Owners tells fans " if I dont get name change, I walk away "

thats the bit i dont get most of all............brand consistency............we had it more than most............you often hear us described as the Bluebirds, we played in blue with a bluebird logo....................how many clubs were/are as strongly linked to a nickname that incorporates its colour............Chelsea? Man City? Everton?Arsenal?.etc etc.........i can not think of another club with these connections as strongly linked as ours

Brand consistency includes the name.

Apple - Apple Logo - etc.
Target - a logo of a red/white target etc.
Red Bull - a logo featuring red bulls head to head - competitiveness - which is what Red Bull are all about

People make the connection in their mind without even thinking. Its all done by people in the marketing sector to brainwash people into remembering their brands through these identifiers and so on.

Cardiff Bluebirds - Bluebird Logo - Play in blue - consistent brand

Ive done a module on it in university this year mate. I've got a brand plan on Cardiff City but because its being moderated/assessed at the moment I cant put it up for others to read. Its incredible how they brainwash people with this sort of stuff but it sticks.

Every day we remember things from logos - people who only buy Heinz beans etc. can find them straight away on the shelves of TESCO due to knowing the green tin label etc.

A f*cking module ..... Bollocks,that's at modules not you.

Students learn when they get in the real world.

The real world is this is a football f*cking club not a circus act.

Show me where the club generates millions more by being called the tigers than it would as a football club known as Hull City

* serious post *

Wow. Cant believe some of the shit I have read in this thread.
This isn't a brand its a football club. If we thought of our clubs as we thinkof other businesess the clubs would be fucked. 45 quid to watch 90mins football? 50quod for a shocking polyester tshirt? 4 quid a pint etc etc. Fans are the club not some jumped up prick from overseas. Our clubd arent franchises Like the states they represent the town and city they have been based in. Have a look at rugbys regions and tell me that works? Hull City are not going to become mpre profitable overseas because they are now called tigers ffs. Nobody outside hull gives a guck what they are called. Brand identity? The brand is already there ffs. Cardiff city-bluebirds' play in blue-bluebird on badge represent the city of cardiff. What more identity do you need. And as for Manchester devils v Manchester citizens well thats just laughable. Dear me university education is slipping badly since my day.

thats the bit i dont get most of all............brand consistency............we had it more than most............you often hear us described as the Bluebirds, we played in blue with a bluebird logo....................how many clubs were/are as strongly linked to a nickname that incorporates its colour............Chelsea? Man City? Everton?Arsenal?.etc etc.........i can not think of another club with these connections as strongly linked as ours

Brand consistency includes the name.

Apple - Apple Logo - etc.
Target - a logo of a red/white target etc.
Red Bull - a logo featuring red bulls head to head - competitiveness - which is what Red Bull are all about

People make the connection in their mind without even thinking. Its all done by people in the marketing sector to brainwash people into remembering their brands through these identifiers and so on.

Cardiff Bluebirds - Bluebird Logo - Play in blue - consistent brand

Ive done a module on it in university this year mate. I've got a brand plan on Cardiff City but because its being moderated/assessed at the moment I cant put it up for others to read. Its incredible how they brainwash people with this sort of stuff but it sticks.

Every day we remember things from logos - people who only buy Heinz beans etc. can find them straight away on the shelves of TESCO due to knowing the green tin label etc.

A f*cking module ..... Bollocks,that's at modules not you.

Students learn when they get in the real world.

The real world is this is a football f*cking club not a circus act.

Show me where the club generates millions more by being called the tigers than it would as a football club known as Hull City

* serious post *

Spot on mush. University module my arse.

As long as we stay in the Cardiff area, and represent the city of my birth, I will support the club no matter what we are called and no matter what colours we play in. And I've been coming to games since 1967.

Wow.

A f*cking module ..... Bollocks,that's at modules not you.

Students learn when they get in the real world.

The real world is this is a football f*cking club not a circus act.

