200k per year over 5 years is still a lot to find at the moment.
The design of NM is phased to have the corners of the stadium filled in over a period of time, it may prove that until we could find a similar level of funding we would have to stick to having open corners. Unless Uncle Rodney get's his cheque book out again!

On a side note Fully; does CT have a stadium pressure group?

No: WAKEFIELD fans believe there are massive funding problems - or rather hope there is to save their own skins in a SL licence.

Why would we need to move to NM? We've not sold our ground remember, so technically we could continue playing at The Jungle, rent free until such a time.

Just buy a brick or two

The land is not toxic and has had no chemicals produced on it, but dont let facts get in the way of your drivel.

Theres also funding being put in by the developer and i've heard that we are getting some grant funding as well.

Quote ="Ceejames"If Cas think they will get £400k / year naming rights they are in cuckooland.'" Find me my post where I ever said it was over just a singular season? Thank you very much, I'll accept your apology that you was wrong now! As for the rest of your post, lets agree to disagree, shall we? I know how sponsorship works, thanks. As for not naming the stadium in the press, erm, let's see. Player new contracts: "Player X has agreed a new deal to stay at the XYZ Stadium for the next two years." Match reports as you wrongly point out DO state location of where it is played: www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/au ... per-league "Andy Wilson at the Jungle guardian.co.uk, Friday 13 August 2010 22.12 BST Article history" And I don't think I will get deeply depressed, thanks. In fact, I'm already largely happy that we've got one company on board to sponsor our East Stand.

Quote ="Ceejames"If Cas think they will get £400k / year naming rights they are in cuckooland.'" Find me my post where I ever said it was over just a singular season? Thank you very much, I'll accept your apology that you was wrong now! As for the rest of your post, lets agree to disagree, shall we? I know how sponsorship works, thanks. As for not naming the stadium in the press, erm, let's see. Player new contracts: "Player X has agreed a new deal to stay at the XYZ Stadium for the next two years." Match reports as you wrongly point out DO state location of where it is played: www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/au ... per-league "Andy Wilson at the Jungle guardian.co.uk, Friday 13 August 2010 22.12 BST Article history" And I don't think I will get deeply depressed, thanks. In fact, I'm already largely happy that we've got one company on board to sponsor our East Stand.

It has a fans' focus group which meet regularly with the club.

Castleford Fans, not people......oh, and I do believe it will be possible to buy more than one brick, or has a law been passed to the contrary?

That's good. Correct me if I'm wrong (& if I am I apologise) but are they not a new (or less than year old) group?
I think you lot would have been much further on if the pressure group had been set up 3 years ago, I know nobody can lay all the fault for delays of GH at the feet of RW, but I do think if you would have had a group similar to SWAG you wouldn't have suffered the everlasting promise you've had to. Nobody can deny that he has lead you a merry dance to an extent already with GH. Opening 2008, I mean 2009, wait 2010, half way through 2011 now partially built in 2012.

I know how that hurts mate, you've had as many false dawns as us lot. However I'm 100% confident both will eventually be built and our rivalry will live on. TBH I think we've both said how much we'd have preferred an atmosphere of mutual support, but the systems playing us against each other. Bit of an insult when you think about how much "the golden triangle" brings to the table of elite RL.

FWIW I think if it does come down to Wakefield or Cas that goes from SL the demoted team will be first in line to be welcomed back in 3 years time. IMO the welsh will be lucky to see out another 12 months let alone 4 years. There are only so many millionaires in Wales who want to throw money at RL. So it might not even be a full 3 years the team would have to wait.

Quote ="Fully"Find me my post where I ever said it was over just a singular season? Thank you very much, I'll accept your apology that you was wrong now! [Do try and keep up Deehell pointed out that £200K a season would be a realistic figure . You said it would be ten times that. The figures you eventually cobbled together were plain stupid . As for the rest of your post, lets agree to disagree, shall we? I know how sponsorship works, thanks. As for not naming the stadium in the press, erm, let's see. Player new contracts: "Player X has agreed a new deal to stay at the XYZ Stadium for the next two years." [I do disagree with your nonsensical made up figures. You do not know much about sponsorship if you think a small RL stadium will pull in £400K / year in naming rights. As for your other 'cod journalism' the press can just as easily say....'agreed a new deal to stay at (club Y)'... Match reports as you wrongly point out DO state location of where it is played: www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/au ... per-league "Andy Wilson at the Jungle guardian.co.uk, Friday 13 August 2010 22.12 BST Article history" [Your point here just shows that you are hard of thinking. You said [uevery[/u article will name the stadium. I said many reports will not. So you quote a single example as if that is proof that every article names the stadium. Shoddy evidence...much like your info on naming rights. And I don't think I will get deeply depressed, thanks. In fact, I'm already largely happy that we've got one company on board to sponsor our East Stand. [Glad you wont get depressed. However if you fantasise about £200k / year for stadium naming rights you will almost certainly be disappointed.But if pretending you will get inflated rates for an unbuilt stadium rocks your boat....enjoy! '"

