ctwd now out in the open

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
"In August 2012, Fraser & Neave has accepted an offer from Heineken to acquire its stake in APB for US$4.1 billion.[5] Shareholders approved the deal during the extraordinary general meeting held on September 28, 2012"

The company that owns the Tiger Beer brand are worth billions. They could buy City out of their loose change and, after the Wimbledon / MK Dons switch, simply re-brand City "Tigers" and base them anywhere they wanted in England and how much would they care what CTWD or hip flask man thought about it? They could sell more sponsorship to other Tiger brands ... it could be a nice little earner ... a new, huge stadium west of Hull (selling Tiger Beer, brewed in Edinburgh) offering easier access to Premier League football starved folk from West Yorkshire plus loyal Tigers fans from Hull prepared to travel westwards .... I reckon the force that is making this scenario most likely is CTWD ..... just outside Goole or Howden? .... under FA rules, that would help "The Tigers" run an academy with a better catchment area as well ... I don't want this to happen but this is ultimately what I reckon will come to pass ... how close to Hull does a new stadium have to be? According to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Keynes_Dons_F.C. not very close to Hull ..... so City's fans are quite capable of campaigning their club out of the city entirely having to leave town to protest outside their club's ground .... maybe accepting "we've never had it so good" and a bit of compromise might not be a bad idea looking at how bad the other options could be. The club is Dr. Allams to sell. Hull City have, it seems, never had enough fans willing to put up enough money to buy the club and, as for help from HCC, forget it .... there are two ruby teams that would want equal treatment and support. Politically it will never happen ....
 
Vaslav said:
"In August 2012, Fraser & Neave has accepted an offer from Heineken to acquire its stake in APB for US$4.1 billion.[5] Shareholders approved the deal during the extraordinary general meeting held on September 28, 2012"

The company that owns the Tiger Beer brand are worth billions. They could buy City out of their loose change and, after the Wimbledon / MK Dons switch, simply re-brand City "Tigers" and base them anywhere they wanted in England and how much would they care what CTWD or hip flask man thought about it? They could sell more sponsorship to other Tiger brands ... it could be a nice little earner ... a new, huge stadium west of Hull (selling Tiger Beer, brewed in Edinburgh) offering easier access to Premier League football starved folk from West Yorkshire plus loyal Tigers fans from Hull prepared to travel westwards .... I reckon the force that is making this scenario most likely is CTWD ..... just outside Goole or Howden? .... under FA rules, that would help "The Tigers" run an academy with a better catchment area as well ... I don't want this to happen but this is ultimately what I reckon will come to pass ... how close to Hull does a new stadium have to be? According to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Keynes_Dons_F.C. not very close to Hull ..... so City's fans are quite capable of campaigning their club out of the city entirely having to leave town to protest outside their club's ground .... maybe accepting "we've never had it so good" and a bit of compromise might not be a bad idea looking at how bad the other options could be. The club is Dr. Allams to sell. Hull City have, it seems, never had enough fans willing to put up enough money to buy the club and, as for help from HCC, forget it .... there are two ruby teams that would want equal treatment and support. Politically it will never happen ....
Click to expand...

where to start...

the fa is determined that the mk dons debacle will not be a precedent. the premier league and fa are determined not to let their brand and its traditions be watered down. both are determined that the hull city case will not allow the floodgates to be opened. "under fa rules"? which fa rules? i take it you have a link? you think west yorkshire people would forsake their own clubs to watch a team that used to be based in hull? really?

and you're trying to blame ctwd in advance for some fantasy outcome?

bizarre. where's the off switch...?
 
captain caveman said:
Serious question, have you ever posted anything that isn't abusive to those with an alternate view?
Click to expand...

reason isn't working. hasn't worked anywhere in the thread.

it feels like i'm batting for science against the creationists.
 
captain caveman said:
Welcome to my world!
Click to expand...

i started with cause and effect. too many blaming one of the effects for being a cause.

so, appeal rejected in november, making me and others happy, and then...?

i'm not desperate to see the back of them. sb says they want to stay. someone else says they want to go. name change for a million a year? not worth the hassle when a single place higher finish would cover that anyway. que sera. roger and out.
 
x said:
i started with cause and effect. too many blaming one of the effects for being a cause.

so, appeal rejected in november, making me and others happy, and then...?

i'm not desperate to see the back of them. sb says they want to stay. someone else says they want to go. name change for a million a year? not worth the hassle when a single place higher finish would cover that anyway. que sera. roger and out.
Click to expand...

