I've had to trapse through loads of posts since this announcement was made. Everything from total fume to more pragmatic acceptance. Here's a few thoughts from me:
Hill Dickinson doesn't roll off the tongue. It's not snappy or cool and isn't a globally recognisable name. However, for me it does sound quite classy and quintessentially British. It could absolutely be worse - The B&M @ BMD; The Jewson Stadium; Fisherprice Park; The Nestlé Bowl, The Lego Stadium (all companies with much larger turnovers and brand recognition).
Obviously it could have been better and I think a few pinned their hopes on a "Toyota" type name, but all things considered Hill Dickinson ain't that bad for me - The HD @ BMD.
Seems that the naming deal was always going to struggle to please the fanbase. It's a money generator and has no connection to the club or its history. From some comments it seems that the deal had to meet a lot of criteria - 'good' name (subjective), big player (brand), a business with integrity, in an industry that can't be used to take the piss... oh and it can't have "dick" in the name

.
Whatever the name, opposition fans will find a way to mock. Anfield has no naming rights deal and has numerous names - Analfield, Mordor, The Pit etc. That's just football banter.
The devil is in the detail as they say and as yet it isn't officially clear how much we're getting over what period. Considering what Arsenal get for the Emirates deal, I honestly think if we've exceeded £5m per year then we've done very well, despite what some might say.
Ultimately it is what it is. I don't think the name is great but it's also not "embarrassing" or "a joke". It could be a lot more money for a more embarrassing name (The KFC @ BMD, Matalan Arena, Dacia Dome).
HD is a company with local links, in a service industry that isn't a joke or likely to bring us shade/embarrassment.
Defo not worth losing your $h!t over