Quote ="Fully"Find me my post where I ever said it was over just a singular season? Thank you very much, I'll accept your apology that you was wrong now! [Do try and keep up Deehell pointed out that £200K a season would be a realistic figure . You said it would be ten times that. The figures you eventually cobbled together were plain stupid . As for the rest of your post, lets agree to disagree, shall we? I know how sponsorship works, thanks. As for not naming the stadium in the press, erm, let's see. Player new contracts: "Player X has agreed a new deal to stay at the XYZ Stadium for the next two years." [I do disagree with your nonsensical made up figures. You do not know much about sponsorship if you think a small RL stadium will pull in £400K / year in naming rights. As for your other 'cod journalism' the press can just as easily say....'agreed a new deal to stay at (club Y)'... Match reports as you wrongly point out DO state location of where it is played: www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/au ... per-league "Andy Wilson at the Jungle guardian.co.uk, Friday 13 August 2010 22.12 BST Article history" [Your point here just shows that you are hard of thinking. You said [uevery[/u article will name the stadium. I said many reports will not. So you quote a single example as if that is proof that every article names the stadium. Shoddy evidence...much like your info on naming rights. And I don't think I will get deeply depressed, thanks. In fact, I'm already largely happy that we've got one company on board to sponsor our East Stand. [Glad you wont get depressed. However if you fantasise about £200k / year for stadium naming rights you will almost certainly be disappointed.But if pretending you will get inflated rates for an unbuilt stadium rocks your boat....enjoy! '"

No, he didn't. deeHell said:

"How much do you think these sponsorships will raise? I would estimate at no more than 200 000."

Where is per year in that? I said I think they'll raise £2m. I'll await your apology still but I doubt you will because you hate being wrong don't you?

And, of course, I'm a) sad enough; and b) have enough time to go around providing hundreds of links to support my argument. I know what I'm talking about and there is no way you're EVER going to change my mind about this.

Answer me this: which do you think is more valuable and brings in the most income for clubs? A shirt sponsorship or stadium sponsorship?

The main reason Dally is because we want/need to be self sufficent.
The east stand sell's out pretty much every week and the club has taken steps to add to its capacity in the aim that even more will be able to get in there.
This hopefully will mean that our average will increase as less will think 'I cant get in the east and i'm not standing/siting at an end so I wont bother'.
When we get the north stand that should stop away fans thinking 'uncovered seating?, Im not going to bother'.
Also added to the fact that we dont want to be seen to be saying to the RFL 'Well we are happy with that so that's it'.

And Cas fans like like to believe we don't have a chance in hell of getting PP past the SOS that's why your always trolling on the Wakey board trying to bull your perceived negatives of the project.

Would the RFL accept you for another franchise playing at the Bungle? I doubt it, especially the promises of 2009 completion date when the last franchise applications went in.

If it's really that much and such a money spinner why haven't debt ridden soccer clubs like Sheffield Wednesday done such a thing? Like I said 100-200K a year and that's been very generous. I can't see that been paid up for any more than 12 months in advance. In reality the money where talking about is not for the stadium construction it will be for day to day operating coasts. A few of them you'll have as well including the 2 million quid land loan from Wakey council that will after be paid back with interest!

And what's the developer getting out of it? Private companies don't just pump millions into other private companies projects unless there is something in it for them!

I know friends that have worked at Hicksons, they know what waste is buried in the area and so will the surveyors. Good look with the sale you'll need it!

Quote ="Fully"No, he didn't. deeHell said: "How much do you think these sponsorships will raise? I would estimate at no more than 200 000." Where is per year in that? I said I think they'll raise £2m. I'll await your apology still but I doubt you will because you hate being wrong don't you? [If you possessed something approaching average intelligence you would understand that that DeeHell was refering to an annual figure. Your ludicrous £2m for 5 years shows that you are clueless. picking figures out of the air. You mention Chesterfield getting £1m for naming rights and omit to mention it is an eleven year deal and there are other aspects of the sponsorship deal. But don't let any facts spoil your self delusion. I do not hate being wrong it happens. i do dislike people making up silly figures like you have done rather than do a bit of research. And, of course, I'm a) sad enough; and b) have enough time to go around providing hundreds of links to support my argument. I know what I'm talking about and there is no way you're EVER going to change my mind about this. [If you understood evidence gathering you would realise that you do not need to go to hundreds of links. You said [uevery article[/u. In just a couple of minutes i found these: www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/ju ... storm-trio and www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 80,00.html. highly reputable news sources that do not refer to stadia. the fact that you say you will never change your mind, even when the evidence is clear, says much about you. Answer me this: which do you think is more valuable and brings in the most income for clubs? A shirt sponsorship or stadium sponsorship? [It will depend on the club / shirt exposure / stadium / target market and several other factors. For example there are SL clubs with shirt sponsors but no stadium sponsorship so here shirts will definiately bring in more money. Others clubs, e.g.in soccer, could certainly sell their naming rights but prefer the historic 'brand name' of the stadium. If you had the vaguest idea about naming rights you would not ask such a lame question. HTH '"

