So you wouldn't have minded our club's name being consigned to the dustbin and us sounding like a franchise if it had been properly researched and executed? The only snag with that is no amount of research would have come to the conclusion that changing the name of a PL club would result in extra revenues. Otherwise it would have been done before. They couldn't make a case for it acceptable to the PL. as far as executed goes, that should apply to those who suggested and those who were in favour of such a dumb idea.
Membership scheme was not a good idea The only useful bit (the ability to pay by direct debit on a monthly basis) was always there, and I'd always used it All the needed to do was alter the agreement very slightly so it was over 12 months and you kept paying until you told them you wanted to stop ALL the rest of it was pointless ****e
A business that stands still, in effect is going backwards! Now I'm not supporting the Allams on what has happened, far from it, but had the research been conducted as it should have done, then the outcome would have clearly been very different in that no change or minimal change might have been applied with all stakeholders on board.
Had research been done, no name change would ever have been attempted, as it was moronic. And I put FACT first, which makes it an indisputable fact. FACT.
Had research been done it may well have been that 'Hull City Tigers' MAY have been adopted and accepted by a majority? Just saying! Lets agree to disagree!
As I have said, had the project been researched they would have been mad to pursue the name change to Hull Tigers, it wouldn't have got that far; then again we are dealing with the Allams!
Had research been done, they'd have left it well alone, as it was a ****ing stupid idea. Hull City Tigers was as bad as Hull Tigers. FACTOID.
It's the pitchside disabled and carers seats along the west and east stands that have the restricted view. The area was supposed to be raised by about 8-10 inches so the view is not obstructed by the new boards. Although this could then cause a viewing problem for those sat behind the disabled/carers. But I'm sure they've checked that
OK I get the picture! However when the Allams first 'rode into town' and acquired the club they generally had the vast majority of supporters on board and behind them; after all they had pumped milions in. At that point, or during the first couple of years of their tenure the reception and response to any new business and/or marketing strategy they were looking to explore would have been far more postive from stakeholders than it would be say today. The universal animosity towards them today (mine included) means they will be attacked (rightly) until the day they depart
You started off by saying rebranding was not a moronic idea. Then have agreed with everyone who said it was.
Look on the bright side, if they had done some research, they would not have bought the club and then we may not have had any club left?
Rebranding to Hull Tigers was bloody stupid; any commercial project that was effectively managed and executed would have prevented us getting that far! What I am saying is that visiting any aspect of a business to see if it can be improved should always be considered, key stakeholders involved in the due process, even if the outcome is to do nothing. The idea was not moronic, the eventual output was moronic, hope that clarifies
