• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Qatari Sponsorship?

Status
Not open for further replies.
If this is true will that frightening ground share thread disappear now?

Not sure this could be a very carefully constructed lawyers type trick, if they move to a new shared ground they could easily take the naming rights money and maintain that they were correct in saying they would never sell the rights to Anfield. Whether they could do the same with a rebuilt/expanded Anfield is probably more of grey area but then Ive never met a suit who couldnt justify weaseling his way out of a statement as long as it was financially beneficial to do so
 
Not sure this could be a very carefully constructed lawyers type trick, if they move to a new shared ground they could easily take the naming rights money and maintain that they were correct in saying they would never sell the rights to Anfield. Whether they could do the same with a rebuilt/expanded Anfield is probably more of grey area but then Ive never met a suit who couldnt justify weaseling his way out of a statement as long as it was financially beneficial to do so


There's no chance a shared ground would be called Anfield anyway.
 
Fuckin' hope not, but could it be:

(To the tune of Da Do Ron Ron by the Crystals)

Got charged by the FA and I fucked it up
Ooredoo run run
Ooredoo run run

Thought about appealing
But I lost my nerve
Ooredoo run run
Ooredoo run run

Still paying Luis
While he's on the beach
Ooredoo run run
Ooredoo run run

Somebody told me that my rhymes were shit
Ooredoo run run
Ooredoo run run

So I went to the cloakroom
Then I fucked off quick
Ooredoo run run
Ooredoo run run

I was thinking more of the 'Lion sleeps tonight' tune.

OooooOOoooOoooooooooRedOoooOooOooOoooooooooOOOO

😉
 
Tony Barrett with a story about this today.
Would you rename Anfield if the money was to good to turn down?
 
Definitely, the games moved on so much we'd be stupd to turn anything sensible down and besides us fans will still call it Anfield regardless of whoever sponsors the ground
 
Definitely, the games moved on so much we'd be stupd to turn anything sensible down and besides us fans will still call it Anfield regardless of whoever sponsors the ground

Thats how I feel aswell.
Nearly every stadium in Germany is sponsored.
Its headed in that direction.
 
I wouldn't be happy at all. We shouldn't have to put a price-sticker on everything that makes this football club special, nor do I believe it's a necessary evil.

Part of what attracts sponsorship and revenue to this club is Liverpool is a unique club in England, unlike everybody else. We need to ensure that continues.
 
Several papers are running with it tomorrow but I can't see any new sources for their stories.All a bit iffy.
 
On the subject on the quataris... Big news over here tonight

Sheik Said to Pursue M.L.S. Club for Queens

The Russian entrepreneur Mikhail D. Prokhorov owns the Nets basketball team. Red Bull, the Austrian-based energy drink company, owns the Red Bulls soccer team. Now a member of the royal family of Abu Dhabi is poised to become the latest foreign owner of a New York-area professional sports franchise.


Sheik Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan, a member of the Abu Dhabi royal family, whose private investment group owns Manchester City in England’s Premier League, has entered final negotiations to purchase a franchise of Major League Soccer to be situated in Queens, according to two people with knowledge of the negotiations.

The prospective owners are willing to pay a $100 million expansion fee for the league’s 20th team, which could be called New York City F.C. and begin play in 2016, the two people said. That would more than double the expansion fee of $40 million paid by the Montreal team that entered M.L.S. in 2012.

After months of public hearings, applications and discussions, a deal for a privately financed $340 million stadium in Flushing Meadows-Corona Park, which would hold 25,000 spectators and could be expanded to 35,000, could be completed in several weeks, according to several people with knowledge of the deal.

The league wants to make the announcement before May 25, when Manchester City is scheduled to play an exhibition at Yankee Stadium against its English rival Chelsea, the two people familiar with the negotiations said.

Neither Don Garber, the commissioner of M.L.S., nor Sheik Mansour could be reached for comment Sunday. Last week, Garber told reporters he hoped to make an announcement about the expansion team in New York in four to six weeks. In addition, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg told reporters last week, “Hopefully, we’re getting close to announcing a new soccer stadium here in Flushing Meadow Park.”

While foreign ownership of professional teams is relatively limited in the United States, it is rarer still for those owners to be of Arab descent. But the influence of oil and gas money in the Middle East has spread in international soccer in recent years.

In 2008, Sheik Mansour bought Manchester City for $330 million. Last year, Qatar Sports Investments, a branch of the emirate’s sovereign wealth fund, completed its buyout of Paris St.-Germain in the French league, valuing the club at $130 million.

Qatar also won a contentious vote to host the 2022 World Cup. And beIN Sport, a subsidiary of Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based television network, now televises soccer matches in the United States, some featuring the American national team, others showcasing top leagues in Spain, England, Italy and France.

For M.L.S., an affiliation with the Abu Dhabi royal family and the owners of Manchester City would broaden the global footprint of the sport in the United States. And the association with wealthy owners willing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on their team would provide another vote of confidence in soccer’s potential in America, sports industry experts said. Owning a team in New York could also provide a springboard for other opportunities, including potential real estate investments.