Show me where the club generates millions more by being called the tigers than it would as a football club known as Hull City

* serious post *

Its proven theory Steve. You may think its daft and it does sound it but its what they do in the business world.

Red Bulls logo features 2 red bulls - why? brand consistency - they're arguably the biggest brand in the world cornering numerous markets from energy drink to extreme sports to clothing and motor sports.

What does Apple's logo feature? An apple. Its a known icon and it symbolises the brand.

Brands like NIKE are different. They got so successful from the tick logo that to change it would be catastrophic just as changing Manchester United would be now as they're already an extremely successful brand. Hull City's not a successful or massively known brand so its being changed to become more consistent and to become one.

People identify brands by logos - slogans - colour schemes and so forth.

You say its a football club, not a circus act, but in truth in the real world its no more than a business just like TESCO, ASDA, Vodafone, John Lewis, Paul Smith - Paul Smith's a clothing label and a staple in the fashion industry but its still a business and its a brand.

Cardiff City FC is a business with a brand image. Hull City/Tigers is a business with a brand image. Any which way that can be improved or attempt to improve it then they will do so.

Its the same reason Arsenal modernised and simplified their badge. Its a more striking emblem and its more rememberable. It leaves out all the fancy bits that were negligible in terms of business to the brands image and it drives home the brands proper image - the important part.

I disagree with what Tan does as he's overwritten a brand - not progressed it. Hulls owner is simply progressing a brand and modernising it to become more consistent. In the business world, his move will be regarded as very sensible. Especially in America and Asia, where image is everything and identifiers and logos are so important.

Wow. Cant believe some of the shit I have read in this thread.
This isn't a brand its a football club. If we thought of our clubs as we thinkof other businesess the clubs would be fucked. 45 quid to watch 90mins football? 50quod for a shocking polyester tshirt? 4 quid a pint etc etc. Fans are the club not some jumped up prick from overseas. Our clubd arent franchises Like the states they represent the town and city they have been based in. Have a look at rugbys regions and tell me that works? Hull City are not going to become mpre profitable overseas because they are now called tigers ffs. Nobody outside hull gives a guck what they are called. Brand identity? The brand is already there ffs. Cardiff city-bluebirds' play in blue-bluebird on badge represent the city of cardiff. What more identity do you need. And as for Manchester devils v Manchester citizens well thats just laughable. Dear me university education is slipping badly since my day.

Its a business and a brand whether you like it or not you daft bugger. Look at companies house. Even the FA are registered because they're also a business who's sole purpose is to increase revenue and generate profit. If you cant see that then God help you.

As for brand identity, you say the brand is already there. Yes, but its not a consistent brand. The name Hull City does not link at all with the image of a Tiger on their badge. Wheres the link? Wheres the consistency? There is none and thats the point. You clearly do not understand marketing principles if you do not understand that.

There's a simplified version of it for you to understand dumbo: http://www.added-value.com/source/2012/ ... uld-quack/

As for the citizens/devils thing, that was an example of the sort of changes that will occur as they are in America. The fact you've taken them as gospel is hilarious.

As long as we stay in the Cardiff area, and represent the city of my birth, I will support the club no matter what we are called and no matter what colours we play in. And I've been coming to games since 1967.

As long as we stay in the Cardiff area, and represent the city of my birth, I will support the club no matter what we are called and no matter what colours we play in. And I've been coming to games since 1967.

We get taken over by a female billionaire who loves pink - A Paris Hilton like owner - who sees a struggling club like us financially as a good way to turn around the fortunes of the club and make a profit.

Name: Cardiff Powerpuff Girls
Kit colours: Pink shirt and shorts
Badge: A love heart
Slogan: Girl Power
Stadium: The Sleepover Stadium
Billboards: Barbie all around the stadium

Would you support the club? Its still in Cardiff btw.

