Reasons for changing the name

  • 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
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
It's taken you a lot of words to realise you have no argument, but you got there in the end.

The reasons for not changing have been mentioned in several other threads, but surely, with all the posts against the name change, somebody can offer a benefit in using Hull Tigers over Hull City AFC?
Click to expand...

it is personal preference, no one can say for business reasons cos in truth they don't know.
I think we should see what it does bring.. the emotive argument is mainly by old people anyway, they don't like change anyhow, I think they just like to feel safe.
Fortunately they will be dying off soon.
 
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
The study the owner commissioned to find out if the name change would be beneficial is not yet completed. From someone that took part in an element of it, it looked unlikely that it would find that it would be successful. Other campaigns that followed similar lines failed.

Perhaps the campaign is the best thing to help the owners dilemma?

So, anyone with a reason the name change would benefit the club?
Click to expand...

This has to be the most pointless and loaded thread I have seen on here. One poster is dictating what should be said, then judging them by his own biased viewpoint and ignoring anything that challenges his own stance.

Do we wish to keep the current owners who own and fund the club? If so, he has made it very clear that name-change is an essential part of that. So, depending on your viewpoint, continued ownership and security is an absolute benefit of name-change.

What is this study that has been commissioned and what bearing can it possibly have on your argument if it is incomplete? I asked earlier, somewhere; what other campaigns have there been that are similar to our own (identity changes of PL football clubs)? Come on, follow your own advice and state your case clearly, as it is you that has introduced it to this very prescribed and foolish thread.
 
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
I doubt it. The potential income isn't about kit sales to current fans, it's supposedly about expanding the whole commercial side to a new market.

However, none of that is a justification in favour of the name change. As yet, I've still to see one.
Click to expand...

It has already been stated on other namechange posts that the only way that Hull City is going to market replica kits etc anywhere else but in the local area is by performance on the pitch and I am afraid if Mr Allam thinks anything else but that is going to increase our marketing potential I am afraid I would have to question his business sense.
 
PattyNchips2 said:
it is personal preference, no one can say for business reasons cos in truth they don't know.
I think we should see what it does bring.. the emotive argument is mainly by old people anyway, they don't like change anyhow, I think they just like to feel safe.
Fortunately they will be dying off soon.
Click to expand...


There are stupid people, there are very stupid people, extremely stupid people, then there are people like patty(sic)n chips.

Why not drop Hull in favour of Kingston, which is actually the name of the city and and the river it is on? Seeing as it represents the whole city and unites them, let's call them United. The most successful English clubs have worn red, so that's the colour sorted out. So, there we have it, we will be Kingston United playing in red and white. Job's a good un and success is nailed on.

You can forgive Craig some of his half-baked thoughts on this as he is a callow youth with no experience of life and still as time to learn. But what is your excuse?
 
Fez said:
This has to be the most pointless and loaded thread I have seen on here. One poster is dictating what should be said, then judging them by his own biased viewpoint and ignoring anything that challenges his own stance.

Do we wish to keep the current owners who own and fund the club? If so, he has made it very clear that name-change is an essential part of that. So, depending on your viewpoint, continued ownership and security is an absolute benefit of name-change.

What is this study that has been commissioned and what bearing can it possibly have on your argument if it is incomplete? I asked earlier, somewhere; what other campaigns have there been that are similar to our own (identity changes of PL football clubs)? Come on, follow your own advice and state your case clearly, as it is you that has introduced it to this very prescribed and foolish thread.
Click to expand...

Which other PL clubs have proposed changing their names? I can't think of any and unless you can your question is rather stupid as there won't be any campaigns to compare to.

If name changing is a good idea doesn't everyone think it would have been happening regularly?
 
Castro's Coffin said:
There are stupid people, there are very stupid people, extremely stupid people, then there are people like patty(sic)n chips.

Why not drop Hull in favour of Kingston, which is actually the name of the city and and the river it is on? Seeing as it represents the whole city and unites them, let's call them United. The most successful English clubs have worn red, so that's the colour sorted out. So, there we have it, we will be Kingston United playing in red and white. Job's a good un and success is nailed on.

You can forgive Craig some of his half-baked thoughts on this as he is a callow youth with no experience of life and still as time to learn. But what is your excuse?
Click to expand...

