Lansdowne Road to be renamed ‘Aviva Stadium’
- This topic has 47 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
Sponsership deal with Hibernian insurance announced today
http://www.fai.ie/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4014
The trains are about to take off;)
And you could perhaps walk down ABeaver Row on your way to it!
Norwich Union Stadium might have been a little too confusing, so it is just as well there was rebranding before and not after.
I myself am prepared to sell the naming rights to “Ireland”, in case any banana republic fancies a title change.
I hope that BT or British Airways don’t have their eyes on Croke Park!
It will always be Landsdowne Road
aviva shmivaSounds like a womens cleansing product
Aviva may refer to Aviva, a corporation, or a given name, which may refer to:
Aviva Cantor
Aviva Chomsky
Aviva Farber, an American actress
Aviva Tower
Aviva Stadium, Dublin: see Lansdowne Roadhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviva_(disambiguation)
• In the midst of the economic chaos, it’s good to see that some people have got their priorities right. Norwich Union is changing its name, and they are running a TV ad in which famous people who changed their own names point out how it benefited them.
Would Alice Cooper have succeeded as Vincent Furnier? Or Bruce Willis as Walter Willis? (Actually, Bruce is his middle name so he didn’t have to change anything.) Ringo Starr wonders where he’d have been as Richard Starkey (answer: hugely successful, assuming he played with the Beatles anyway.)
The whole thing must have cost a gigantic sum. And for what? Norwich Union sounded strong, reliable, traditional. Aviva might be anything – a car, a brand of face cream, a singer who performs mimsy numbers about gurgling mountain streams. In other words, they have spent (I suspect) millions to achieve nothing. Another triumph for British advertising and marketing.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2009/jan/10/simon-hoggarts-week
Two weeks ago I wrote about the pointless, and incredibly expensive, rebranding of Norwich Union as “Aviva”. (Apparently it’s because they are going global, so they need something that’s equally meaningless in every country.)
James Cassidy of the BBC’s Look East TV news based in Norwich writes: “They had spent something like £350,000 coming up with the new name. We interviewed their PR guy. You can imagine his response when we told him that just round the corner from Norwich Union HQ was a clothes shop called – Aviva. They were still picking up his jaw from the floor a week later.” But these names are meaningless. How about Alfalfa? Or Angina? Or Ebola? Would you entrust your financial safety to them?
http://www.salopblog.co.uk/2009/01/simon-hoggatt-in-todays-guardian.html
just for the record, there’s only 1 “d” in Lansdowne
I agree with ac1976 – it’ll always be Lansdowne as the O2 will always be The Point
“We believe that in the difficult economic conditions we are going through, Aviva Stadium will be of huge benefit to the economy as a whole,” said Philip Browne, chairman of Lansdowne Road Stadium Development Company and chief executive of the Irish Rugby Football Union.
“Even taking the most conservative view, I do not think it would be exaggerating to say that Aviva Stadium could have an impact of some 250 million Euros on the local economy each year”
€250million? how so?
@wearnicehats wrote:
“Even taking the most conservative view, I do not think it would be exaggerating to say that Aviva Stadium could have an impact of some 250 million Euros on the local economy each year”[/I]
€250million? how so?
Through increased disruption and inconvenience to local businesses and residents :p
@wearnicehats wrote:
€250million? how so?
He quoted a figure in the press release that previous Ireland / England matches had brought in 90m to the ‘local economy’, I’ve no idea how these things are measured but on that basis with 5 or so big matches annually bringing in what would seem like a more realistic 50m a go between football & rugby … obviously there’s your 250m. The figures regularly bandied about however could be nonsense & are impossible to verify.
The capacity of Lansdowne is disappointing given that rugby matches easily attract 80k these days with a couple of football qualifiers having that potential also. Contractual arrangements attached to the crazy proportion of corporate seating in the new stadium make moving to croker for the big matches a non-runner and so the ordinary punter is left in a scramble for fewer over priced seats than were available in the old Lansdowne 🙁
Croke Park to be sponsored next…..by BT?
The Aviva Stadium aka Lansdowne Road has changed a bit, looking at the roof construction!
Newer Image
Older Image
Wow. It sure has. to its detriment too. The new rendering looks to have lost that dynamic curve. I’m sure it’ll remain a very impressive structure but still it looks slightly disappointing.
The older one looks moe curvey because of the prespective used. The actual roo fline looks unchanged to me. If you look at the older image, the steel roof structure look inadequate – not big enough to support itself.
@archipig wrote:
The older one looks moe curvey because of the prespective used. The actual roo fline looks unchanged to me. If you look at the older image, the steel roof structure look inadequate – not big enough to support itself.
Well no – the older one is actually an entirely different structure. Its a ring structure of the type developed by Cecil Balmond in a competition entry for a stadium in Chemnitz.
http://www.archilab.org/public/1999/artistes/koni11fr.htm
The newer image depicts what look to be two arches or trusses simply supported at either end.
The older image may have not been very well developed and possibly inadequate but it is very disappointing to see the original intention seemingly discarded in favour of an easier solution. By doing so surely much of the original design intent (a smoothly flowing, elegant stadium) is lost.
Reddy is correct. It looks like the entire nature of the roof structure has changed between to two images to a more traditional pair of long span arches resting on columns at either end. I never liked the renders of this project inside or out, the always seemed very paper-thin (the earlier image off the interior never looked convincing structural) and am much more hopeful for the project now that we can start to see the reality of the structure going up and the way it will spectacularly dominate some of the adjoining residential areas (similar to some dramatic juxtapositions of scale around Croke Park).
Supporting piers at the Havelock Square end are one thing, but how are they going to get columns into the Lansdowne Road end? The upper terraces wrap around here, don’t they, or is it going to be a lop-sided hybrid roof, 3/4 ring structure, springing from column support at one end?
Anyway I have to go and get the dogs their dinner.:rolleyes:
Oh God, that Havelock Square end looks even more ridiculous than I thought, its like as if they’ve brought up one of the terraces from Thomond Park!:o
The fact that the roof is being so heavily supported at that end is going to make any future reconfiguration (however unlikely it may be) pretty difficult!
The 50,000 capacity is a joke aswell, it might be just about adequate for soccer but as we’ve seen over the past 2/3 years in Croke Park, its way off the mark for rugby! 65,000 would have been ideal but I’m not sure the site would have taken a stadium that large, even if you were to include the back pitch?
I suppose it begs the question, were all the options properly evaluated? I think the answer would probably be no!
those giant supports are being put in place now – (thanks for explaining what the shite they are coz i hadn’t seen these renders)
as for the capacity, 54000 did the job for donkeys years. Many people bemoan the fact that a lot of the people at Croker haven’t a clue what’s going on in front of them, especially in the soccer where the only decent atmosphere has been Georgia last week as the fairweathers stayed away. I can’t wait to get back to a more intimate crowd at Lansdowne.
Tuborg, the inspector was right in his assessment that the IGB site was better, but that was beyond his remit.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
