop Blah]

Market value will be £3-4m per year, as per my mail above D2D...

How much of that is the shirt sponsorship though?

Average/small clubs seem to be going for £1.5-£3m a year don't they? So ball park figure for the ground naming is likely to be around £1, £2m tops?

[Seal]

Yep your figures aren't too far off - for a club of Reading's size in the prem, you'd be looking at c.£1.5-£2m for the shirt. Current deal with Waitrose is c.£400k per annum at Championship rates (highest in Champ is Leeds & West Ham @ £750k p.a.)

Obviously economies of scale for packaging shirt and stadium together, but this is way most clubs are going as it is a challenge in this market, even for a small premier league club to sell two sponsorship deals for £2m+. Needs the eyeballs delivered by regular European football to move up to the next bracket of £5m+