So Chelsea are the latest club to express an interest in selling the naming rights to their stadium.
The timing of this announcement is a little odd given the hoots of derision that have greeted Newcastle United's decision to rename St James' Park earlier this week, but the reasoning behind it is less surprising.
With little or no chance of them being able to extend Stamford Bridge or move elsewhere in the near future, Chelsea were always going to have to find new revenue streams if they are to to meet their grandiose ambitions of becoming self-sufficient.
But with the club resolutely sticking to the line that Stamford Bridge must remain part of the name, it is difficult to see what value any potential sponsor would get from the deal.
Most Chelsea fans already find the name Stamford Bridge too much of a mouthful and shorten it to 'the Bridge', so what hope have Samsung, Adidas or any other blue-chip company got of getting people to throw in their name too?
The example of Southampton should be a cautionary tale for any potential sponsor. When the Saints moved to their new home in 2001, their sponsors proudly announced that the ground would be known as the Friends Provident Stadium.
When fans objected, the name was swiftly changed to Friends Provident St Mary's - and the sponsor's name barely registered in most football fans' consciousness for the remainder of the deal.
Events at Newcastle over the rest of this season are likely to provide any sponsors Chelsea might hope to attract with a test case of how a deal to re-christen a stadium with a perfectly good name already could fare.
The idea of 'showcasing' how a sponsor's brand could work in conjunction with the existing stadium name by temporarily renaming the Toon Army's home as sportsdirect.com @ St James' Park Stadium is surely as wretched a decision as Mike Ashley and friends have taken yet.
This trial measure will surely illustrate two things to any potential sponsor. Firstly, it will give them six months to witness the bad PR and potential boycotts that are likely to greet them should they take over this poisoned chalice.
Secondly, when or rather if the initial fuss dies down, it will give them a chance to notice how little the official name of the stadium will seep into popular usage.
For the Spy's money, Ashley and Co would have been better off doing nothing this season, and trying to sign a company to a long-term deal from next season before they realised what they were letting themselves in for.
And if the ripples from Newcastle reach potential investors in west London, Chelsea might also have cause to rue Ashley's latest blunder.
Seeing Red
Man Utd reserve keeper Tomas Kuszczak doesn't think that Edwin van der Sar likes him very much. He says that United's senior goalkeeper routinely gives him the cold shoulder when he should be sharing his experience and wisdom with his young apprentices.
Amazingly, we know all this because of an interview with Kuszczak on Man Utd's own television station, MUTV.
On the few occasions that the Spy has seen MUTV, he's always got the impression that it is the football TV equivalent of Pravda, the Soviet newspaper that was essentially just Communist propaganda. Except that MUTV obviously advances the interests of a different set of Reds.
Sir Alex Ferguson must have choked on his cornflakes when he read Kuszczak's quotes faithfully transcribed in his newspaper this morning.
MUTV already has one blot on its record as far as Fergie will be concerned: an ill-advised interview on that station spelled the end of Roy Keane's time at Old Trafford back in 2005.
The Spy is all in favour of freedom of expression, but he pities the poor TV producer who will doubtless be on the wrong end of some of Sir Alex's famous hairdryer treatment this morning.
