But they've heard the business proposal and you haven't, making your position weak beyond serious consideration.
Ehab says we've got sponsors/investors approaching US now instead of the other way round. Then he says it's not something that will yield immediate results, it's a longer term strategy. Even HE doesn't agree with himself.
No other fans of other clubs or the media will care about our name change in the long run. I have not contradicted myself. He has not been allowed to explore the name change. That is what he is trying to do.
What are the facts then? Go on make your point. You love postng these little cheap arguments but never follow them through. Come on what facts are being missed leading to AA being unfairly portrayed as a villain? We shouldn't still be talking about this. Tue vast majority of us have said all along there's no way it'd make money, all the experts have said the same and now the FA, after having the full case made to them by the club, have said the exact same thing. It's a **** idea it always was and it's only a need to be contrary that would compel someone to argue with that.
Not now it's been shown for what it is, but plenty were concerned at the implications for their own clubs, and football in general.7 He HAS been allowed to fully explore the name change. He simply chose not to. Arguably because even a cursory glance shows it's a non-starter.
No matter what side your on Im sure everyone likes our Tiger identity. Its our badge our colors its everything about our club without it we would be just another City. I we had to lose one association it would be city. The only thing i agree with CTWD is that an owner shouldn't force his views, other than that Im 100% behind the Allams. I also feel like the "no" campaign is tainting peoples views of our Tiger association which is as much if not a bigger part of our club than city. If you take away the Tiger from our club we have nothing, take away city and??
Again this is true, my position is weak. I have no influence. I have heard his reasons and i agree that it might work. Am i not entitled to this opinion.
Nobody's saying you're not entitled to that opinion, but people are also entitled to question that opinion and listen to any justification you may choose to offer. As yet, the justification you offer, is the Allams position, which has been rejected by the people that viewed and considered it.
You give your reason why you agree with the name change, not just because you agree with the owner. And I dont want to hear you say its cos I need my weekly fix of ****ing over Stevie G at the KC......and I will tell you why you are a prick!