In 2012, M.L.S. had a higher average attendance than the N.B.A. and the N.H.L. A recent global survey named it the seventh-best soccer league in the world.

“If England has the world’s biggest soccer league, then America has the most up and coming league,” said Steve Horowitz, a partner at Inner Circle Sports, an investment bank that has put together soccer deals, including one last year on behalf of Erick Thohir, an Indonesian media magnate who bought a controlling stake in D.C. United.

Sheik Mansour, who is in his early 40s, was listed in 2009 by Forbes as its newest Gulf billionaire, with a personal fortune of $4.9 billion and a collective family fortune estimated at $150 billion.

Abu Dhabi, a part of the United Arab Emirates, holds 9 percent of the world’s oil reserves, and Sheik Mansour is chairman of its International Petroleum Investment Company, part of what Forbes estimated as a $650 billion sovereign wealth fund.

Buying a soccer club allows the establishment of business and political connections and provides good public relations in enhancing Abu Dhabi’s global business empire, said Stefan Szymanski, a professor of sports management at the University of Michigan and a co-author of the book “Soccernomics.”

“These are long-term investors, the Warren Buffetts of the Middle East,” Szymanski said. “It almost doesn’t matter what plays inside the stadium. It’s the location, the city, that indicates it’s a good investment.”

A salary cap in M.L.S. would prohibit Sheik Mansour from spending hundreds of millions of dollars to sign players, as he has done with Manchester City, which in 2012 won its first Premier League title in 44 years and is now valued by Forbes at $689 million, the fourth richest in England and an increase of 56 percent from last year.

A New York franchise could help develop young players for Manchester City, Szymanski said, while Sheik Mansour positions himself in the event M.L.S. takes off in terms of attracting a wider television audience, offering larger salaries and becoming more appealing to soccer fans in the United States who now prefer the international game.

Buying into M.L.S., Szymanski said, may also be a subtle signal by Sheik Mansour that he has other alternatives if he begins to feel impinged by a European soccer initiative called Financial Fair Play. This is an attempt to curb runaway deficit spending and restrict teams to income generated from broadcast rights, ticket sales, corporate sponsorships, merchandising and competition prize money. A person familiar with the M.L.S. negotiations said the league would have been more wary of Arab ownership if a New York team were being bought by the Qatari royal family, which has shown support for Hamas, a Palestinian group that Israel and the United States consider a terrorist organization.

Referring to the Qatari ownership of Paris St.-Germain, the person familiar with the Abu Dhabi negotiations said, “That would have been a much larger challenge.”

Several experts said they would not expect much political blowback from an Abu Dhabi ownership in New York.

“These people have a huge interest in political stability,” Szymanski said. “Jihad would be the furthest thing from these people’s minds.”

Still, legislative hurdles remain, even with the ownership group proposing to spend hundreds of millions of its own money instead of asking the city for hundreds of millions in subsidies. The City Council, no doubt aware that some community groups have opposed the project because of the loss of park space, must approve the land use plans for the stadium. The State Legislature also must approve plans to replace the 10 to 13 acres of parkland that would be set aside for the stadium. M.L.S. and representatives of Sheik Mansour are also in discussions with the Mets about using the parking lot at Citi Field on game days,

The city said it was in “active discussions” with M.L.S. But pending a final deal, the Parks Department is spending $2 million to install two new soccer fields and make other repairs to the land where the proposed stadium would sit.
 
I wouldn't be happy at all. We shouldn't have to put a price-sticker on everything that makes this football club special, nor do I believe it's a necessary evil.

Part of what attracts sponsorship and revenue to this club is Liverpool is a unique club in England, unlike everybody else. We need to ensure that continues.


Kids haha.

1978 Liverpool became first English club to have shirt sponsors.

We been shooting ourselves for decades!

I remember being mortified when we did that!
 
Fuck I typed whoring and it put shooting, PlayBook too small and fiddly for me
Old people haha.

1975 the personal computer was coined by Ed Roberts with the Altair 8800

We been using them for decades!

I remember being really excited when it came out!
 
Kids haha.

1978 Liverpool became first English club to have shirt sponsors.

We been shooting ourselves for decades!

I remember being mortified when we did that!

Thanks old-timer, but I already knew that.

I'm open to it being the 'X' Anfield stadium. In fact I would think it foolish for any sponsoring company to remove the name Anfield from any title because it's such a famous name in football that removing it entirely wouldn't be sensible.

The wider point here is that there are other factors which have far more significantly affected our decline than our lack of stadium sponsorship; Failing to capitalise on foreign markets, making some appalling football decisions in regards to transfers and contracts, corporate facilities, underselling our shirt sponsorship for years, etc. If we got all them right then selling a stadium name wouldn't be a priority.

