Financials Of Wonga Deal Do Not Look Good

We must say we were a bit disappointed that the deal Newcastle have made with Wonga is only for £8M a year, and that’s for both the shirts and the Stadium naming rights, and compared to other clubs, it’s not good.

When Derek LLambias was asked if the deal was £8M a year yesterday, he didn’t give any exact figures but said that £8M was fairly close.

Other top clubs do a lot better on their shirt deals.

Liverpool are getting £25M per year over six years from Warrior Sports,

and Manchester United in the summer signed a shirt deal with American General Motors division Chevrolet, which gives them £50M per year over seven years, and starts in the 2014-2015 season – some other reports have that at £25M per year.

Chelsea just renewed their contract with Samsung, and that’s estimated at around £18M a year, in the three year extension.

We know those three clubs have a much higher visibility around the world than Newcastle do (at the moment), and all three have won the Champions League recently, but those deals are just for the shirts – and they don’t include any stadium naming rights, which is part of the Newcastle deal.

And when you remember that Derek LLambias had said Newcastle were looking for £10M a year just for the naming rights alone, it just doesn’t look too good a financial deal to us.

A decent deal would have been around double what we are getting.

What do you think?

Follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook and +1 us on Google+:

You can also reach Ed at

Buy your Newcastle tickets here.


400 comments so far

  • Spuggy

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:45 PM

    Comment #1

    Moral arguments aside if we get Cat 1 status for the academy, and the funding to bring the 3 quality players we need through the door by next summer, nothing else we matter that much to the majority of fans.

    I agree about bank sponsors being just as bad. Look at McDonalds etc sponsoring the olympics.

    Time to move on, but I want to see this money put back into the team in January and over the summer.

  • BelfastMagpie

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:46 PM

    Comment #2

    I honestly couldn’t care, far more important things to worry about in life, than bloody shirt sponsorships..

  • Edd Case

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:47 PM

    Comment #3

    Well, I actually think it’s a good deal.
    We’re not ‘top 4’ or in Champs League, so we don’t fall in the same ‘global’ scene as the other clubs mentioned.

    Wonga are investing heavily in the yoth set up and that’s very good news.

    The stadium naming rights is just a smoke screen. The sponsorship ‘package’ is £8million a year for 4 years.
    So £32 million into the club coffers and don’t forget we still have Puma and Sports Direct as sponsors too.

    The naming rights was a way of Ashley and co “selling” it when actually I bet this is just a cover up for another appaling decision and not admitting they were wrong.
    All the while I’m sure they wanted it to be back to SJP but couldn’t put their hands up to the mistake and of course sold it as part of a sponsorship deal.

    Wonga, to their credit, gave us the name back and will pump £32 million into the club…pretty much all so they can put ‘Wongo’ on our t-shirts…..fine by me.

  • jesperfuglsang

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:49 PM

    Comment #4

    Ed, maybe I misread DL’s statement, but didn’t he say the deal was for the shirt (the £8M) and the naming rights was on top of that? Meaning extra money for that?

    …well that was how I read it!

  • Dai

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:52 PM

    Comment #5

    Southern Press just using any excuse to have a pop at Newcastle. Apparently there is an article out suggesting that the muslim players boycott the club and Wonga trade in a manner which is against Sharia law.

    Spuggy, what is it with you and Macdonalds mate. To many quarter pounders with cheese……

  • pbNcl

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:54 PM

    Comment #6

    Beefman. I’ve gotta gan back to work, I don’t want to spend my lovely afternoon arguing with a jumped up little to55pot like you. You are insignificant. However, if you do decide to wade into disagreements with your now trademark bad attitude. No doubt we will enjoy more fruitless wordplay. Gan take your face for a 5hit you disagreeable cretin. Wonga are scum.

  • Toon_Army

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:56 PM

    Comment #7

    I think DL mentioned that it was the incentives that stood them out as the best option, we all know how MA is with cash so I guessing there were some TAX benefits involved with them pumping money into the different sections of the club rather than straight into the bank account, of course it will still be nowhere near the CHE or MU deals but we havn’t won anything for a while have we…

  • nufc90

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:56 PM

    Comment #8

    If people want to take the moral high ground they should look at the authorities who legalise these companies. We’re just taking advantage of a commercial opportunity which will benefit the club, that’s all that matters to me. Some people may say that’s wrong but if we start looking at ethics lets look at the whole lot…gambling, alcohol, kitmaker’s sweat shops

  • rainrix

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:57 PM

    Comment #9

    Dai… Thats what annoys me they only need the slightest excuse to have a pop.

  • estechco

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:57 PM

    Comment #10

    For all the grief the club will have as a result, I too feel the deal seems a rather mediocre one, especially when you consider it IS strictly speaking for ground naming rights as well (despite them not using it the sense you would expect).

  • walton1984

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:57 PM

    Comment #11

    I dont understand why everyone is complaining about Wonga……if its the best deal we could get then why not….
    Also Barclays, Capital One they are the League & Cup Sponsors are a Bank & Credit Card….Do i need too say anymore about Banks….The Fa Cup Budwiser(i think) will this turn us all into Alcholics…….then u have then team Liverpool was their sponsor not doin the banking for terrorists, Then u have all the Teams Sponsored by Beers & Betting Sites are all those not wrong

  • Edd Case

    Oct 10, 2012 at 12:58 PM

    Comment #12

    Dai – it’s actually ‘McDonald’s’…not ‘MacDonald’s’
    Although, most of the intellectually challenged population do say McDonald’s as you have written it, pronouncing the “a” or “Mac” part, when it’s not, it’s actually “Mc”, said, “muck”.

    But I’m sure this was just a typo on your behalf and you are not part of the intellectually challenged…….right?

  • Dai

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:04 PM

    Comment #13

    Edd Case….I’m an Englishman and will therefore spell Macdonald’s the way our mother tongue intended. Let’s not stoop so low as the yankie doodle dandies…….

  • Ibizatoon - Back by popular demand

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:06 PM

    Comment #14

    Question for everyone. Let’s discuss APR rates and what we consider would be reasonable for a company to offer for a second. I have seen people say “Why don’t Wonga just offer the same rate as banks, say 21% (APR)”.

    Using the Wonga method and service that they are offering:

    £400 loan for 30 days.

    £400 @ 21% = £84 p.a
    £84/365 = £0.23 p.d
    £0.23 x 30 days = £6.90

    Are people really thinking a business (or evil corporation if you wish) should be receiving what equates to 1.725% of the loan for what is considered a short term high risk loan?

    Please don’t think I am saying their rates are fair, but you cannot apply the logic of bank rates (APR) to such a service, can you?

    From what I have read (not experienced myself), there are certainly cases where the collection and help offered by Wonga has been suspect to say the least and these incidents should be looked in to, reported and dealt with, however, these occurrences do happen at most companies, doesn’t make it right, but also shouldn’t be used to just single out one company.

    If we’re talking about the service the company offers though to people, are they not within their rights to charge what they see as the right rate as long as people are aware of the cost?

    Perhaps we need to be discussing why there aren’t other alternatives out there for people between a rock and a hard place as this is not actually the service for these people and the sad thing is they have or feel they have nowhere else to turn. That for me is the social issue and question.

    Don’t want to cause offense, I can see some people are passionate about this and that is understandable, but I do feel, perhaps incorrectly, some issues are being crossed here and making a final conclusion more difficult that it should be.

    This is a re-post and I see we’re trying to veer onto a new topic, so please just ignore it if that is the case and let me know what we’re discussing now.

  • Tsunki

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:06 PM

    Comment #15

    C’mon and do the Won-ga
    C’mon and do the Won-ga
    La la la la
    La la la la!


    Wonga wonga wonga wonga wonga.

    Mike Williamson is responsible for faukts occuring with the Large Hadron Collider and the decline in the honey bee population. Ok – I’m out.

  • Tsunki

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:08 PM

    Comment #16

    Faults ha ha how ironic.

  • Ibizatoon - Back by popular demand

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:09 PM

    Comment #17

    Tsunki…Stop being such a Wonga

  • Peter Beardsley

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:11 PM

    Comment #18


    Charging interest(usury) on loans is against Muslim beliefs so I doubt they would buy any shirt with a bank sponsor. But then Jesus was also against the same practice.

  • Dai

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

    Comment #19

    Beardo, I understand that similar rules apply to alcohol, gambling, etc, etc. There would be no clubs left for them to play for……… Just the southern gutter press having a pop yet again.

  • Quasi.modo

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

    Comment #20

    Long time reader, first time poster so here it goes.

    I don’t understand the approach that certain fans are taking to this Wonga deal. Either you get behind the team or you don’t, the sponsor of the shirt is in no way reflective of the morals and values of the team, it is merely a way of bringing money into the club.

