Shirt sponsor

[TheSlicer]

19 hours ago, Kopparberg said:

Wonder if it’s harder to get the same money for a sponsor - now that there’s no fans in the grounds. 

is there not an increase in games on TV? Or is that just the premiership. 
 

seeing a sponsor on TV is easier than seeing it in the ground with my dodgy eyes. 

[sonofbert2]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with having Chansiri or any other of his companies on our shirts as long as he only pays the going rate, around 400k tops I believe and it obviously helps re. FFP.

 

The EFL found nothing wrong with any of that stuff plus the stadium sale itself and we were only found guilty of spending too much.

 

The last time we gave the sponsorship away to SCH when we really did need the fuckingmoney it was spoiled by the chairman who gave it away leaking to the Yorkshire Post that we hadn’t paid SCH up yet.

 

MM gave away sponsorship for a full season in anticipation of a deal that never came through so therefore we were never paid.

 

I’ve said it before but our more recent shirt sponsors tell the story of our club.

 

By all means sell it to someone willing to pay for the privelege but don’t assume that having any Chansiri group company on there is some sort of freebie.

 

The End.

[BARMYARMY2010]

2 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with having Chansiri or any other of his companies on our shirts as long as he only pays the going rate, around 400k tops I believe and it obviously helps re. FFP.

 

The EFL found nothing wrong with any of that stuff plus the stadium sale itself and we were only found guilty of spending too much.

 

The last time we gave the sponsorship away to SCH when we really did need the fuckingmoney it was spoiled by the chairman who gave it away leaking to the Yorkshire Post that we hadn’t paid SCH up yet.

 

MM gave away sponsorship for a full season in anticipation of a deal that never came through so therefore we were never paid.

 

I’ve said it before but our more recent shirt sponsors tell the story of our club.

 

By all means sell it to someone willing to pay for the privelege but don’t assume that having any Chansiri group company on there is some sort of freebie.

 

The End.

Yeh, but you're a "fan boy, clapper" and need to give your head a wobble or summat.............. Well according to that cheese fella anyway. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with having Chansiri or any other of his companies on our shirts as long as he only pays the going rate, around 400k tops I believe and it obviously helps re. FFP.

 

The EFL found nothing wrong with any of that stuff plus the stadium sale itself and we were only found guilty of spending too much.

 

The last time we gave the sponsorship away to SCH when we really did need the fuckingmoney it was spoiled by the chairman who gave it away leaking to the Yorkshire Post that we hadn’t paid SCH up yet.

 

MM gave away sponsorship for a full season in anticipation of a deal that never came through so therefore we were never paid.

 

I’ve said it before but our more recent shirt sponsors tell the story of our club.

 

By all means sell it to someone willing to pay for the privelege but don’t assume that having any Chansiri group company on there is some sort of freebie.

 

The End.

^^^^^ this 100% 

[room0035]

32 minutes ago, The_Limit_Owl said:

 

It actually makes sense to do something like this, instead of a "CHANSIRI" default, why not give the sponsorship up to one of the local hospitals/charities, Bluebell Wood suits our colours! 

Or and this is a little out there so bare with me, we get a proper company to sponsor us so we can get some income into the club to help with the P&S rules we have to abide by. Stoke who still get parachute payments also get £9m a season for the naming rights to their stadium and their shirts could we not do the same for lets say a company run and owned by member of DC family. who could legitimately put in anything up to £5m a season without the EFL being overly bothered.

 

I am all for charity but lets have that sponsorship when we are getting £100m a season for taking part in the premier league. 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, room0035 said:

Or and this is a little out there so bare with me, we get a proper company to sponsor us so we can get some income into the club to help with the P&S rules we have to abide by. Stoke who still get parachute payments also get £9m a season for the naming rights to their stadium and their shirts could we not do the same for lets say a company run and owned by member of DC family. who could legitimately put in anything up to £5m a season without the EFL being overly bothered.

 

I am all for charity but lets have that sponsorship when we are getting £100m a season for taking part in the premier league. 

Do you think Chansiri is putting his name on the shirt for free ?

 

[BARMYARMY2010]

14 minutes ago, room0035 said:

Or and this is a little out there so bare with me, we get a proper company to sponsor us so we can get some income into the club to help with the P&S rules we have to abide by. Stoke who still get parachute payments also get £9m a season for the naming rights to their stadium and their shirts could we not do the same for lets say a company run and owned by member of DC family. who could legitimately put in anything up to £5m a season without the EFL being overly bothered.

 

I am all for charity but lets have that sponsorship when we are getting £100m a season for taking part in the premier league. 

Room,you've been banging that "mythical, multi million" sponsorship drum for ages. 

Other than Stoke's pre-existing deal with their owners, who else in the Championship has a multimillion shirt/ground sponsorship deal.? 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, TheSlicer said:

is there not an increase in games on TV? Or is that just the premiership. 
 

seeing a sponsor on TV is easier than seeing it in the ground with my dodgy eyes. 

 

Don't think there's much difference in the number of televised Championship games and if last Saturday is anything to go by we will have people switching off! 