Youre right, the name wont change. So why is there still a protest against the owners? I'm certainly not gping tp defend the owners actions rrgarding the name chamge, but everything else he has done has beem spot on in my opinion.
The song at 1904 was designated a protest song, saying it now isn't doesn't change perceptions. Action os needed to show that the protest is over. Being as stubborn as the owner won't help anyone.
 
captain caveman said:
Youre right, the name wont change. So why is there still a protest against the owners? I'm certainly not gping tp defend the owners actions rrgarding the name chamge, but everything else he has done has beem spot on in my opinion.
The song at 1904 was designated a protest song, saying it now isn't doesn't change perceptions. Action os needed to show that the protest is over. Being as stubborn as the owner won't help anyone.
Click to expand...

some no longer view it as a protest. i don't know. someone said one or both allams liked it as it was the most noise made during a game. the "we say no allam" one is not to my liking. but would people stop singing it if ctwd asked them to? perhaps it'll die out after november.
 
people say that the ballot had 'leading questions'........... so basically you are saying that people can't make up their own mind about a question?
even if it was: would you like the name to stay the same and so we stagnate and eventually fall into the conference or would you like the Allams to invest in Hull Tigers so that they win the BPL but flush your history down the drain?
People wouldn't have voted at 100% the way you want, cos not everyone is the same.
 
people say that the ballot had 'leading questions'........... so basically you are saying that people can't make up their own mind about a question?
even if it was: would you like the name to stay the same and so we stagnate and eventually fall into the conference or would you like the Allams to invest in Hull Tigers so that they win the BPL but flush your history down the drain?
People wouldn't have voted at 100% the way you want, cos not everyone is the same.

I have no idea why this posted twice, can a mod delete this one?
 
PattyNchips2 said:
people say that the ballot had 'leading questions'........... so basically you are saying that people can't make up their own mind about a question?
even if it was: would you like the name to stay the same and so we stagnate and eventually fall into the conference or would you like the Allams to invest in Hull Tigers so that they win the BPL but flush your history down the drain?
People wouldn't have voted at 100% the way you want, cos not everyone is the same.
Click to expand...

the question and answers were not "fair" in any sense. the name change question should have been separate from the question of wanting the allams to stay. if the question had been "do you want the name to be hull city or hull tigers?" there would have been no problem. the question should not have been made dependent on the allams staying. as such it wasn't about the name change.

i was never expecting 100%. i was expecting a fair question and it didn't happen.
 
x said:
the question and answers were not "fair" in any sense. the name change question should have been separate from the question of wanting the allams to stay. if the question had been "do you want the name to be hull city or hull tigers?" there would have been no problem. the question should not have been made dependent on the allams staying. as such it wasn't about the name change.

i was never expecting 100%. i was expecting a fair question and it didn't happen.
Click to expand...
so if people were against the name change 100%, it doesnt matter what the question was, ppl would still be able to see through it. I am sure that ppl are inteligent enough to work out what the questions are.
claiming that they "aren't the right questions" seems like an excuse cos they didn't get the answers they desired........................................... sour grapes at all?
 
x said:
the question and answers were not "fair" in any sense. the name change question should have been separate from the question of wanting the allams to stay. if the question had been "do you want the name to be hull city or hull tigers?" there would have been no problem. the question should not have been made dependent on the allams staying. as such it wasn't about the name change.

i was never expecting 100%. i was expecting a fair question and it didn't happen.
Click to expand...
um why should the questions have been seperate?
The Allams said "we stay if the name changes, else we go"
and you wanted a question that split that into "we will pay but the name stays the same" can anyone else see a problem with that? (clue: that proposition was never on the cards)
 