    If some of you have such strong feelings about this Wonga deal then why don’t you let the rest of us support the team instead of saying that we are wrong, or that we are fools? We simply choose to acknowledge that the deal is good for the continued progress of our great club and that instead of turning this into some moral crusade we just want to get on with supporting the team.

  • Alain Pardeaux

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM

    Comment #21

    I’m not bothered whether Mike Ashley’s getting a good deal or not, the main thing is we’re gonna get an extra 8 mill a year to spend on players, no excuses now to not improve the squad

  • Edd Case

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM

    Comment #22

    Dai – McDonald and MacDonald are two competely different names, neither is spelt incorrectly, unless used in the way you have in your previous post.

    The chain you were referring to is McDonald’s, not MacDonald’s, that was my point.

    You can say ‘Mac’ Donald’s all you like (although this is also wrong) but spelling the name incorrectly is just that, incorrect, that is all…

    Good day.

  • Dai

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:29 PM

    Comment #23

    Burger King it is then.

  • Alain Pardeaux

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:30 PM

    Comment #24

    The Burger King Arena

  • toon smart

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:31 PM

    Comment #25

    Right, from now on i am going to use “wonga” as a direct replacement for any expletive.

    I think people should shut the wonga up about morals etc. Football has no wonga-ing morals. this is just wonga-ing me off at the moment. As far as i am concerned every sponsor has been a wonga and therefore to complain is wonga-ing stupid.

    Wonga over

  • toon smart

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:32 PM

    Comment #26

    * rant over

  • lesh

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:35 PM

    Comment #27

    Just what is it about the owner and his side-kicks that seems to embroil the club in controversy? Virgin Money, which is a bank no matter what anyone thinks and has a non-controversial profile, aside, it seems that the powers that be seem lead us into situations that provoke a reaction.

    I do recognise that this is business and that money has no scruples or conscience, and therfore we should only be glad that there’s new money coming into the pot.

    As Wonga’s got the naming rights to SJP, in mitigation for Ashley, Llambias and presumably Wonga, they’d correctly anticipated that adopting Wonga’s name into the stadium’s name would have been a PR disaster. Theyr’e also investing money into the club’s community activities and its academy – that should release extra money to invest in the squad as time goes on. Although Wonga seem to have the rights to rename SJP at a later date and it could do so, if it wishes. However, a PR disaster at the moment.

    Have faith guys, Ashley and his crew will have thought this through but in the meantime, the press will continue to see us as ready made for targeting and we’ve got to hope that good results and success force the media to change its perception about Newcasttle United.

    Howay the laaaaaaaddddds!!!

  • Alain Pardeaux

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:37 PM

    Comment #28

    WONGA wonga dot com!
    You make it easy when a month is too long!
    Thanks for everything you’ve done!
    Mr Wonga you’re number one!!

  • Peter Beardsley

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:38 PM

    Comment #29

    @toon smart

    ” Football has no wonga-ing morals”

    If a person has no morals or is immoral, are they likeable? I fear this deal has many negative implications for the club, this is why I don’t think it is good for us.

  • Rotonda heights

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:42 PM

    Comment #30

    Beefman – you said in the last thread

    would play one up front supported by benny with fergie left wing jonas left back and anita cabaye tiote in the middle hopefully saylor colo and krul are back santon at right back still; and bring shola and or demba or cisse on with 30 mins left weather we are winning or not to shake it up even more, but not 442.
    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

    Great minds think alike. That is so screamingly obvious to me, but with Pards it aint going to happen. We only went 433 with Benny last season cos raylor got injured when we were playing 442.

  • Ibizatoon - Back by popular demand

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:46 PM

    Comment #31

    Rotonda….Good news that Raylor is injured then?

    Didn’t we start 4-3-3 against Everton? Pardew might favour or at least be seen to favour 4-4-2, but you can’t say he wont play 4-3-3 or another formation, as he has done so.

  • beefman13

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:46 PM

    Comment #32

    pb, you must be tea lady, i would say pamela!!!, seems you get quiteafew breaks in your work!

    oh should i have said tea person

    its the total falseness that i cant abide.

    anyway it must be time for another cuppa! pb, milk and no sugar ta very much!

  • Les Grossman

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:46 PM

    Comment #33

    I think ill go out nad borrow 10k from wonga because they are on the front of the toons shirts!!

    i wish everyone would get a grip!!

    Sharia law states….bla bla bla
    UK Law states, companies can gain sponsorship from who they see fit!!

    Gutter scum press trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill!! I cant see the deal being less than 10m for shirt and naming, I think Lamarse is being a bit economical with the truth their.

