At the meeting between Dr Assem Allam and supporter groups on 1 November 2013 to discuss the proposed name change for Hull City AFC, the Chairman referenced âmarketing scienceâ as the rationale for changing the clubâs name. He cited the example of Manchester United FC temporarily dropping the letters âFCâ from their badge, arguing that this had attracted American investment, resulting in the Glazersâ takeover of Manchester United. In March 2013, the clubâs company name was changed to Hull City Tigers Ltd, and a process of gradual rebranding is occurring, with an amended âHull City Tigersâ crest being used increasingly widely. The media and other clubs have been instructed to identify the team as Hull City Tigers in advance of the brand eventually becoming Hull Tigers. Guardian journalist David Conn interviewed Dr Allam in September (see http://bit.ly/ConnAllam). As he later recounted in an interview with talkSPORT (see http://bit.ly/talkConn), after the article was published, Dr Allamâs secretary forwarded Conn the summary page of a study which he claimed supports his belief that his âname shorteningâ project has a logic and science behind it. This summary relates to the paper âCompany Name Fluency, Investor Recognition, And Firm Valueâ by T Clifton Green and Russell E Jame (viewable online here: http://www.viewdocsonline.com/document/kpzlit), originally published in the Journal Of Financial Economics, and later mentioned on the Harvard Business Review blog (which, it appears, is how it came to Dr Allamâs attention). In its complete form, this article runs to 59 pages. Its authors are from the Goizueta Business School, Emory University, Atlanta and the School Of Banking And Finance of The University Of New South Wales respectively. It is unlikely the authors could have ever imagined that their abstract, which pertains to portfolio stock investors, would find itself at the centre of a row about the historic name of an English Premier League football club. Nevertheless, it has. CORE THESIS The core thesis of the article is that companies with names that are âeasier to mentally processâ â ie those with greater âname fluencyâ â have higher breadth of ownership (more shareholders), greater share turnover (more trades of their stock), and lower transaction price impacts. So the more âfluentâ the name, the more successful the stock is likely to be. The article explores how familiarity with and affinity to a name as a result of its fluency may influence investor behaviour. This is a hypothesis that pertains to stock portfolio investor behaviour and the human choice dynamics of people looking at thousands of publicly traded stocks. Hull City Tigers Ltd is not such a stock. Upon further reading, it becomes clear that the application of this hypothesis has been further confused with marketing and brand strength theory. The opening line of the abstract gives a major clue to its lack of relevance: âChoosing from among the thousands of stocks to invest in is a difficult decision for most peopleâ, it begins. Choosing one of twenty clubs competing in the English Premier League is a rather simpler business. Even if we ignore this basic fact, the authorsâ hypothesis does not support the theory that Hull City Tigers or Hull Tigers are more marketable than Hull City AFC. âENGLISHNESSâ OF A NAME The first element of the authorsâ theory of fluency is the âEnglishnessâ of the name; in this context, âEnglishnessâ refers to the English language, not the culture of the country. Using the Englishness algorithm of Travers and Oliver (American Journal Of Psychology, 1978), word and sentence structure can be assessed mathematically for âEnglishnessâ based on their relative common pattern to other commonly used words, phrases and letter combinations. A word has greater âEnglishnessâ the more commonly its letter clusters appear in the English language; to use an example cited in the article, the letter combination âTHEâ appears in printed English 500 times more often than âTHLâ. So a name with the letters THE in it has a higher Englishness value than one with THL. The insertion of the word Tigers, as in Hull City Tigers or Hull Tigers, significantly reduces the âEnglishnessâ of the name. âCityâ is a common suffix in the English language, also appearing in words like âelectricityâ, âpublicityâ and âcapacityâ; âityâ is also a common letter cluster. âTigersâ, on the other hand, is a unique letter cluster. The very âcommonnessâ that Dr Allam decries actually increases fluency. The article also talks about rebranding and the impact on linguistic fluency. This concerns both phonological simplicity (does it sound correct?) and lexical simplicity (is it easy to say?). Though this is a âsubjective experience of ease with which people process informationâ it seems clear that in this respect Hull City is more fluent than both Hull City Tigers and Hull Tigers. OMITTED EXPRESSIONS A further aspect of fluency is the length of a name. In the article, the authors suggest that for the purposes of analysis we should first âremove expressions that