If someone internally created these so called "Brand Guide lines" they want sacking. If they paid a consultant to create that, which is what most big organisation do, then they have been robbed. It's clear Ehab has jotted a few words down on a bit of paper and someone typed them last week. What an absolute load of bollocks, and an insult to whom ever they were given to. I have seen brand Guide lines well run businesses have prepared, and as Fez says these are nothing like what they should be. There taking the piss as usual.
Ignoring the fact that they aren’t brand guidelines, if you focus on what little they do say they become a useful document to at least prove what we knew all along Didn’t Ehab say that there was not a club decision to not use Hull City? Well this document proves that there has been a Club decision to not use Hull City As Fez said we all knew that really, but now they’ve actually admitted it It can be added to the lies list if nothing else, and is useful in Trust conversations with the FA
It was actually Tom Rowell that said there was no club policy around not using ‘Hull City’, but it was obviously bollocks and equally obvious who was responsible.
What I find absolutely incredible, is that having taken months to release these guidelines, they didn’t doctor them and have actually released something that proves they’re lying twats.
Ok I knew someone had said it Clearly there is a club policy not to use Hull City As you say I’m amazed they’ve admitted it though
But please don't protest until after the transfer window closes, they may not buy any new players. Oh and don't protest after the transfer window closes either because that may put off potential buyers.
They are brand guidelines. The fact that there is very little of them is a good thing. All they have to do is alter a few words. In fact I'll do it for them, free of charge. Full business name: Hull City Tigers Limited (This should be only used on business documents such as contracts, orders and stationary.) Using Two Words: Hull City, Hull City AFC or occasionally The Tigers (AFC isn't a word) Playing name: no alterations (although it could be deleted as its covered in "Using Two Words above) Using One Word: City (to be used sparingly and only after it is clear which City we are referring to). (Again this could be deleted) Examples of what not to use: Hull Tigers, Hull football club, City AFC When using the nickname instead of Hull City the t in the should always be spelt as a capital T Job done. It took a few minutes.
I agree with the important parts, but they’re not brand guidelines in any recognisable sense for those who deal with them Or they are a very short summary of a small part of what a multi million pound business should have in place anyway I agree the brevity is useful though, easier to expose previous lies
It says the Tigers is OK but The Tigers isn't. Presumably they aren't going to start a sentence with those two words.
That's what struck me the most when I saw them in Gemmells. I was actually struck dumb. Briefly. I then noticed the instruction to not use The Tigers, and that got me narky. It's a huge own goal, and I don't believe Ehab is clever enough to be trying to trying to get one over anyone.
What else is needed for a football team? For me the guidelines should cover its name, and its nickname. I don't see the point in anything more complicated than that. Brand recognition comes from success on the pitch not have a ten thousand word set of brand guidelines. A simple set of brand guidelines makes it easier to alter them. Get rid of Hull Tigers and put Hull City in its place. Stop calling us Tigers and start calling us Hull City or The Tigers.
I trust you aren't holding your breath mate? Yet another perfect opportunity for our media to hang, draw and quarter our c.untish owners. Will they? Will they f.cuk.
I’m no expert, although I have been responsible for approving a few They can be relatively short, but still include far more detail from colour palettes and fonts to overall design guidance for adverts etc etc Irrelevant though really because the bits we needed to know are, surprisingly, all there And yes they are very simple to amend if there is a will to
These aren’t actually brand guidelines at all, they’re simply use of name guidelines. Brand guidelines would include fonts to be used, logos to be used, Pantone colour references etc.
Timothy? OK, found the filter now to switch it off Odd thing is, I rarely swear. I don't particularly like swearing. 2 things that make me swear .... playing football and the Allams .. the ****s make my ****ing blood boil
I should point out, the club said all along this is just the page referring to use of the name. There is a wider document apparently but this whole issue of the guidelines was only brought up in relation to the use of the name, so that's what they've given us. None of which is to say they're not silly friggers.
Yeah true. Whilst it's fun to mock this being presented as a branding document, and pointing out it isn't, that's a distraction really. There's literally everything on that page that warrants being angry at. Or, taking it, suggesting sensible changes and returning it, to see what happens.