briny_ear Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Trouble was, we just couldn't guarantee them a Full House at our home games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Also, I see it as a good thing that the deal is expiring and not being renewed. Although I like the occasional flutter and have been a professional poker player in the past I've always thought that having a casino as our main sponsor is really tacky and is the polar opposite of what Randy's philosophy was in the first couple of seasons - ie charity sponsor Acorns. I also hate the fact that you can't get kids shirts with the sponsor on due to advertising laws. Makes the shirt look tacky and small time. Agreed they will not be missed but their money will be. Surely Randy can twist someone's arm back home to put their name on our shirts? If not I would rather we go Acorns again rather than sell out for next to nothing to some small time outfit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Agreed they will not be missed but their money will be. Surely Randy can twist someone's arm back home to put their name on our shirts? If not I would rather we go Acorns again rather than sell out for next to nothing to some small time outfit. Don't think we could afford not to have a sponsor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Don't think we could afford not to have a sponsor If we could afford not to have one before I do not see why we could not now particularly if the money we would get would be a lot lower than what we now get. After all it is not as if we need it to pay high wages and transfer fees is it? I just do not want us looking small time with this as we have done in the past for peanuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Good riddance, I'm sure we could find a higher standard of sponsor than some tacky unheard of casino. Let's hope Macron take their knock off active wear quality kits and their terrible Fiat Multipla level designs and leave next. We were better off with Hummel and DWS investments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 If we could afford not to have one before I do not see why we could not now particularly if the money we would get would be a lot lower than what we now get. After all it is not as if we need it to pay high wages and transfer fees is it? I just do not want us looking small time with this as we have done in the past for peanuts. Whilst i liked the acorns stuff and was proud of the club for doing it, I think it had an adverse affect on the running of the club.. If we had been getting sponsorship money for those few yrs, don't think we would be cutting back so much now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Do AST Computers exist any more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Whilst i liked the acorns stuff and was proud of the club for doing it, I think it had an adverse affect on the running of the club.. If we had been getting sponsorship money for those few yrs, don't think we would be cutting back so much now... we would, because sponsorship to a club like us isn't megabucks. the seasons we had acorns wouldve maybe netted us £6-8m total in sponsorship. heskey cost us more over the course of his contract what ACTUALLY had an adverse affect on the club was signing players for inflated fees, paying them inflated wages and letting them leave for free, earning the club nothing at all by way of resale. that's something that happens occasionally at most clubs, for us it's become a way of life. you can't run a football club if you're essentially writing off the entire transfer fee and entire wage over the entire contract of 90% of players you sign 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 we would, because sponsorship to a club like us isn't megabucks. the seasons we had acorns wouldve maybe netted us £6-8m total in sponsorship. heskey cost us more over the course of his contract what ACTUALLY had an adverse affect on the club was signing players for inflated fees, paying them inflated wages and letting them leave for free, earning the club nothing at all by way of resale. that's something that happens occasionally at most clubs, for us it's become a way of life. you can't run a football club if you're essentially writing off the entire transfer fee and entire wage over the entire contract of 90% of players you sign Was there any need to put actually in capitals, and then go off the thread topic by just talking about how badly the club has been run, which is fairly obvious... But £6-8m would still have been a decent sum which would've still helped us out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 But £6-8m would still have been a decent sum which would've still helped us out. it wouldve paid a handful of benched players wages. you said had we had it we wouldn't have been cutting back so much. we would have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 we would, because sponsorship to a club like us isn't megabucks. the seasons we had acorns wouldve maybe netted us £6-8m total in sponsorship. heskey cost us more over the course of his contract what ACTUALLY had an adverse affect on the club was signing players for inflated fees, paying them inflated wages and letting them leave for free, earning the club nothing at all by way of resale. that's something that happens occasionally at most clubs, for us it's become a way of life. you can't run a football club if you're essentially writing off the entire transfer fee and entire wage over the entire contract of 90% of players you sign I'd have thought that £6-8m would have made a decent dent in the depreciation cost (about £23m?) for that year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 I'd have thought that £6-8m would have made a decent dent in the depreciation cost (about £23m?) for that year. we wouldnt have gotten 6-8m a year, that'd have been over the 2 years we had acorns at best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drewdat Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Can't believe Genting didn't have the heart to stick with a diamond of a club. Could have paid off in spades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 I think that when we went for Acorns it was considered the club did not want to be associated with a company that makes its money from internet gambling for what was not a significant return. It seems the return offered by our present deal was enough to put those high ideals to one side but if the returns are again to be low then I suggest the question is do we need to do similar or tie the club to a small time outfit for what would be a much reduced return? I also wonder why there was an escape route for Genting so soon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted January 20, 2013 Administrator Share Posted January 20, 2013 I think that when we went for Acorns it was considered the club did not want to be associated with a company that makes its money from internet gambling Why would you think that? I've heard people mention this, but I've never seen it on an official statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 we wouldnt have gotten 6-8m a year, that'd have been over the 2 years we had acorns at best I misread your post, I thought you said season and not seasons. Still, that amount would have been a dent in depreciation costs of £40m+, too. The point though (regardles of the specific numbers involved) is that revenues and costs are both important to the financial position of the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Do AST Computers exist any more? The curse of the Villa shirt sponsor strikes again. Don't all the firms end up going belly up - Davenports Mita CDWS MG AST Be afraid Genting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 we need the re croup and start again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Most of our previous sponsors are still going just under a diffrent name, mita got taken over by a printing company that sponsored reading a few years ago, ldv vans went tits up though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted January 20, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted January 20, 2013 Why would you think that? I've heard people mention this, but I've never seen it on an official statement. Fairly sure the general or someone like MM said it when Randy took over the club. Didn't like Red32 because it was a casino/gambling site so I was surprised when we went for Genting. To me it underlined the financial state of the club that Randy was prepared to compromise on something he had previously been against. To be fair, I couldn't find anything that backed up my recollections though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts