But they use it else where, whats your point. There will always be some places that will not like or buy into it.
You are right. Andrex don't want a tiger as a mascot, the tag line 'it will tear your arse to shreads' would not work. It all depends what image you are going for.
My point is, that allegedly we need to change our name to Tigers to appeal to the Asian market, when the world biggest petroleum company, who have a brand associated with a tiger, don't use that brand in Asia.
They can have advertising campaigns, they use the animals to help portray an image. We can't have adverts on television asking for people to support us. Our advertising is through the league we are in. By adding it to our name it will be seen more frequently and potentially improve our brand. (I dont know if it will or not)
Anyone who buys something because of a free stuffed animal is insane IMO. Buy what YOU want, and NOT what a stupid advert tells you to buy.
Does Assem not realise councillors can be voted out? His tactic to get back at Geraghty from the start should have been to publicly make a fuss about how such people are holding the progress of the city back, and watch as May elections arrive...
Thanks for the response. If we can't use TV advertising (agreed) then we should use the most visible symbol possible which surely is the strip and badge? How long do Asians spend staring at the league table? We know that the playing kit is the most powerful place to advertise. We've got a tiger on the kit and the words 'The Tigers'. That's far more effective than putting it in the name. On top of all this, the most important point is that Ehab and Assem are even less convincing than the argument you're making. They have the full information and the motivation to want to convince us that they're right, yet despite their position the best they can come up with is Everton and McCoys, neither of which support the name change. The fact that they can't come up with anything more convincing than that tells us all we need to know. Even if you had some wonderful business case it would still be the case that the Allams clearly don't, otherwise they'd have demonstrated it by now. When questioned they get defensive and say 'I don't have to prove myself to anyone'. Instead of concinving argument they have relied on cheating, lying and blackmail and that is the most condemning thing. If they had a decent argument they wouldn't have had to stoop so low. He actually came up with a good idea which was to request an investigation into Geraghty's conduct whereby if he (Allam) was proven to be wrong he would put a significant sum into a local charity and if he was right he simply wanted Geraghty/the council to admit it. That would have been a good route to go down but he didn't publicise it and as far as I know he never got a response. I wouldn't be surprised if the council never even knew. Instead he focused on changing the name of his and our football club to try and upset them, an organisation who really couldn't give less of a **** about football.
Presumably because the tiger is a very common symbol in China and as they want to promote themselves as a premium American petroleum/oil company, they wanted to set themselves apart.
I'm not sure you'd be as glad as you think. It sounds tacky and **** because rather than being what we're used to it sounds Americanised, and American sport is full of cheap tacky **** to distract people away from the fact an hour long game takes several hours to play because they're mincing about working out in which square inch of the pitch they're going to run into each other next rather just than getting on with the game. If it had been Hull Tigers from 1904 through to today we'd all be used to it and it wouldn't feel like it was an americanised name so that connection wouldn't be getting made. Plus, if you felt the name was cheap and tacky in that form despite it being the original name then you'd have been less likely to support the club in the first place, so it changing to a name you preferred wouldn't really be something for you to look on either way. There is a point here, why can't we use TV advertising? Totesport used us in their instore TV adverts when we had them as sponsor (that was weird going in the bookies in Dunfermline and Hull City stuff being plastered on the screens and posters) and had better odds on us than other bookies. If you look at the style of the Paddy Power in play adverts on TV, why couldn't we pair up with an Asian bookie (they love their gambling scams out there) and have TV adverts shared between us? Use footage of the best goals we've scored, and the best results we've had, and the bookie can overlay the footage with how much punters could have won by betting on those events and encouraging them to take part in gambling on upcoming games. Constantly showing goals like Aluko's at Newcastle, the 3-1 vs Liverpool, etc would be good for our brand out there and get people thinking we might actually be worth watching. And there's no additional cost to anybody, because presumably the bookies are advertising themselves anyway, we're just providing them with the rights to use the footage. Problem is, unless the bookies in Asia are more elitist in nature the name change would actually harm it, unless it's just because I can't imagine Ray Winstone referring to us as anything other than just Hull or The Tigers in an advert because a full name is too formal a thing for him to use.