    Reason being, I think North Rock/ Virgin deal was worth 10M per year, why kick them out halfway through a deal??

    DL and MA are damned if they do and damned iof they dont. If I was them I wouldnt be putting the correct figures out into a public domain who constantly ask the qeustion, where has the 10m gone whingey whine!

    Come on Ed.
    Gullibles travels springs to mind here …….

  • numba9

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:46 PM

    Comment #34

    Rubbish deal and hope it falls thru working class game it isn’t any more and getting sponsored by people that don’t care about those people . Not what we are about

  • AndyMac

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:48 PM

    Comment #35

    nufc90 says:

    “If people want to take the moral high ground they should look at the authorities who legalise these companies. We’re just taking advantage of a commercial opportunity which will benefit the club”

    But we didnt HAVE to take Wonga’s money nobody forced Fatman.

    Unfortunately Wonga and SD are taking Newcastle United’s image down into the gutter yet some fans dont seem to care ?

    What next ? Poundland ?

  • dutchgeordie

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:50 PM

    Comment #36

    i would think that Ashley may not be the best at footballing matters but at a purely financial matter like this he will be astute enough to broker a good deal. It is true that a £ 10 million figure was mentioned for the stadium naming rights only but nobody took that serious.

  • NewcastleMole

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:52 PM

    Comment #37

    There’s a huge misconception about Wonga.

    (Personally as a business i don’t like what they do)

    But let’s use common sense here. Wonga has recently reported good profits. Now the media, fa, & MPs are suggesting that Wonga targets the weak and vulnerable of society.

    Wonga made they’re profits by people actually “REPAYING” their loans (With outrageous ARP i might add)

    Now if the weak and vulnerable are really that they would be getting a loan because they are short on cash and being short on cash would leave them unlikely to be able to repay such a loan and end up in further debt. If that were to to happen Wonga wouldn’t receive back the money it has leant with interest.

    The media in particular love a good muck racking i wouldnt expect anything less than that.

    Premier League sponsored by alcohol then a bank.
    Conference – Gambling
    FA Cup – Alcohol
    League Cup – Finance

    Villa, Stoke, Swansea, West Ham, Wigan – Gambling
    Everton – Alcohol
    Fulham, Liverpool, Man Utd, Norwich – Finance

  • Mister Tuff

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:52 PM

    Comment #38

    Ibiza @#14.
    Bloody hell they’re not too bad rates for a loan. Without being cheeky I think you need to get your facts/sums right. Examples of the correct rates I will indicate below.
    The representative APR on a Wonga loan is 4214%. So correct loan examples would be:-
    A £100 Wonga loan taken for 30 days would mean you repay £136.72
    A £400 Wonga loan taken for 14 days would mean you repay £461.49
    A £50 loan from Wonga repaid in 10 days means you would repay £60.97.
    Some posters stated they have used Wonga for a short loan that is all well and good I have no problem with that. There are those in society who may not be as astute as some of the posters on here, people recovering from mental illness, persons threatened by illegal loan sharks, other vulnerable people, some may say it is their own faults, well if that is the way people think about the vulnerable in society- they should probably examine their own consciences.
    If the truth be known all these companies profiteer at the expense of others, it is just that Wonga are probably one of the worst.
    The southern based press are going to jump on anything adverse about Wonga over the next few years, and by that old principle of “guilt by association” NUFC will get slagged off, as well as the North East. A price worth paying?

  • beefman13

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:53 PM

    Comment #39

    rotonda, AP likes to fit the dembas in but it really dosnt work with them as we know, and it is nearly always the second half were we improve after tactics have had to change.

    we could be attacking from all angles if we played a different system we have the players to do that.

    yohan is getting back up to spped, let him link with benny from midfield, fergie a big threat down the left and santon pushing on down the right.

    all hopefully supplying one of the dembas to start with the shola maybe to close the show late on.

    we have to mix it up more i think AP must know that.

    that said its taking a bit of sinking in about the 442 carry on.

    we have the perfect players to play other attacking formations.

  • toon smart

    Oct 10, 2012 at 1:56 PM

    Comment #40

    As a philosophical question, i think it could be possible for a person to be without morals and still likeable

    What does that have to do with the sponsorship deal?

    As I stated before Wonga’s unethical practices are there for all to see. Where as many, if not all sportswear manufacturers are either directly or indirectly involved in the exploitation of people in poverty.

    So the question is why now for the moral indignation. why not with other sponsors or other manufacturers i.e. nike etc

1 2 3 10

You must log in to post a comment.