Can a sponsor re-brand a stadium with heritage?

As Newcastle United’s much maligned owner, Mike Ashley, renames the 119-year-old St James’ Park to the Sports Direct Arena overnight, we got to thinking: Can an existing stadium ever adopt a new name that’s accepted by the media and supporters alike?

Conventional wisdom would have it that branded sports grounds or entertainment venues fare best when named from their inception, avoiding any confusion over previous names which, in some cases, may have built up decades of heritage and history.

Strong examples of this way of thinking are Arsenal’s new(ish) home at the Emirates Stadium, Coventry City’s Ricoh Arena and Bolton Wanderer’s Reebok Stadium.

In these instances, an injection of sponsor cash either at the beginning of the new build process or swiftly upon completion meant that the clubs were able to lessen the burden of financing the move which might otherwise have impacted negatively on their ability to compete in the transfer market or on player wages.  Or getting the stadium built at all.

For the media and supporters, this approach is more palatable too, since the stadium has never been known by any other name.  The fact that sponsor money is used to help fund the move serves to present the sponsor in a positive light – like a benevolent parent helping their youngster on to the property ladder.

So at first glance it would appear that any brand (Sports Direct or otherwise) will find it difficult to win over the fans or media by simply re-badging an existing stadium.  It’s too easy for everyone to revert back to calling it by its historical name.  St James’ Park has been in the Geordie vernacular for over a century and the ground is a totemic piece of architecture that sits proudly at the heart of the city.

You can change a stadium’s name, but you can’t change what it’s known as.


But is it always thus?

On the continent, Germany’s Bundesliga has numerous examples of brands entering in to naming rights deals with clubs at both new stadia and existing grounds. 

In 2005, Borussia Dortmund’s colossal 80,000 capacity Westfalenstadion was renamed after local insurance company Signal Iduna in a deal that saw the stadium change its name to Signal Iduna Park.

Dispensing with their traditional blue brand identity and adopting the yellow and black of Borussia Dortmund, Signal Iduna went a long way to appease fans who might have been concerned about this sudden change of name.

But as a long-standing local partner, who acted sensitively and recognised fan sentiment, Signal Iduna Park has, seemingly, been easily adopted by the football community.

On a similar thread, Dortmund’s Bundesliga rivals VfB Stuttgart call the Mercedes-Benz Arena home, a stadium that was originally known as Neckarstadion (after the nearby river Neckar) then Gottlieb-Daimler-Stadion (named after the automotive inventor) and now after the car company he helped create.

Similarly Schalke 04 ply their trade at Veltins-Arena after a deal in 2005 with German brewery Veltins.  The ground was built in 2001 and originally known as Arena AufSchalke.

Closer to home, O2 took on the hugely controversial Millennium Dome and have developed it in to one of the premier music and sport venues in Europe.  The adoption of ‘The O2’ as its name was virtually instant and absolute.

So what does this mean for Newcastle United and Sports Direct?  Mike Ashley’s raison d’être for selling naming rights is essentially sound.  The club should look at all possible commercial avenues in a bid to compete with their wealthy Premier League rivals.  Whilst the handling of the renaming to Ashley’s sportswear company has been questioned by some, it has at least put the stadium name in the shop window.

If, in the long run, selling the name of the famous stadium generates funds that can be spent buying players that help win trophies, would the Geordie faithful then begrudge such a move?

Might the best possible outcome for all involved now be for a well-supported local brand (and preferably an established partner of the club) to offer a fair price for a long-term deal?  It could look to incorporate the historic St James’ Park name.  Had it not been for the global recession, maybe we could have seen Northern Rock @ St James’ Park?

Whatever St James’ Park is ultimately known as, the club should just be careful that in the race to cash in on their ground’s name, they do not sell its soul.

@RussJefferys

Comments

[_guy_richards]

Cracking read Russ, a well-considered assessment. The one area I’d disagree with is your last point, if you want your new stadium identity to be widely adopted you need to cast off the original name and give the brand full ownership. A good example of this, although not a stadium with a great heritage, is Southampton. Saints fans objected to their new stadium being named ‘The Friends Provident Stadium’ so a compromise was reached, the stadium would be called 'The Friends Provident St Mary's Stadium'. Of course this is too lengthy to be used in conversation and that number of characters puts a strain on the vide-printer, as such the stadium would always be known as St Mary’s and FP’s cash was wasted. Unsurprisingly, all principal partners since have opted out of taking up the naming rights and that potential revenue stream has long since dried up.

The moral of the story is keep it short and ensure the brand has total ownership. As you’ve mentioned, this is likely to grate with the fans, but three points always eases the pain.

[Account Deleted]

"Whatever St James’ Park is ultimately known as"...

Newcastle United play at St James' Park, Liverpool play at Anfield, Manchester United play at Old Trafford. Every football fan across the land knows that.

Owners come and go, but the best understand the basic rule of marketing.... "know your target market".

It'll be a brave (or stupid) sponsor that crosses the Tyne to takes "St James'" on ...

[Russ Jefferys]

Tend to agree Guy and Southampton is a great example.

It was discussed on the Football Weekly podcast the merits of a 'sponsor' coming in and immediately changing the name back to St James' Park... This would obviously be a huge gesture that would generate enormous initial coverage, but could it work long-term? It would rip up the traditional sponsorship rule-book but maybe a new way should be considered?

It definitely feels like Ashley has attempted to take the sting out of the tail for any future brand coming in. If nothing else he and the board certainly have a thick skin!

[Account Deleted]

Good day and welcome to http://www.joyfax.com