news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_u ... 429437.stm Quote Sale Sharks chief executive Mick Hogan says the club are still in negotiations about a move to Salford City Reds' new stadium at Barton. Reds chairman John Wilkinson and Sale owner Brian Kennedy have previously spoken about a possible groundshare.'" Whilst there are obvious advantages for Salford like shared stadium costs, income from renting out to Sale..etc, it must be seen as a risk when trying to attract additional support. I'd tell them to fook off myself.

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_u ... 429437.stm Quote Sale Sharks chief executive Mick Hogan says the club are still in negotiations about a move to Salford City Reds' new stadium at Barton. Reds chairman John Wilkinson and Sale owner Brian Kennedy have previously spoken about a possible groundshare.'" Whilst there are obvious advantages for Salford like shared stadium costs, income from renting out to Sale..etc, it must be seen as a risk when trying to attract additional support. I'd tell them to fook off myself.

Said on here before get them in and take it easy on them for a while. When they least expect it start to hit them with rental increases. Start to charge them for using press facilities, hot water, tea bags etc.

Just make life difficult for them and run them out of there with nowhere to go.

I would let them share at first then screw them for as much as they are worth



I think somebody else previously mentioned the above notion and i totally agree with them.

EDIT As if by magic he has appeared directly above my post

Financially I'm sure It makes great sense. But regardless of what both clubs may say, they're going to be in direct competition for a lot of things, and for that reason as a RL fan I wouldn't want it to happen.

I think it's pretty safe to assume that someone like Brian Kennedy will make sure he's got a watertight contract to avoid things like you mention. Not that I don't like your thinking, however wishful.

Thought someone had picked up my ex misses when i read the title.

I don't see a problem, union is dying (on the big stage) on its backside in the north, Orrell have as good as gone, Leeds C are way down the ranks and Sale struggle for support with a 6k average.

Let them play there, it reduces Salfords costs which may benefit them on the field which benefits SL

After at first, agreeing with the first few posts of screw 'em and frig 'em, this could be mutually beneficial. We are all aware of Mick Hogan's marketing capabilities (who knows what would've happened if he'd gone to Red Hall rather than Sale), there could be opportunities to get fans supporting both teams. Half price Salford STs for Sale STH and vice versa could be one option. ATEOTD, advertising our sport in a city as big as Manchester has huge potential.

For me, getting bums on seats of any RL stadium - not just our own - is critical at the moment to stop RL becoming even more marginalised.

It doesn't work though Quins RU/RL, Leeds RU/RL you have a handful literally of fans that like both, they've both tried the deals to attract each other to each others codes and they rarely work, people like what they like.

Was always likely to happen once the council took full control of the stadium project. Salford are just a tenant as Sale would be so unfortunately for the Reds no initial benefits whatsoever. Unless as mentioned they could get some kind of joint commercial venture going.

Good for them, anything that drives up the utilisation of the ground is going to help the running costs.

Depends how it is operating, if Salford are paying a set yearly rent for the facility it won't make a difference! Like with Leigh at the LSV.

Of course.

If it happens though Salford need to make sure they're holding the vast majority of the cards.

I'd have their rent as high as possible for starters.

Don't let the buggers anywhere near their nice new stadium.

Look at what has happened to Stockport FC, the curse of RU.

It will be a bad step for Salford to let Sale move in with them we are like in other posts said competing for the same customer and RU will win hands down due to the vast amount of money they can throw at it, take last years game at the reebok that Sale did cost them over 100k acording to some people on here and god forbid if both Manc soccer clubs increase thier grounds RL/RU in that area will not attract 5 figure gates which you have to do to try and break even.

I think what should be more important is:
When are Sale gonna drop the "Sale" name they haven't played in Sale for years! Maybe if they changed their name to "Salford Sharks" then it would work but all the posh idiots that like Union would be all up themselves about a team in Salford I imagine.

If it makes financial sense I'm sure they will grin and bear it just like Wigan handle sharing with a second rate football team.

Maybe Salford could change their name to something like Altrincham Reds to try and give a more upmarket image to sponsors.

I lived in Alty for a while... it's not that posh. Well, that is apart from Hale and Bowdon obviously....

Mind you, I did go down to Moss Lane to watch Alty FC every now and again, the standard of football and the quality of the stadium did remind me of the Latics in my youth....

The best thing salford could do regarding the name change is just drop salford and become the 'City Reds' .

That way they wouldnt alienate the traditional supporter base by having any other reference to Manchester or the surrounding area, but would also open up potential for attracting fans from all over the manchester and salford region.

This way the 'City Reds' could stand for different things depending upon the supporter - to the old they remain Salford City Reds, yet to potential new fan basis in manchester, they could feel they were representative of them (be that the city of manchester / city of salford etc) also and widen their potential fan base to the whole M60 region. Perhaps there could also then be a further clever rebranding phase depending upon the success further down the line to be the 'Cities Reds' bringing together supporters of manchester and salford if it was felt the support started to drift in this way.