<laugh> <laugh> <laugh> I'm fifty next month!!
BTW Kingston Utd Mmm nice.
 
PattyNchips2 said:
I am not a successful businessman, IF I could answer that question - Id be rich.
Now let me ask you a question, apart from emotive reasons, what justifiable reason do you have for believing that the name change will be detrimental to Hull City?
Click to expand...

And he could answer with the same reply as you. One of Allams reasons for the change is because the name is shorter, he has therefore shown in a recent interview that it is a load of bollocks by saying if he owned Manchester City he would rename Manchester Hunter which is two letters longer. It therefore proves that the only justification for the namechange is because Allam has spit his dummy out with Hull Council, there is therefore no justification for the name change what so ever.
 
PattyNchips2 said:
I have offered some and people throw emotive **** at me so I can't win.
Click to expand...

No what you offered was guesses because you haven't a crystal ball. I have been to loads of places on this planet through work and I can tell you this as a FACT, you only see Man Utd, Arsenel,Chelsea and Liverpool shirts in large numbers, with Man City shirts starting to make more appearences. The rest of the PL teams shirts are as rare as Rocking Horse ****
 
merchantman5 said:
No what you offered was guesses because you haven't a crystal ball. I have been to loads of places on this planet through work and I can tell you this as a FACT, you only see Man Utd, Arsenel,Chelsea and Liverpool shirts in large numbers, with Man City shirts starting to make more appearences. The rest of the PL teams shirts are as rare as Rocking Horse ****
Click to expand...

but all anyone can offer is guesses.. UNLESS we win the PL title more times than Man U have - we wont sell nearly enough shirts in the worlds markets
 
the truth is that people only buy shirts of a successful team and those fans don't care whether we are called Hull City AC or even Hull Tigers.
 
Castro's Coffin said:
There are stupid people, there are very stupid people, extremely stupid people, then there are people like patty(sic)n chips.

Why not drop Hull in favour of Kingston, which is actually the name of the city and and the river it is on? Seeing as it represents the whole city and unites them, let's call them United. The most successful English clubs have worn red, so that's the colour sorted out. So, there we have it, we will be Kingston United playing in red and white. Job's a good un and success is nailed on.

You can forgive Craig some of his half-baked thoughts on this as he is a callow youth with no experience of life and still as time to learn. But what is your excuse?
Click to expand...

and then there are sheep.
 
Craig in Nottingham said:
From where I'm sitting we have a lot of loud voices on the opposition side, but no physical evidence of great numbers. The protest at the ground for instance wasn't well attended even though it was well publicised - Why?

I didn't answer your question on the nickname because I thought the answer was obvious - Our nickname will always be the Tigers. The fact that it could also be part of our name is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Neither Hull nor City is our nickname because they are part of our official name. Both are used by our supporters. One more often then the other. If Tigers becomes part of our official name it ceases to be a nickname. Spurs is a nickname because it is an abbreviation of Hotspur. Simple really. So, the club either doesn't have a nickname or we establish a new one.

The last protest is in the past. There are a number of reasons for the attendance. I'm sure the campaign will look at the reasons why the march didn't attract the numbers expected and at ways of including those people who don't want to march or miss the first 5 minutes of the match.

That water has flowed under the bridge.
 
before this descends any further into mud slinging - I was asked to offer evidence as to why a name change was such a good thing.
Unfortunately there is little evidence that I can offer - our shirt sales may improve, our merchandise sales may improve our worldwide appeal may improve.
In short, I offer the same evidence that you can offer to argue your case... except you can state emotional reasons as to why it shouldn't change..
like I said, I'm into the "suck it and see" camp
 
Castro's Coffin said:
There are stupid people, there are very stupid people, extremely stupid people, then there are people like patty(sic)n chips.

Why not drop Hull in favour of Kingston, which is actually the name of the city and and the river it is on? Seeing as it represents the whole city and unites them, let's call them United. The most successful English clubs have worn red, so that's the colour sorted out. So, there we have it, we will be Kingston United playing in red and white. Job's a good un and success is nailed on.

You can forgive Craig some of his half-baked thoughts on this as he is a callow youth with no experience of life and still as time to learn. But what is your excuse?
Click to expand...

I am stupid for having a personal opinion that isn't the same as yours?
I bet you get funny looks goosestepping around your neighbourhood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back