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, room0035 said:

Or and this is a little out there so bare with me, we get a proper company to sponsor us so we can get some income into the club to help with the P&S rules we have to abide by. Stoke who still get parachute payments also get £9m a season for the naming rights to their stadium and their shirts could we not do the same for lets say a company run and owned by member of DC family. who could legitimately put in anything up to £5m a season without the EFL being overly bothered.

 

I am all for charity but lets have that sponsorship when we are getting £100m a season for taking part in the premier league. 

 

How do you know that Chansiri is not putting a fair whack into the sponsorship in terms of having his brands on the shirt and in the stadium?

 

As badly as he has managed to balance the books, our income has increased by over £10M annually compared to what we were bringing in prior to his turnover.  

If another company was to offer more for the sponsorship than he is injecting I am sure he would consider it.

[sonofbert2]

24 minutes ago, BARMYARMY2010 said:

Room,you've been banging that "mythical, multi million" sponsorship drum for ages. 

Other than Stoke's pre-existing deal with their owners, who else in the Championship has a multimillion shirt/ground sponsorship deal.? 

 

Nobody but he always quotes Premier League sponsorship deals (which Stoke’s was) to “prove” his point.

 

Full ofshite particularly on this subject.

[Guest Therealrealist]

1 hour ago, sonofbert2 said:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with having Chansiri or any other of his companies on our shirts as long as he only pays the going rate, around 400k tops I believe and it obviously helps re. FFP.

 

The EFL found nothing wrong with any of that stuff plus the stadium sale itself and we were only found guilty of spending too much.

 

The last time we gave the sponsorship away to SCH when we really did need the fuckingmoney it was spoiled by the chairman who gave it away leaking to the Yorkshire Post that we hadn’t paid SCH up yet.

 

MM gave away sponsorship for a full season in anticipation of a deal that never came through so therefore we were never paid.

 

I’ve said it before but our more recent shirt sponsors tell the story of our club.

 

By all means sell it to someone willing to pay for the privelege but don’t assume that having any Chansiri group company on there is some sort of freebie.

 

The End.

Fair enough but it just looks crap havin the chairmans name on tje shirt

[Olly1996]

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Therealrealist said:

Fair enough but it just looks crap havin the chairmans name on tje shirt

 

Can't say it is any worse than having a betting company emblazoned across the front, which is what the majority of teams at this level had last season.

[westy365owl]

12 minutes ago, Olly1996 said:

I wonder why we haven't had any involvement from John West or TUF? With them being family owned companies 

[Chris Apolon]

Given all the embarrassment of the last few months it would be nice if the club went for a charity sponsor as per a few years back

 

However being realistic it would be I guess whomever provides the most dosh, chansiri or otherwise

[hasthagotanycheese]

4 hours ago, The_Limit_Owl said:

 

Fanboys!?

 

The hatred towards DC continues, sad, really sad.

No hatred towards DC personally.

Its more like utter contempt for the way he runs the club.

He seriously doesnt have a clue. So much money has been wazzed up the wall in the last five years and what have we got to show for it? 1 trip to Wembley, a level pitch and a nice scoreboard.

We are in big trouble with Dej Boy in charge.

[DJMortimer]

5 minutes ago, The_Limit_Owl said:

 

Yeah right!   No hatred eh!  Out comes the name calling.

 

 

 

A bit rich from someone suggesting in another thread that questioning the chairman is nothing but hatred and racism.

[DJMortimer]

2 minutes ago, The_Limit_Owl said:

 

...there'd be a hell of a lot of slack cut towards the chairman if he was a local businessman, if the chairman was from Budleigh Salterton or Baltimore and was getting pelters, I'd be saying exactly the same thing, I ain't implying racism, hate yes, but not based on race.

 

I think Dave Allen and Lee Strafford would beg to differ.

 

[Lythamowl]

how about steve gibson loves us really.....

[room0035]

4 hours ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

How do you know that Chansiri is not putting a fair whack into the sponsorship in terms of having his brands on the shirt and in the stadium?

 

As badly as he has managed to balance the books, our income has increased by over £10M annually compared to what we were bringing in prior to his turnover.  

If another company was to offer more for the sponsorship than he is injecting I am sure he would consider it.

DC put in £1.2m to have his name on the shirt, the stadium, the seats, the stands and also a lot of the match day advertising hoarding as per the last filed accounts from 2017/18 season (August 2018) had he filed any account since we might have been able to see if this figure has risen.

 

Do you think £1.2m is the going rate to sponsor a team's shirt, stadium, stands and advertising hoardings in the 5th most watched league in world football.

 

It is an area of football that is very loosely controlled by the governing bodies.  I mention Stoke in the past because they are owned and run by the Coates family who also own and run Bet365, The same way we are own and run by the Chansiri family who also own (a majority share) and run Thai Food Group who in turn own John West. It would be a very easy way to inject some money into the club but for what ever reason that has never happened though I had been told at one point advertising was up for them at Hillsborough a while back.