I'd see this in a similar way that St Helens re branding has now seen them brand as 'Saints' in order that they do not alienate the existing fan base of st helens, but can also appeal to new markets in liverpool and the supporting area. Lets face it, no one from Hyton are going to support 'St Helens' as there is no ownership, inclusion to them, yet if they support 'Saints' this repersents whatever 'Saints' represents in their mind, and can be different for different supporters.

If Salford put up 1,000 posters in Manchester with 'Salford City Reds' they are never going to get the support whereas convesley if they do the same with 'City Reds' Manchester fans will assume the city refers to them and are more likely to get on board.

The only difficulty with this one is that it would perhaps confuse soccerball fans with their being seemingly references to City and Utd (reds) in their name - that said this could provide a clever marketing ploy and a great deal of media attention across manchester and salford. ie/ Cities Reds - "A Truly United Team"

I think that's a great idea. If they could support from a wider manchester audience they could become a massive force in SL

Salford fans would go mental at the thought of dropping 'salford', just mention changing to Manchester and the toys are out the pram.

It should have been Manchester Devils from the off instead of SCR

Would we have accepted taking out the Wigan name and being called 'The Warriors' had we actually moved to the Reebok back in the late 90's?

I think not.

I also think that it's disrespectful towards Salford supporters who, in my opinion, would be right to oppose being re-branded.

Quote ="Barge"Would we have accepted taking out the Wigan name and being called 'The Warriors' had we actually moved to the Reebok back in the late 90's? I think not. I also think that it's disrespectful towards Salford supporters who, in my opinion, would be right to oppose being re-branded.'" Difference being its just a 5h1t moniker for us, where as salford have always been known as the 'red devils' or the 'city reds' to a significant extent in the past. The only people who refer to us as warriors are the under 8s and latics fans!!!! Therefore the difference is significant. Salford becoming the 'city reds' is very comparable with st helens becoming 'Saints' they are just droping one of two instantly recognisable names for the club. Saints will always be St Helens to the existing support in the same way the city reds would always be Salford, it just opens up other opportunities to sell the brand given there is a limited support base and this is much needed. The Salford fans seem to think its all a wind up on their board though- viewtopic.php?f=20&t=512342

Quote ="Barge"Would we have accepted taking out the Wigan name and being called 'The Warriors' had we actually moved to the Reebok back in the late 90's? I think not. I also think that it's disrespectful towards Salford supporters who, in my opinion, would be right to oppose being re-branded.'" Difference being its just a 5h1t moniker for us, where as salford have always been known as the 'red devils' or the 'city reds' to a significant extent in the past. The only people who refer to us as warriors are the under 8s and latics fans!!!! Therefore the difference is significant. Salford becoming the 'city reds' is very comparable with st helens becoming 'Saints' they are just droping one of two instantly recognisable names for the club. Saints will always be St Helens to the existing support in the same way the city reds would always be Salford, it just opens up other opportunities to sell the brand given there is a limited support base and this is much needed. The Salford fans seem to think its all a wind up on their board though- viewtopic.php?f=20&t=512342

Quote ="gerr'emonside"Difference being its just a 5h1t moniker for us, where as salford have always been known as the 'red devils' or the 'city reds' to a significant extent in the past. The only people who refer to us as warriors are the under 8s and latics fans!!!! Therefore the difference is significant. Salford becoming the 'city reds' is very comparable with [ust helens becoming 'Saints' they are just droping one of two instantly recognisable names for the club.[/u Saints will always be St Helens to the existing support in the same way the city reds would always be Salford, it just opens up other opportunities to sell the brand given there is a limited support base and this is much needed. The Salford fans seem to think its all a wind up on their board though- viewtopic.php?f=20&t=512342'" Didnt Saints only change for one year because they were playing in Widnes? Arent they going back to being St Helens RLFC next year in their new stadium? Thats what I remember being told? Anyway the rest of your stuff is right I think Salford should have been changed years ago they should have been given the change as a condition for a Franchise. They do that in the NFL make a team change name or make a team move completely and isnt that where the franchise idea comes from?

Quote ="gerr'emonside"Difference being its just a 5h1t moniker for us, where as salford have always been known as the 'red devils' or the 'city reds' to a significant extent in the past. The only people who refer to us as warriors are the under 8s and latics fans!!!! Therefore the difference is significant. Salford becoming the 'city reds' is very comparable with [ust helens becoming 'Saints' they are just droping one of two instantly recognisable names for the club.[/u Saints will always be St Helens to the existing support in the same way the city reds would always be Salford, it just opens up other opportunities to sell the brand given there is a limited support base and this is much needed. The Salford fans seem to think its all a wind up on their board though- viewtopic.php?f=20&t=512342'" Didnt Saints only change for one year because they were playing in Widnes? Arent they going back to being St Helens RLFC next year in their new stadium? Thats what I remember being told? Anyway the rest of your stuff is right I think Salford should have been changed years ago they should have been given the change as a condition for a Franchise. They do that in the NFL make a team change name or make a team move completely and isnt that where the franchise idea comes from?

talk to Stockport county people about how sale have fecked them over since they ground shared at Edgely park

if they do share i hope they do some background checks first