Quote ="Fully"No, he didn't. deeHell said: "How much do you think these sponsorships will raise? I would estimate at no more than 200 000." Where is per year in that? I said I think they'll raise £2m. I'll await your apology still but I doubt you will because you hate being wrong don't you? [If you possessed something approaching average intelligence you would understand that that DeeHell was refering to an annual figure. Your ludicrous £2m for 5 years shows that you are clueless. picking figures out of the air. You mention Chesterfield getting £1m for naming rights and omit to mention it is an eleven year deal and there are other aspects of the sponsorship deal. But don't let any facts spoil your self delusion. I do not hate being wrong it happens. i do dislike people making up silly figures like you have done rather than do a bit of research. And, of course, I'm a) sad enough; and b) have enough time to go around providing hundreds of links to support my argument. I know what I'm talking about and there is no way you're EVER going to change my mind about this. [If you understood evidence gathering you would realise that you do not need to go to hundreds of links. You said [uevery article[/u. In just a couple of minutes i found these: www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/ju ... storm-trio and www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 80,00.html. highly reputable news sources that do not refer to stadia. the fact that you say you will never change your mind, even when the evidence is clear, says much about you. Answer me this: which do you think is more valuable and brings in the most income for clubs? A shirt sponsorship or stadium sponsorship? [It will depend on the club / shirt exposure / stadium / target market and several other factors. For example there are SL clubs with shirt sponsors but no stadium sponsorship so here shirts will definiately bring in more money. Others clubs, e.g.in soccer, could certainly sell their naming rights but prefer the historic 'brand name' of the stadium. If you had the vaguest idea about naming rights you would not ask such a lame question. HTH '"

Exactly. Up to £200K / year is much more like it. also spot on re payment in advance.

And that money is not pure profit. there will be signage / printing / PR costs. Most naming rights sponors will expect some quality corporate hospitality etc. Some of this may be paid for seperately but some will be a cost.

You know what annoys me? People who can't quote.

deeHell asked how much I thought it would raise? He didn't specify a time limit, he never said a year so therefore one would not assume it was specifically for a year. Nice backtrack, though. It must be nice trying to defend the indefensible. Knew you didn't have the balls to apologise for your mistake.

Go back and read my post, did I or did I not mention that Chesterfield's stadium was worth approximately £1m and conditioned on things such as gaining promotion? I think I did. Once again, you're making things up to suit your agenda. So I have to mention timeframes now but deeHell doesn't? Make your mind up! Doesn't make a difference whether it's £1m over 2 years or ten years - if they get that, that's a great achievement. I'm not making silly figures up, in fact, I know it's not silly. It represents the value I - and others - place on the stadium naming rights but like I said, we'll see who is right won't we? As for research, I know that sponsorships vary on many different factors such as division, location, chance of silverware, media coverage etc etc. It's why Leeds are very successful at gaining sponsorships.

Did I say EVERY press article? I thought I said every press article for an home game. If you read that, it would mean match reports in papers although I do note that some newspapers have a tendency to merge articles so I'll admit a slight error on that front. However, the point stands that the name still does find itself into many match reports and even news articles and publicity can be gained more than any other form of sponsorship in that way.

The last question was to see how you would answer. I wasn't actually seeking a response about circumstances and whether clubs have them. I was just enquiring if both were wanted and clubs had businesses interested in both, which one would sell for the higher figure and the obvious answer to me is stadium sponsorship. However, you're right about heritage but that refers to the older stadiums such as Hillsbrough, such as Highbury, Old Trafford etc. Newer stadiums such as the Emirates Stadium, b2net stadium, Reebok Stadium, DW Stadium, Galpharm Stadium all seem to push for stadium sponsorship.

Perceived negatives? So the opposition are just imagining their own concerns now are they? Don't talk silly. There are legitimate arguments that people have although not always written or conveyed in a way that is sensible and provokes a discussion and turns into trolling. You're referring to one or two Cas fans who give the rest a bad name. However, the majority of us - myself included - do want Wakefield to get their own stadium for the benefit of rugby league but can see the negatives too. People like SWC and I_A are always willing to answer and clarify their queries. I wish there were more like them to be honest.

I don't know why Sheffield Wednesday haven't pursued it, it is a question you would have to ask them. I think like Ceejames said, a bit of it is to do with heritage and alienating their fanbase.

Because it's obviously not as cost effective as you think (or hope)!

Like I said, you'd have to ask them! My opinion does not alter and nor does my figure. I suggest that all parties - including Ceejames - leave it at that because we're all not going to agree and I think people will get tired of reading this argument. Also, time to return to the original topic I think which is about actual stadium situations.

I'm referring to you with your provocative trolling comments. When you come on the Wakefield board it's an alternative opinion when I do the same on the Cas board I'm a troll. You obviously think you have a higher level of intellect that your inflammatory comments can't possibly be classed as trolling. Me and you both know what there designed to do!