Indeed there is. Seems not everyone on here agrees with you. Is that ok?
An Open Letter to Hull City AFC
- Thread starter originallambrettaman
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Indeed there is. Seems not everyone on here agrees with you. Is that ok?
You're actually having a different argument to the point I've made. You're actually supporting my argument.
Just to clarify for late comers, my point is more about being misled. The fact you don't think the name change is a bad idea, seems to point you thinking the name change is happening, which contradicts what the club are saying, so you seem to agree we're being misled.
Cheers for your support.
You're actually having a different argument to the point I've made. You're actually supporting my argument.
Just to clarify for late comers, my point is more about being misled. The fact you don't think the name change is a bad idea, seems to point you thinking the name change is happening, which contradicts what the club are saying, so you seem to agree we're being misled.
Cheers for your support.
Unfortunately you have misunderstood. If I may clarify, I don't care. I don't think it is about to happen, but if it does it will make no difference to me. I cannot see that the vast majority of fans care much either way. I have stated on here many times that by preference I would rather it did not change, but I don't understand why you are so bothered.
I don't support your position, I just don't care that much.
If the name change happens tomorrow do you expect the KC to be empty every home game?
If not that would rather suggest most people agree with me.
Will you stop going?
It would suggest nothing of the sort.
It will just prove, once again, that people love their football clubs so much, that they'll put up with any old ****.
If ridiculously high ticket prices and being treated like a criminal at away games doesn't stop them, a name change won't either.
So rather than supporting it, you're just using a lot of words to show your apathy. That seems fair enough, but whether you realise it or not, by claiming the name change doesn't matter, you are ARE in effect arguing the self and same point I'm making, that we are being misled.
I struggle with the logic of you thinking people still going to the KC or not is a measure of support for the argument you claim you're not having.
It's a silly and pointless question and nothing to do with the point I'm making.
We'll ALL stop going one day.
It might prove that to you. To me it proves people are more interested in their team then they are in a minor name change designed to bring funds in.
I don't agree that is pointless. People go to watch their team, not to argue about the name. I would suggest this whole debate is silly and pointless unless the name change actually happens and if it does we will either have the opportunity to debate it and disagree with it if we choose, or we will simply be told by the owners that it is happening. Either way the stadium will be filled faster if we have secured extra funds for team improvement.
I'm sorry we disagree on this matter, and I respect your views, but you won't shout me down. People who disagree with you are entitled to say so on here. That is, surely, the whole point of this forum?
It's called debate and it's what forums are used for and it's exactly what we're doing.
I'm not trying to shout you down. You just seem hell bent on having an argument with me on a point I haven't made.
As do you with me.
For the avoidance of doubt, perhaps you would spell out for me exactly what point you are making.
DMD's point isn't the name change - rather, it's about the way the club is going about it: sneaking it in and denying its intentions.
(If I read him right).
IF it happened (which I currently doubt) the suggestion seems to be that it would make us more attractive to sponsors/supporters in the East. I cannot think of any other reason the club would do it. If the evidence, or balance of probabilities, indicate that no extra funds would be generated then I doubt the club would do it.
Personally I think it would not attract any real support, I see no benefit in doing it, and, if asked, would vote against it. But if it does happen I will still be more interested in who we are signing then I am about a minor name change.
Ah, fair enough. That I agree with. I think if the club have the intention they should tell us. Unfortunately, like most conspiracy theories, it is very difficult for them to prove a negative. NT has said that it is not in their plans. I hope he is being truthful.
If not then he will lose all credibility over an issue that seems to me unimportant.
What about if the name change damaged the chances of generating income from other markets?
As I believe it would. You don't scrap 109 years of history, that's exactly what you try to get supporters outside of the UK to buy into.
I don't believe for a second that this is about an attempt to generate income from the East, I think this is about Assem making his mark on the club just because he can and I don't think that's a good enough reason.