really? OMG. You need to learn a little about the basic history of the game; this man played quite a part in the shaping of modern football.
CBK - you seem to be under the illusion that the local fan base matter. As a percentage of income they have become quite small. Just one example is live games being broadcast live around the world to millions. Not the ones we can also see here in the UK, but every game every weekend is televised somewhere -- that reach is enormous. Just pick up a very, very small percentage of that audience and it will dwarf the local support spend. So why not Tigers for the Asian Tiger markets. I don't like it, but local supporters do not have the sway they once had.
Doesn't matter how many times Hull are shown on TV in the far east, their cut of the TV money stays the same (as does other clubs). You only make money in the far east by selling merchandise or being invited to play out there pre-season (but its only Man U, Liverpool, arsenal, chelsea who get paid big bucks, clubs like Pompey got **** all when they played in china... don't exactly hear of thousands of Chinese Pompey fans do you??) As the blog I linked to said, do you think fans in the far east are that thick to follow a football team (if they don't already) just because they have "tiger" in the name?!? They follow the big teams, the ones that win things, always have, always will. Is doing all this for sod all monetary gain worth pissing off the loyal local fans who support the club through thick & thin and do pump the most money into it?
The FA plan to consult fan groups about Hull name change. Think they are just trying to look like the good guys...can't see that they will refuse the name change.
If you really think he would be doing it for "sod all monetary gain" then you're very naive. Yes, pissing off a few idiot fans doesn't matter if you increase your revenue. People from different cultures that have no idea about football just might be swayed by something like tigers in the name. Just because it's incomprehensible to you that it would affect who you support, doesn't mean that you're right. I bet any money you can't prove that it "won't make a difference". I also bet any money that hulls chairman has market research to prove that it will.
CBK - you again bring it back to fans and fans buying things. As I was trying to allude to in my previous post; fans are a byproduct. The new or future revenue is all about the marketing. Yes, the more successful you are, the more coverage you will get. Merchandising is good but is insignificant to the audience or outreach. Why is Facebook valued so highly? It's the audience not the content. Live coverage reaches millions more abroad than at home - pure guess work but what would've reasonable multiple,- factor of ten or 100 or 1000 times more? Formula 1 teams income is generated by what? Certainly not the fans themselves. Ryanair's business model at the beginning was not focused on making money from passenger ticket sales. It was the destination's local councils footing the bill. Revenue streams will not be like they used to be. If a business can make themselves more attractive to a market, they will do so. Revenue is not what it used to be. The business model is changing. Advertising, investments have possibly a higher priority than John Smith loyal team supporter of thirty years. As I said, I don't like it and hopefully I am wrong. However, jingoism does account for a fair bit of marketing and shouldn't be disregarded flippantly as a load of tosh.
Well put......commercial viability through and through....it is the way of the future and the only the way clubs will make it in the big time. All avenues have got to be explored...........
Thought you had proof that football clubs changing names or logos increase their revenue? Not provided it yet have you? Why do you follow football if there are so many "idiot fans"? Or do you only follow it from the comfort of your sofa?
If advertising increases revenue significantly, why couldn't even Saints find a new shirt sponsor in the summer? Believe you me, they were whoring themselves around a hell of a lot. Perhaps we should have changed our name to Southampton Dragons eh? I am not surprised at some of your reactions. Why do you even bother following a team if you don't care about anything it stands for, its heritage, its history, its name, where it plays?
I love Saints and am proud of it's heritage, but the most important thing is how we are now and our future. I care about our results and financial stability...I care that we are known for our probity and that our fans are decent people who behave well. I care that we are admired for our Academy and as a playing side. Stripes are way down the list and, though I would prefer not to have a name change, it matters little compared to everything else.
Where is the suggestion by any of the fans, that do not see it your way, that they are not passionate about what the club stands for...it's history or any of those things. In this you are totally barking up the wrong tree. The difference is they have a more open view and are more prone to new idea's. Look around you CBK, not only at football, younger peoples idea's have been brought forward and tried, not all successfully it is true...but tried none the less. May be not in your eyes, but the vast majority does perhaps improve things including new technology. They are still just as passionate as you or I but with a different view.
No, I'm not trawling the internet to find proof as I'm not that interested in convincing you. But EVERY club is changing in some way, even the massive ones so there must be a reason behind it. And I go to every home game and as many away games as possible, and I have supported saints for my whole life thank you very much. Just because I don't agree with your old school way of thinking doesn't make me an armchair fan. If you were in charge we would still have Adkins, Chaplow and Hammond would be our midfield and Jaidi would be at Centre back. History, tradition and sentiment will only take a club so far.
Ouch! Don't think anyone has dissed their club about heritage etc. We used to play in stripes....but we didn't at the beginning and we don't now!! The simple matter is, a business has to grow and the limited pool of local supporters is well, er, limiting. Shirt sponsorship is but one arrow and you are unlikely to get instant results. We are up against the big boys now and if we can mix it we have a better chance. Who knows, having a plain shirt may just swing it next time. As I have started several times, not exactly supporting this business stance just reflecting on it. I happen to agree there is a lot of BS concerning all this, but to the masses who do not come from round here a name can be difference, the way the shirt looks too.
And why the business model is changing: http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/ It's easy to get bogged down in the main article but there are snippets concerning global commercial interests.
True, without him footballers might be earning a sensible salary and we could all afford to attend matches and get Sky!
How do we know he is changing it to get more revenue etc? He could just be a owner with a massive ego.
