There are 275 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Which company do you want to get the naming rights to a new 49ers stadium ?

Which company do you want to get the naming rights to a new 49ers stadium ?

  • sfout
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 6,306
Originally posted by SFL49ER:
Originally posted by modninerfan:
Originally posted by DJD:
Google has the most money to burn....

considering Apple is the most profitable company in world history, I'd say your statement is factually incorrect

Overhead matters!

Overhead doesn't mean anything when you're SITTING ON $80BILLION. Apple could've built the stadium for us and put the word Apple or the letter i in front of everything.

"Welcome to our $3Billion Apple Park, would you like an iDrink in our iBox Luxury Suite. Look at the iTurf and how green it is. By the way did you see the Retina Display Scoreboard? We've also got new iPad's attached to every seat in the stadium." lol.

EDIT: On a serious note I know the list is for "silicon valley only" but Samsung should seriously be included as they seem to be shifting to "WERE THROWING MONEY AT ANYTHING AND ANY CONCEPT BECAUSE WE CAN" mode so I bet they'll at least be in the mix in effort to compete with Apple.
[ Edited by sfout on Apr 20, 2012 at 8:09 AM ]
  • Apone
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,739
Panda Express
Santa Clara Good Vibration Park!
Originally posted by BigRon:
Why one company. Have them Bid on the Stadium Name, Section Names, Parking Lot Designations, Street Names that access the Field.


Walsh Field
Ground Level Seating, between the 40's The Montana Section provided by Google
2nd Tier Seating, between the 40's - The Young Section provided by Apple
3rd Tier behind the Goal Posts - The Brodie Section provided by Intel

Instead of Parking in Section A. You park in Oracle Parking

Streets leading to the Stadium. Cisco Way. Sybase Dr.

Why limit the sponsorships? This stadium is gonna cost close to a BILLION dollars. Probably go over budget anyway. We need all the help we can get.

Is the Jeff Garcia section in the Men's room?
Originally posted by sfout:
Overhead doesn't mean anything when you're SITTING ON $80BILLION. Apple could've built the stadium for us and put the word Apple or the letter i in front of everything.

"Welcome to our $3Billion Apple Park, would you like an iDrink in our iBox Luxury Suite. Look at the iTurf and how green it is. By the way did you see the Retina Display Scoreboard? We've also got new iPad's attached to every seat in the stadium." lol.

EDIT: On a serious note I know the list is for "silicon valley only" but Samsung should seriously be included as they seem to be shifting to "WERE THROWING MONEY AT ANYTHING AND ANY CONCEPT BECAUSE WE CAN" mode so I bet they'll at least be in the mix in effort to compete with Apple.
Doesn't Samsung make the processors for iphones? Reason why I ask is that, wouldn't it be a conflict of interest thing?
  • sfout
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 6,306
Originally posted by Jesu80ncleats:
Originally posted by sfout:
Overhead doesn't mean anything when you're SITTING ON $80BILLION. Apple could've built the stadium for us and put the word Apple or the letter i in front of everything.

"Welcome to our $3Billion Apple Park, would you like an iDrink in our iBox Luxury Suite. Look at the iTurf and how green it is. By the way did you see the Retina Display Scoreboard? We've also got new iPad's attached to every seat in the stadium." lol.

EDIT: On a serious note I know the list is for "silicon valley only" but Samsung should seriously be included as they seem to be shifting to "WERE THROWING MONEY AT ANYTHING AND ANY CONCEPT BECAUSE WE CAN" mode so I bet they'll at least be in the mix in effort to compete with Apple.
Doesn't Samsung make the processors for iphones? Reason why I ask is that, wouldn't it be a conflict of interest thing?

Even if they make their processor wouldn't samsung building its own phones be a conflict of interest in itself? Doesn't matter if they make the processor for a single product of a competitor, they need to compete on a global scale and getting the naming rights to a stadium in Silicon Valley that will definitely host at least 1 superbowl a decade would be a massive marketing boost.

If Samsung was worried about losing the opportunity to build parts for the next generation Iphone they wouldn't be building their own phones and its not like they go out their way to play nice with each other, both Apple and Samsung have filed patent injunctions against each other all over the world regarding their tablet designs.
Check n to cash
Surfin at Bill Walsh Field.
dick in a butt
  • Kolohe
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 31,553
Originally posted by 49erRider:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by 49erRider:
Google. By far.

Oracle by farther.

I think the Googleites would actually contribute to the stadium and make it an even better, more technologically advanced venue. I'm contracted by Google (though I do not actually work for them) and if you were to see the way their facilities are set up and the way their workforce is treated, you'd know exactly why I say Google should be the company we'd want involved with the stadium.

I just think it sounds better.
Great America Park.
Shake weight stadium
Zoosk Stadium !!! Were you can browse thousands of local singles.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Call me old fashioned but I'd like it to be New Candlestick at Santa Clara
No Facebook

Google and Apple are clearly the two best and most fit sponsorships/naming candidates.