Once we decided to do it, there will be no going back. And, as a supporter, saying I'm off to the Gillette arena will lost part of part of the magic that makes me love this sport.
 
Thanks old-timer, but I already knew that.

I'm open to it being the 'X' Anfield stadium. In fact I would think it foolish for any sponsoring company to remove the name Anfield from any title because it's such a famous name in football that removing it entirely wouldn't be sensible.

The wider point here is that there are other factors which have far more significantly affected our decline than our lack of stadium sponsorship; Failing to capitalise on foreign markets, making some appalling football decisions in regards to transfers and contracts, corporate facilities, underselling our shirt sponsorship for years, etc. If we got all them right then selling a stadium name wouldn't be a priority.

Once we decided to do it, there will be no going back. And, as a supporter, saying I'm off to the Gillette arena will lost part of part of the magic that makes me love this sport.

Good post and largely agree but, as another "old-timer" who remembers the glory days, I'd say that's a sacrifice I'll be willing to make in order to get the resources we need to compete with those who already have them.
 
You guys can't imagine the shock of some company going to be plastered on our shirt, it was an outrage!

Yet now nobody gives a fuck.

Isn't there still a foreign team that refuses to do it?
 
You guys can't imagine the shock of some company going to be plastered on our shirt, it was an outrage!

Yet now nobody gives a fuck.

Isn't there still a foreign team that refuses to do it?

I think Barcelona technically don't do it, they don't get any money for it.
 
They don't still have UNICEF?
From wiki

Prior to the 2011–2012 season, Barcelona had a long history of avoiding corporate sponsorship on the playing shirts. On 14 July 2006, the club announced a five-year agreement with UNICEF, which includes having the UNICEF logo on their shirts. The agreement has the club donate €1.5 million per year to UNICEF (0.7 percent of its ordinary income, equal to the UN International Aid Target, cf. ODA) via the FC Barcelona Foundation.[122] The FC Barcelona Foundation is an entity set up in 1994 on the suggestion of then-chairman of the Economical-Statutory Committee, Jaime Gil-Aluja. The idea was to set up a foundation that could attract financial sponsorships to support a non-profit sport company.[123] In 2004, a company could become one of 25 "Honorary members" by contributing between £40,000–60,000 (£45,800–68,700)[124] per year. There are also 48 associate memberships available for an annual fee of £14,000 (£16,000)[124] and an unlimited number of "patronages" for the cost of £4,000 per year (£4,600).[124] It is unclear whether the honorary members have any formal say in club policy, but according to the author Anthony King, it is "unlikely that Honorary Membership would not involve at least some informal influence over the club".[125]
Barcelona ended their refusal of corporate sponsorship prior to the commencement of the 2011–12 season, signing a five-year €150m deal with Qatar Sports Investments, that meant the Qatar Foundation[126] was on the club's shirt for the 11/12 and 12/13 seasons, then replaced by Qatar Airways for the 13/14 season, the deal allowing for a commercial sponsor logo to replace the charity logo, two years into the six-year deal.[127]
 
I never noticed that.

Shows how much attention I pay to these things.
 
Qatari telecommunications company Ooredoo have issued a statement strenuously denying any interest in becoming the new shirt sponsors of Liverpool Football Club.

Al Jazeera had quoted an unnamed director of Ooredoo, formerly known as Qtel Group, claiming the firm was keen on replacing Standard Chartered as principal sponsors as well as acquiring naming rights to Anfield.

However, a statement from telecommunications company, which is backed by the Qatari Royal family, have rejected the claims.

"There is no basis for the current speculation linking us to the sponsorship of a Premier League Football Club," said a statement.

"If the situation changes, we will – as always – be open and transparent in our announcements to the media and to our customers."

Liverpool's current deal with Standard Chartered is due to expire at the end of the season, and although talks have taken place to extend the contract, Ooredoo had appeared to steal a march with quotes attributed to the director.

“The goal was to sponsor a big English club with a huge history, our search included Arsenal and Manchester United but the former two have long sponsorship deals and the same applies to Manchester City, so Liverpool is the only club available right now," he was quoted as saying.

"We want to sponsor the club in full. We want to sponsor the Stadium as well as the club's kits. Our goal is to reach the Asian markets where the Premier League has an enormous fan base.

"We received the tender from the club a few days ago and we are currently in the process of due diligence and we are studying each aspect of the study.

"It is a dual interest, Liverpool needs the money to compete with the European heavyweights and we want to expand our brand to reach new markets via football."

Ooredoo would certainly have the financial means to take Liverpool, or any Premier League club, forward. They are an international communications company delivering mobile, fixed, broadband internet and corporate managed services in the Middle East, North Africa and South-East Asia.

Ooredoo has a presence in markets such as Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Algeria, Tunisia, Iraq, Palestine, the Maldives and Indonesia.

The company reported revenues of $9.3 billion U.S. dollars in 2012 and had a consolidated global customer base of more than 91.0 million people as of 31 March 2013.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom