Richard Garcia speaks out against the name change.
http://m.442.com.au/News/Article.aspx?CIID=368831
http://m.442.com.au/News/Article.aspx?CIID=368831
Obadiah:5872360 said:If Assem Allam wants a return on his full investment relegation will lead to problems, but there is a possibility that financially he would not be any worse off if he took his money out of the tv rights payments every season and left the club to rot. I haven't done the full figures, but I do think it could be a close run thing.
The bottom line is dependent on where the money has actually come from.
As for the FA, well lets see.
Yes he could take his money out, how much would be dependant upon his wage commitments and whether he could sell players. He could leave us to rot, but his gift was saving our club and as long as we are not in liquidation I wouldn't begrudge him the return of his money. I personally think him and his family are entitled to as much of their investment as they want.
The FA will make their decision in due course. All we as CTWD can do is make the best presentation we can.
As to the OSC. I don't see us in competition. They have held 3 consultation exercises all of which show a majority for keeping Hull City and a minority for Hull Tigers FC.
So what; who needs evidence? It's his club and on one can tell him what to do. But he can tell us. If he has run out of funds, most of us would respect that and say thanks for what you've done, we are still behind you. They call that loyalty - possibly not a cultural aspect of Egyptians.
Why not? It's his money, his club; surely he is entitled to ask reasonable qualifying questions before he invests further money he cannot afford? That's the problem with much of this argument, the logic had gone out of the window and has been replaced by narrow-minded singlemindessness ( If there is not such a word then there should be)
I have no real issue (never said so) with a season ticket ballot - it would not include me - but I have said and do believe that the FA know exactly how they will handle it - just as I believe they know their response.
I wish to see some form of minutes published; some of what come out in an ugly way come of been done much better. There is always one benefit of 'speaking the truth and shaming the devil' and that is that you have nothing to hide, no reason to avoid honest questions and, you know, it puts the real villain on a back-off.
What information do you need, when by and in what bloody language. Braille can be arranged where appropriate. How more lies does he have to tell before you join his 'Truely-Insincere Club'?
We aren't in competition. I'm involved with the OSC and everyone else that I'm aware of being involved supports CTWD. The only thing about the OSC is the need to be neutral for obvious reasons, but the people who make it up are very much anti name change, like everyone in the real world is.
One thing that keeps getting forgotten is that the one investor any business always needs to keep on the right side of is the one whose already has put his hands in his pocket.
DMD,
The HCSS thing is nothing to do with the name change. It's to do with watching Hull City play whilst living down South. No competition, most of those who are involved already will be members of both anyway.
As for CTWD, I challenge what is posted on here if its not quite right it should be. No one can claim that the majority of Hull City fans are against the name change and support that with figures. Of those who respond the majority are against the change. The call for season pass holders to vote would be the same result. Only 10% would respond and the problem is that the 90% who do not vote will be hijacked by Assem Allam who will say that they do not care enough to vote and so they do not care about the name change.
This problem of apathy is well known in the football world. Overcoming it and getting supporter involvement is very difficult.
If I wasn't bothered about retaining the name, I wouldn't bother finding fault with what gets posted. You can be certain that every post on every forum is read by someone in Allamhouse. Every mis leading post is noted and recorded.
I do have what I think is a solution or possible solution, but I doubt that either CTWD or Assem Allam will accept it.
Hull City Tigers
A compromise. Keep City and add Tigers. It's not ideal but what is?
Oh, and you can ram Hull City Tigers. If the issue is "The Tigers" we've got that ready and available to use. Changing it to that is as daft and pointless as Hull Tigers is.
Most are happy with Hull City AFC "The Tigers", it's what we're watching so why **** about?
originallambrettaman:5873622 said:Oh, and you can ram Hull City Tigers. If the issue is "The Tigers" we've got that ready and available to use. Changing it to that is as daft and pointless as Hull Tigers is.
Most are happy with Hull City AFC "The Tigers", it's what we're watching so why **** about?
This.
Omega, we're almost all aware of the points you raise, personalley, I expect the people reviewing the decision to be aware of it too, it's hardly unique as most surveys need consideration of the sample size. Labouring the point doesn't achieve anything at all in my view.
