I'm not sure the Allams could afford MLS, dazzar. Off the top of my head NYC's franchise fee was $100m (though obviously that's skewed a bit because they're in New York), plus they'd have to build a Soccer Specific Stadium to even be considered.
That's why I mentioned a consortium. It is well known that there are groups of businessmen looking to buy a franchise in the MLS. The Allams could look to join a consortium already looking to buy, and just put in enough to own, say, 10% of the franchise as well as offering a 'partnership' with Hull City, like the MLS franchise becoming Hull City's sister team, wearing black and amber stripes and being called 'placename' Tigers. If it was done right like the Brooklyn Nets have done, and 'placename' Tigers becomes a popular multi-national brand, the Allams could then use it to promote Hull City to the world. Other points that would interest a consortium would mean our youngsters going there on loan, which helps cut costs on players, but is also beneficial to us, as they'd be getting vital experience.
I can't see them ever being involved in a consortium that they don't control 100%, and as they insist on the tiger being a marketable name in Asia they are seemingly ignoring potential markets in the US or anywhere else in the world.
On this ^^^^ point i agree with you. Nobody does at the moment. As someone said on the radio on friday night, the FA should give the Allams a 3 year window to try and make it work and if not then the club goes back to Hull City AFC. Until they are allowed to try nobody will ever know.
At the same time no-one will ever know if they could have made the name Hull City work even better. Surely that's the whole point of doing market research, to see whether an idea will work. They freely admit they've done none, they want to change the name then find a market in an area that looks on traditional English club names as historic and exotic.
No point in trying to explain that to Frog-in-a-Fog, Muff. (He either can't, or doesn't want to see it)
They haven't but the previous owners and the ones before them have been marketing the club as Hull City. So we do know how that works.
Nor that we had been £100m and in the premier league for the last 100 years. I think everyone agrees that City are in uncharted waters right now. The debate is about which course to sail. And whether faffing around with the name of the shop makes any difference.
Can he balls. He's had all this time and he's not produced anything to show we'd be successful marketing ourselves off the field. £1-2mill (£10m after 4 years) isn't worth selling out for. If we become Hull Tigers, we become a franchise. You can't suddenly change that. It will be hanging over the club for the rest of it's existence.
So are you suggesting that if we were known as Hull tigers from 1904 we would have been more successful? The point now is that we are in the Premier League with worldwide advertising being done for us. There is no evidence that a change of name will offer any financial benefits. Ehab was asked the question last week, whether there are any potential investors wanting to put money into Hull Tigers. He said no. There have been people involved in marketing that say it won't work, and people living or working in Asia that say it won't work. There are plenty of markets around the world where our current name can be marketed, especially local ones which are being ignored. The fact of the matter though, and it is indeed fact, that the primary reason for wanting to change our name is because of his spat with Hull City Council. Whether you don't believe it, or choose not to, is your perogative.
No we don't, unless all owners are the same, which they're not. On the other side the Allams may be as good at marketing Hull Tigers as they were last season at marketing Hull City, an increase in turnover (excluding parachute payments and transfer fees) of £35,000.
There is no other alternative as far as I am concerned. Its Hull City, Always was, always has been and ALWAYS SHOULD BE!!!!!
I'm not suggesting that at all. Someone suggested above that we will not know for sure if the name change will benefit the club without trying it. You argued that by saying we won't know if our current name would have worked if its changed. I am only saying that we know more about using our current name than the new one. We have been marketed as hull city for years.
Just a hypothetical question but if we had been Hull Tigers since 1904 and he wanted to change it to Hull City to bring it in line with other clubs, would we all still be up in arms about it? I'd be more than glad, the reason I don't want the name change to go through is just because Hull Tigers sounds cheap, tacky and ****.
Seems like teams in the MLS like 'CITY' though , because CITY indicates a football(soccer) team , TIGERS is more associated with baseball etc. New York City , common and worthless no doubt
I don't know if I could survive jumping off the Humber Bridge, but as there's a reasonable chance I won't, I'm not ****ing stupid enough to try it.
