So a strategy that appears to mislead the listener is acceptable is it? Thompson was asked whether it was the intention to to call the club Hull City Tigers. His response,on several occasions, was NO.The playing side was Hull City and the commercial side was Hull City Tigers.Whilst he can't control the questions he does control the answer. Do you consider his answer misleading and what benefit is it to the standing of the club if 3 weeks later that information given on air is reversed?
Premier league have not said "no" .. they have said that no approach has even been made to do with the football team name
First phase of stakeholder management. Categorise your stakeholders in terms of how important they are in terms of achieving your objective. The categorisation will not have been "how important are fans to the club" because clearly they will have scored maximum on impact and influence. But they will have been given a different score in terms of "Our goal is to change the brand". Stage 2 - Manage your stakeholders. In terms of the change cycle, us fans are currently in the "shock", "denial", "anger" stage.... next will be depression and hopefully by the time we get to Norwich after getting a surprise point at Stamford Bridge, we will be moved into the "acceptance" stage. They do not technically need us to move into the "integration" stage but this is where other stakeholders such as Sky, BBC, HDM etc have to be.
so therefore the name change cannot go ahead. They want to see evidence of consultation with fans before it does. Until then, the Premier League do not acknowledge Hull Tigers and will use Hull City AFC. Which is NO.
Given the directors and senior management weren't in agreement, I suspect you're crediting them with following a theory they don't use.
I didn't say that you you thought it was acceptable. I was asking you do you think it acceptable and do you think Thompson's response was misleading?
Putting myself in Nick Thompsons place, he will have been aware of the plans but as a managing director you have a corporate responsibility first and foremost to do what's right for the company. As the company were not yet in a position to announce their plans, his hands were tied. I suspect that if you go back and replay the Radio Humberside interview, although on the face of it, it will have sounded like a categorical denial, you will probably find he threw in some politician caveats that will get him out of jail now that the news has broken.
HDM report "But, speaking on tonight’s edition of SportsTalk on Radio Humberside, Thompson was adamant that there is no ‘grand plan’ to change the name which the club has had for the past 109 years. When asked if there was a plan to change the club’s name, he said: “No. The business name was changed this year to Hull City Tigers. “We never talk about Hull City AFC, we talk about Hull City, we talk about the Tigers, we talk about black and amber. “In terms of the football club, it is Hull City and it is an associated football club. In terms of the business, the business is Hull City Tigers. “Most companies will have the name of the business entity which owns the company on the building, that’s what we have done at the training ground. “If we talk about football-related things, it’s Hull City. If we talk about business-related items, it’s Hull City Tigers". Not many caveats there then!!!!
You are thinking how a sensible organisation would do things. You seem to ignore the lies and the correcting statement which shows the bumbling incompetence.
This is bullshit. The Allams are nothing like other businessmen and Hull City is nothing like a normal business. They do what they want, how they want to. Nothing anyone else says will influence the Allams' decision-making. To credit them with having all of this worked out in advance, when in reality they haven't even gone through the proper preparations to ensure their name change happens, is ridiculous. They haven't got a clue what they're doing, and they're making it up as they go along. They've been doing that for ages. A year ago Papa told the OSC press officer, a friend of mine, that we wouldn't be doing any scouting any more because all of the information you need on players is available on the internet. I don't think he ended up going through with that nonsense thanks to SB, but it's yet another example of how out of touch our owners really are with the football world.
Seems not. It would be good to post up the Radio Humberside interview on Sports Talk though because I'm pretty sure when asked about future plans, he was more vague.
Twelve minutes in to the WHCR the guy from the OSC mentions meetings they've been having with the Club this week which resulted in the Club deciding to bring in Hull University to carry out a study on branding and marketing. Some strategy. It's more about the Council spat.
Of course I could be wrong, and the Allams and Nick Thompson could just be making it up as they go along, but this incompetence theory does not seem to stack up with the success of Allam's other company, or the fact that Nick Thompson was in charge of KCs marketing.
Oh hang on.... KC... public relations disaster with consumers.... may be I just need to re-think my assumptions.
From Nick Thompsons linked in page... My strong suits are 1. Creating growth - ARPU growth & customer acquisition 2. Developing & revitalising brands 3. Driving culture & change programmes