I also think the number's game is a red herring. Popular support or opposition is a factor, but if it's weight of numbers, the pro name change group has one vote so far, the apathetic should be treat with caution as it's arguable if they'll hang about in the future. (not saying they won't only that it's arguable)
The key decisions will be based on rules and points of football law and what the other football clubs think of the change of tradition v Clubs being free to make business decisions.
Oh, and you can ram Hull City Tigers. If the issue is "The Tigers" we've got that ready and available to use. Changing it to that is as daft and pointless as Hull Tigers is.
Most are happy with Hull City AFC "The Tigers", it's what we're watching so why **** about?
It's not just me labouring the point though is it. The FA want wider consultation by all groups involved.
Has the CTWD group polled its members. You see it could be argued that since CTWD has publically stated that it intends to become a supporters trust, some may have joined in order to be involved in that. ****ish I know but when asked if you are a single objective group you say no we have broader aims. That could be used to suggest that not all of your members would be against the name being changed to Hull City Tigers. You don't know because you haven't asked but you have become a group with wider objectives. It's a minefield and I am just a know nowt but **** me when millions of pounds are on the table you can bet that there isn't going to be a stone unturned in finding fault.
I will make this my last post on the subject, as it is obvious that for some its you are ether with us or agin us and to be honest as CTWD never post anything wrong on here and are whiter than white what's the point.
The biggest forum by a mile isn't represented is it. It is simply being used as a conduit for CTWD.
Friday.......... Lets see what happens on Friday eh.
It's not just me labouring the point though is it. The FA want wider consultation by all groups involved.
Has the CTWD group polled its members. You see it could be argued that since CTWD has publically stated that it intends to become a supporters trust, some may have joined in order to be involved in that. ****ish I know but when asked if you are a single objective group you say no we have broader aims. That could be used to suggest that not all of your members would be against the name being changed to Hull City Tigers. You don't know because you haven't asked but you have become a group with wider objectives. It's a minefield and I am just a know nowt but **** me when millions of pounds are on the table you can bet that there isn't going to be a stone unturned in finding fault.
I will make this my last post on the subject, as it is obvious that for some its you are ether with us or agin us and to be honest as CTWD never post anything wrong on here and are whiter than white what's the point.
The biggest forum by a mile isn't represented is it. It is simply being used as a conduit for CTWD.
Friday.......... Lets see what happens on Friday eh.
Has the CTWD group polled its members. You see it could be argued that since CTWD has publically stated that it intends to become a supporters trust, some may have joined in order to be involved in that.
The biggest forum by a mile isn't represented is it. It is simply being used as a conduit for CTWD.
Ricardo:
A combination of the information already out there, the disinformation already out there and the expert views of sport and marketing professionals, coupled with your own judgment really should have given you enough direction to jump down off that fence and fully support CTWD or not - you with-hold membership, why?
The only decision, of Allam's, that I object to, is the one he made change the club's name to Hull Tigers; using lies, deceit and manipulation as his process.
The reason you have not been told what the benefits are is because there aren't any!! Some may be conjured up as a result of name-change, but I believe it will be hogwash aimed at the easily fooled.
Because I remain open to the possibility, however remote, that there is information not yet known which may make me believe that it is in the best interests of the club to change the name. That may not apply to this situation, but to one in the future which we've not even seen the start of yet.
I am not too sure I can make sense of that and I am trying very hard to. I am open to the possibility that there may be some remote (very, very remote chance) that Allam will come up with some reason why the name-change is advantageous to the club. I find it very unlikely, as I have heard, from his own mouth, his reasons for it and they are total, ignorant and insulting bullshit. When someone is blatantly bullshitting me I get off the fence so I can tackle it before it is too late. Some of us feel the need to compensate for fence-sitters such as yourself; here and now at least, while you ponder what situation in what future exactly? Sorry Ricardo, but that is really bizarre. Do you live in Filey? (not a serious question)
Likewise, which is why I want to remain open to the potential that there's something we don't know yet. I can see the reasoning behind everything else, even with Barmby I was questioning his media handling long before he finally got himself in trouble with it. If you can see and understand the reasoning behind everything someone has done then you have to assume when they do something you don't understand that there's something you're not being told.
Or you could try thinking they are taking you for a fool; I suggest you try this one.
Likewise, I don't think there's any benefits at this time, certainly not that are known about by AA rather than just hoped for, I'm just open to being shown that I've missed something if I have. I'd rather approach the situation from an "explain it to me then" position than a "you're definitely wrong" one. The silence is pretty telling though.