If we take other Super League clubs - Warrington play in a stadium named after a local car sales garage;Huddersfield named after a brewery;Leeds after the suburb where they are located;Wakefield - solicitors;Bradford,a loan company.
As Iain posted on the 'SBW' thread - Bunnies v Roosters - ever since Murdoch,Sky and Super League started the use of 'additional names' has been encouraged.
The Australian fixture list looks like this - Rabbitohs v Storm;Sharks v Cowboys;Roosters v Sea Eagles;Bulldogs v Knights.
No mention of their home city/town - despite those cities/towns doubtless having lots of other sporting club names.
Recently it seems players refer to Rhinos,Warriors and Giants more than they did.
When the RLE describes Eccles as a 'Manchester based team' the job of raising the profile of Salford would seem to be huge.
Having thought about it,the name of the stadium where we play isn't that big a deal.

I seriously doubt your average Salford fan will ever deal with AJ Bell, let alone have any boycotting power.

GT AJ Bell are a very reputable company,I have always found my dealings with them to be very professional. They will happily look at any individuals affairs for them.

I agree the name of the stadium isn't important to us as a team going forward. However, I'm surprised the council hasn't ensured that the name does include Salford in the title with it being a community Stadium.
The most important part of this sponsorship deal is the fact that we as a club get no revenue streams from the deal. Whereas our Cuckoos (I like that term), get all the revenue. I'm not blaming Sale it's down to overreaching ourselves to move to a new Stadium.

We need to support the new Devolution and move forward with what looks like a very competitive team on the field. We need to drag all the old fans that used to come down and any new ones that want to try our great game for the first time. That will give us a better revenue stream going forwards

My biggest problem is the way that Sale have presented this announcement.

Had they gone about this the right way and involved Salford, MUFC, the stadium management company and the council, they'd not only have avoided a lot of bad feeling, they'd also have gained far more coverage for their sponsor.

I also suspect many of us wouldn't have been that fussed about the whole thing, given the many precedents GT has already flagged up.

I don't think you can compare the NRL situation to why I believe this to be an issue. The NRL teams are very well established in a competition that gets huge national coverage and has corporate sponsorship. The majority of Australia will know where the Storm come from or the Eels, Sharks etc There isn't an identity crisis in the sport over there.

I also don't agree with you when you say clubs over here are becoming more known by their gimmick names. I speak regularly with people who don't follow RL. They only know the teams by the towns, Wigan, Leeds et al. Again though, this is a side issue.

National coverage of RL is little to non existent. We have a poor fan base as it is. Our profile needs to be raised. We spent years trying to deliver a stadium for Salford Reds under whatever guise. We now play at the AJ Bell stadium where a RU club who does & will continue to get national coverage have sold the rights. Since day one we've been trying to make the place feel like home. A club who had no input in the stadium when it was being designed, built etc have been allowed to come in (through our own lack of leadership at the time) and essentially taken over. The club shop is for Sale, the naming rights were bought by Sale, Sale are the team that will be in the national press. Forgive me if I'm taking this all to heart but I don't feel any connection with that stadium. It seems now more than ever that were minor tenants in a stadium that the club worked extremely hard to produce for our own survival. Your Wigans, Leeds even Warrington & Huddersfield are fully established in their homes, it feels were on the outside looking in hoping for a seat at the big table at some stage.

Maybe I'm just being over sensitive. I agree that the naming rights alone isn't the biggest issue, it just feels like the straw that broke the camels back.

Again, I don't blame Sale one jot. If were in their situation we'd be doing exactly the same thing. Chronic mismanagement under the previous regime is to be blamed. For all the good of that regime, and their was a lot of good which should never be forgotten, this is unfortunately the legacy they left.

I do blame Sale for the arrogant way they've handled this. Glad to see they haven't profited financially.

This post from the biggest champion of Sale on this forum says it all. How supposedly sensible Salford fans ever thought Sale would have any qualms about shafting us in protecting their own interest is beyond belief. Unless this is one of Early Bath's 20(?) positives from them moving in?

Thommo's posts have said it all in this thread, another time bomb left by Wilky & co. No wonder Royal Mail was privatised 5 minutes after Tarry started working there.

Well said - without the `previous regime` there would be no involvement with Dr Koukash would there?

Like the Tarry line.

Far more than 20 positives Walshy and as mentioned another post - now the Marketing team should speak to Bell`s. and they could be a useful sponsor for Salford as well.

Timing is everything as they say! Salford were is a mess and thinking more about survival than naming rights. Sale wanted access to a quality stadium after their experiences at Stockport and were smart enough and cute enough to try to create the impression that they were the major player. The Stadium owners were no doubt grateful for Sale's involvement when it perhaps looked like their intended prime tenant may not even exist

No doubt if Dr Koukash had been on the scene earlier Sale might not have got a sniff, or at least it would be obvious that they were the minor tenants.

On the plus side if the Stadium Owners were prepared to sell the naming rights to one of their tenants, they clearly would be happy to sell all or part of the Stadium. In our case the naming rights are retained by Halton Borough Council and they benefit from selling the rights (We have been Autoquest, Stobart and now Select Security Stadiums). Nobody gets too worked up over the Stadium name and there is always the retention of "Halton" in there somewhere.

Having said that it is clear to everyone that we are the major tenant and user and it is to all intents and purposes "our" ground, which is occasionally used for other things! So I suspect Widnes fans would be less than chuffed if another tenant appeared to be the dominant partner (There were some rumblings when the Vikings "brand" was extended to local soccer and amateur RL clubs).

The challenge for Doctor Koukash and your players and fans is to show who is the biggest tenant, by results and attendances (which may take you a little time, hopefully Dr K will have the patience!)

Ha! Even you know that's stretching it EB. That's like praising Al Qaeda for all the improvements in airport security over the last 10 years.

Another excellent post,very patient,thanks,to accompany your other excellent post earlier.
With the Conservative councillor,filling in for the absent Garrido,reminding readers in the local press that the council loaned money to the club,and the stadium management company,trying to pass on a guilt-complex and with the hitherto absence of Salford people attending the stadium,how can the situation be remedied ?
How can Salford people now be made to feel as though the stadium,(and watching the rugby league) is part of their dna ?
The majority of those watching the other code will presumably be attending from outside the area ( do they still say outwith ? ) how can the club make the stadium be a more attractive focus to local inhabitants ?
We need to move on from the initial upset.
Those with intelligence need to address their minds to this....
Over to you...
It will seem a very long few years before Dr Koukash is targetting his plans for the stadium and surrounds,otherwise by which time the other club(s) may make more progress.

Ok, Walshy, it looks like you've earned the right to say 'I told you so,' so I'll probably have to hold my hands up on this mea culpa. I'd hardly call myself a 'champion' of Sale though.

I was as apprehensive as anyone about their impending arrival as soon as the blue seats appeared. However, once it was confirmed that they were coming, my reaction was to try to respond in a positive way (although I never shared the '20 positives' view). I still actually think two tenants working together would be in everyone's best interest.

The problem is: this incident and others before it seems to indicate that the reputation which preceded the Sharks' arrival was probably deserved.

Brilliant