Perhaps he is on the fence as he is genuinely incapable of forming an opinion. He's got nothing either way.
oh I am not fighting my corner anymore, you are getting repetative and cos of that, I am getting repetative. I am not going to say that it is a good thing or a bad thing if the name changes - problem is that no one knows. It can all blow up in AA's face and we will go into liquidation, at which point PLT, OLM and the antis will rejoice that they we're right and we don't have a club anymore - but they we're right! AA is a fantastic owner and keeping SB happy is just what he is good at. I like the fact that he is a business man and not a football fan. Can you imagine SB's reaction if he kept diping his oar in? We are having the greatest season we have ever had in our 110 years of existence. Long may it continue - bumping along the bottom of Division 4 for the longest time isn't exactly great. Is it a coinidence that it has happened since AA has taken over? NO cos without his cash injection, we wouldn't be where we are. I think we should keep AA happy and try.
This thread is getting stupid now. I don't think it's Patty's fault though. If a pro name change poster would kindly answer the questions in the OP to the best of their ability with the ensuing responses as free of prejudice as possible, we can move on and be more enlightened as to why some fans support Allams plans. I ask because like the OP I can't think of a single, legitimate, objective reason why the name needs to change and especially why it's so vital in Allam's eyes to suggest walking away if it doesn't happen. I genuinely want to know people's thoughts on why the name needs to change, relevant to the original questions. Answers like "He can do what he wants" are illegitimate.
as far as I'm aware, there are no pro-name changers. only pro-choice, and out of them I am the most vocal. but seeing how I am treat on here, can you blame anyone else for remaining quiet?
Ok, let me have a go.... What will the benefits be? Quite simply, an opportunity to increase revenue through having a more marketable (or identifiable) brand. Do you believe that brands hold no value? Do you believe that SKY/BT pay ridiculous amounts of revenue to retain Premier League rights so that they can make a loss? Do you believe that the only way to make additional revenue from overseas is to sell club merchandise? It's all about attracting additional revenue from the largest sponsors willing to pay, and making sure these sponsor choose you over one of your other bottom-table rivals. Let's for argument sake pick a hypothetical overseas corporate who are looking to increase their brand exposure to a particular age-group/lifestyle choice. If they have identified sponsoring a Premier League team as the best way to achieve this, let's assume the available choices are: Sunderland, West Brom, and Hull City. As they are an overseas company, they may not even sell their product in the UK or even Europe, so factors like stadium capacity or how well the club is supported in the UK don't come into significance. What starts to become important for the investor is how marketable the club is in terms of their own image. So back to the choice.... Sunderland, West Brom, Hull City. All with similar likelihood of staying up or getting relegated. All with little chance of any significant trophy success. All play in stripey shirts. Most of their target age-group/lifestyle choice will only have watched these teams when they were playing "one of the bigger teams". Same choice again, but you now have.. Sunderland, West Brom and Hull Tigers. Which one stands out more? Which one presents stronger marketing imagery? How much additional income do you expect the name change alone to generate? Who knows? Do you think there are no potential oversea investors out there looking for a taste of Premier League action? Do you think we have a better chance of attracting those investors by retaining the name Hull City AFC? What additional income do you expect to generate by keeping Hull City AFC? Will the benefits be solely financial? Not necessarily. Why do companies attempt to build stronger brand associations. Quite simply, they drive loyalty. How will the benefits be achieved? Clearly most of this won't come just knocking on the door once the FA approve the change. The Allams will then have to sell the commercial value of the new brand to potential suitors. How long until the perceived benefits come into fruition? I believe I have answered this one. This is about the Allams capability (or who they hire) to market the brand. Why has no other club, in a similar position to ours, taken this step, if the benefits are so obvious? Someone has to lead/innovate. Why did Steve Jobs persist with an iphone when Blackberry/Nokia already had that market sewn up? Do you agree with Assem's notion that the shorter the name the more successful you can become? Do you think Allam invented the concept that long brand names are more difficult to market? Do you believe "Hull Tigers" is shorter than "Hull City"? I believe the interview where he suggested this was in the context of dropping the AFC, and suggesting the possibility that Tigers was a more differentiated word than City. Now remember mods, please respect Ben's wishes and close the thread when the **** comments start.
point is that you don't know... they are all valid points. (I bet the anti's shoot you down anyhow) most of the **** messages will come from the mods.
Very good, but before doing anything an astute international businessman would commission some market research and not base a long term marketing strategy on a personal hunch, driven by a petty hatred of a local politician. He has previously said he has done none, and the lack of business plan with the name change application suggests he still hasn't. I have said from day one that if he showed me that his plan would increase club revenue, rather than reduce income by alienating current customers I would accept his idea and leave him to it. Do you really think that businesses such as Sky do no market research before deciding their strategy in new markets?
You do realise that Sky's revenue is £7.6 billion don't you and they have 31,000 employees? So not really a comparable business.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/the-city-diary-silence-on-allams-past-2139612.html wont be his first major **** up - at least we know he will bury his head in the sand - I wonder how he explains that on his cv - probably something like ****ed up royally and lost control of all my companies because I messed up
I've addressed your points in bold. You have tried & failed miserably, no depth, nothing substantiated just pure & wild speculation. Bordering on an embarrassing & desperate attempt to convince yourself rather than others. Although, to be fair, you have put in more time & effort than the owners. Must try harder 2/10.