PattyNchips2 said:
so if people were against the name change 100%, it doesnt matter what the question was, ppl would still be able to see through it. I am sure that ppl are inteligent enough to work out what the questions are.
claiming that they "aren't the right questions" seems like an excuse cos they didn't get the answers they desired........................................... sour grapes at all?
Click to expand...

i can't see why this is so difficult for you. it's nothing to do with intelligence. it's that people that weren't 100% against had to decide whether they would rather have the name changed or have the allams leave. they had to choose between those. some chose to say yes because although they preferred the name to stay the same, they were worried about the financial consequences of the allams leaving. given that the club had almost breathed its last, some felt that was what they were choosing between and they voted for the name change despite preferring it to remain the same. how many that applied to, i can't say, but all doubt should have and could have been removed by phrasing it differently. can you really not see this?
 
PattyNchips2 said:
um why should the questions have been seperate?
The Allams said "we stay if the name changes, else we go"
and you wanted a question that split that into "we will pay but the name stays the same" can anyone else see a problem with that? (clue: that proposition was never on the cards)
Click to expand...

it was meant to be a poll about whether people wanted the name to change. it was not meant to be a poll about whether the allams stayed. there are four possible ways people can vote and they were only given two options.

as it was worded, it was like emotional blackmail. it's the reason bodies like the electoral commission or whoever laughed at the questions (which is not reassuring for anyone).

you can't have a poll that says "do you want to change the name or do you want us to plunge your football team into liquidation and oblivion?" that was what it amounted to.
 
difficult for me??
hahaha
seems straight forward actually.
name OR financial security?
#simples
 
x said:
it was meant to be a poll about whether people wanted the name to change. it was not meant to be a poll about whether the allams stayed. there are four possible ways people can vote and they were only given two options.

as it was worded, it was like emotional blackmail. it's the reason bodies like the electoral commission or whoever laughed at the questions (which is not reassuring for anyone).

you can't have a poll that says "do you want to change the name or do you want us to plunge your football team into liquidation and oblivion?" that was what it amounted to.
Click to expand...


um so you are against the truth?
maybe they should have lied then "OOPS, financially? youre ****ed, sorry about that, didn't see that oh well"
 
x said:
it was meant to be a poll about whether people wanted the name to change. it was not meant to be a poll about whether the allams stayed. there are four possible ways people can vote and they were only given two options.

as it was worded, it was like emotional blackmail. it's the reason bodies like the electoral commission or whoever laughed at the questions (which is not reassuring for anyone).

you can't have a poll that says "do you want to change the name or do you want us to plunge your football team into liquidation and oblivion?" that was what it amounted to.
Click to expand...

no there are 2, name change or they clear off.
 
Sheff U. Gates of 30,000 plus average in the Premier League, now getting 18,000 plus average. 12,000 floating spectators from there, maybe more or less, who knows? add "consumers of football" currently not attending matches (people from Hull took the ferry to watch Grimsby when they were doing better than City. Some people just want to watch a good game of football and are not attached to any particular team ... with cars, motorways, easier communications ..... I remember all the people from Hull who'd travel as far as Liverpool to see Premier League football) ... I have no idea what Dr. Allam's plans are but I wouldn't underestimate him ... I reckon he's capable of selling the club at a profit to someone who won't be as good a custodian of the club as he is ... moving the club west makes sense in a few ways, not in others ..... I'm not thinking like a fan here .... I'm trying to put myself in the position of a businessman who rescued a football club out of a sense of munificence, is finding it's not as much fun as he imagined and wants out but isn't prepared to lose much dosh on the deal and would prefer to make a profit on the whole shebang .... if some "fans" give him little room to negotiate he may not be able to afford to be too choosy about who he sells to. I believe he wants the best for the club but if the wrong person with the right money comes along, he may be glad to take an offer if it removes the burden of having to deal with CTWD. Like anyone else, he wants to be happy, to enjoy life. He thought his plans for Hull City might make fans happy. He was wrong. He'll be hurt and disappointed and think maybe someone else might succeed where he failed. I think he's played a blinder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back