are part of the legal name but are often omitted when referring to the companyâ, such as Co, Corp, Inc, Ltd, LLC, and FSB. The acronym AFC is clearly just such an expression â it is already habitually omitted when referring to the club in an informal context. They similarly suggest dropping conjunctions such as and/or/the. If we accept that the principles set out in the paper can be applied to football, in its current form Hull City (eight letters) is actually the fifth most investable Premier League team, with Fulham (six letters), Arsenal (seven), Chelsea (seven) and Everton (seven) being the only shorter team names. Rebranding to Hull Tigers (ten letters) sees us slip further down the fluency table to join Aston Villa (ten), behind Liverpool (eight) and Stoke City (nine). CONCLUSION There is little to be gained by trying to stretch this theory further by applying it to an unintended target. The application of this hypothesis to the company name or team name of an English Premier League football club is sure to descend into farce. The bottom line for this analysis is that the very renaming or âname shorteningâ proposed by Dr Allam actually has the opposite result to the course of action recommended by the paper cited as its justification. By any measure of the theory, changing to Hull City Tigers or Hull Tigers makes the âfluency valueâ worse. Far from supporting Dr Allamâs case, this paper actually contradicts it. Chris Cooper is a partner with a global consulting firm, visiting professor for the Buckingham University Business School, co-author of Winning By Design, and author of The Little Book Of Lean.
I thought we had finally left this nonsense behind. Does anybody care about the profitability/fluency of the name? It's about Allam not having the moral authority to change the name - regardless of whether the alternative would be 'better' or not.
Personally, I appreciate the posting of this. We finally have something from a professional position of knowledge that supports what we have been saying for some time.
Why don't you and others, with your 'spoiler' attitude and comments, set up your own pressure group? [A suggestion: you could name it 'The Only Way is Assem' (TOWIA)......] You could then have your own platform, where you could bluster and pontificate, instead of attempting to derail what is a very serious matter to a lot of City fans.
All the press release threads have 'CTWD' at the start of them, so those who aren't interested know not to open them, it's not a complicated system.
The original post went right over my head. If this is any help, I went into my local Bowls Club for a meal on Saturday night wearing the current Hull City shirt. There are a number of ex-pats in there many of whom are familiar with "Hull City afc" who shouted out "Carn (Oz slang for 'come on') the Tigers"! as I walked by. Today I walked in with the shirt below which has no writing on it whatsoever and they again all shouted "Carn the Tigers"! with many asking if this was the new shirt. I believe that Hull City will always be associated with the "Tiger" symbol and if there is money to be made by re-branding the Club as "Hull Tigers" then I also believe that the Club will have no option but to follow this avenue. The money from 'sponsorship' could make the difference in our affording a 'quality' player (and his wages) or not. We are a small Club in this league and will have to grab every quid we can to maintain our presence and Mr Allam's bean-counters are nobody's fools when it comes to the Club sustaining itself. please log in to view this image
Has he not recognised the correlation between success and overseas market attraction? It's no coincidence that most of the teams he talks about have a brimming trophy cabinet. It's got absolutely nothing to do with club name. Hull City Tigers or Hull Tigers will raise precisely **** all more revenue than remaining Hull City AFC.
Oh, TigerRoo - if you'd walked into your Bowls Club wearing that shirt and they didn't know you were a City fan, then how do you reckon they would have reacted? ()
I'm surprised you weren't locked up wearing that. Puts me in mind of a Not The Nine O'Clock News sketch.
This is Oz mate - we rarely 'stand on ceremony' here. I recently attended a lovely wedding where the best man had a suit and tie on but was wearing 'flip-flaps' (you call them thongs I think). My "Tiger" shirt would be considered pretty conservative here compared with those that bear the large number 69 with "Breakfast of Champions" written underneath. My favourite was one I saw in the USA with a huge Tomahawk on it with the words "Custer had it Coming" written underneath.
I think that would defeat the object. Clearly we have to be brow-beaten with this stuff constantly. Whether that convinces more people or has the opposite effect is debatable.
I almost laughed this reply off until I realised how much serious research you had done to come to these conclusions.
Just trying to help the cause boss. Afterall you mods fully agree with only one topic of conversation on here don't you?