Wow. Cant believe some of the shit I have read in this thread.
This isn't a brand its a football club. If we thought of our clubs as we thinkof other businesess the clubs would be fucked. 45 quid to watch 90mins football? 50quod for a shocking polyester tshirt? 4 quid a pint etc etc. Fans are the club not some jumped up prick from overseas. Our clubd arent franchises Like the states they represent the town and city they have been based in. Have a look at rugbys regions and tell me that works? Hull City are not going to become mpre profitable overseas because they are now called tigers ffs. Nobody outside hull gives a guck what they are called. Brand identity? The brand is already there ffs. Cardiff city-bluebirds' play in blue-bluebird on badge represent the city of cardiff. What more identity do you need. And as for Manchester devils v Manchester citizens well thats just laughable. Dear me university education is slipping badly since my day.

Get real, football became a worldwide brand the moment the Premier League was born by taking Sky money. If you don't like it move on cos it ain't gonna change back to just being a football club for as long as you take the coin from the TV companies. Can fully understand why the owner wants to change it to Hull Tigers, it's for marketing in the Far East, Tiger is huge out there, not just Tiger Beer, but things like Tiger Balm, Tiger Oil, as anyone whose lived out there could tell you.

Wow. Cant believe some of the shit I have read in this thread.
This isn't a brand its a football club. If we thought of our clubs as we thinkof other businesess the clubs would be fucked. 45 quid to watch 90mins football? 50quod for a shocking polyester tshirt? 4 quid a pint etc etc. Fans are the club not some jumped up prick from overseas. Our clubd arent franchises Like the states they represent the town and city they have been based in. Have a look at rugbys regions and tell me that works? Hull City are not going to become mpre profitable overseas because they are now called tigers ffs. Nobody outside hull gives a guck what they are called. Brand identity? The brand is already there ffs. Cardiff city-bluebirds' play in blue-bluebird on badge represent the city of cardiff. What more identity do you need. And as for Manchester devils v Manchester citizens well thats just laughable. Dear me university education is slipping badly since my day.

Its a business and a brand whether you like it or not you daft bugger. Look at companies house. Even the FA are registered because they're also a business who's sole purpose is to increase revenue and generate profit. If you cant see that then God help you.

As for brand identity, you say the brand is already there. Yes, but its not a consistent brand. The name Hull City does not link at all with the image of a Tiger on their badge. Wheres the link? Wheres the consistency? There is none and thats the point. You clearly do not understand marketing principles if you do not understand that.

There's a simplified version of it for you to understand dumbo: http://www.added-value.com/source/2012/ ... uld-quack/

As for the citizens/devils thing, that was an example of the sort of changes that will occur as they are in America. The fact you've taken them as gospel is hilarious.

As someone who graduate with a marketing degree probably before you were born what you have just posted somes up nicely exactly what is wrong with our education system these days. Wheres your comon sense son? Typical of the apprentice generation. A football club is so different to so many businesses. Its not a brand its a club. And not all successful businesses have a logo that instantly identifies it to its name in such a literal way. The nieve nature of your posts is startling to be honest and completly misses the issues of existing fans, identity and the key stakeholders. A football club from hull is only ever going to make money from two sources. A) tv B) the local fanbase. Talk of overseas fans is complete pie in the sky for all but a small handful of clubs. Of which Cardiff and hull are defn not part of.

Wow. Cant believe some of the shit I have read in this thread.
This isn't a brand its a football club. If we thought of our clubs as we thinkof other businesess the clubs would be fucked. 45 quid to watch 90mins football? 50quod for a shocking polyester tshirt? 4 quid a pint etc etc. Fans are the club not some jumped up prick from overseas. Our clubd arent franchises Like the states they represent the town and city they have been based in. Have a look at rugbys regions and tell me that works? Hull City are not going to become mpre profitable overseas because they are now called tigers ffs. Nobody outside hull gives a guck what they are called. Brand identity? The brand is already there ffs. Cardiff city-bluebirds' play in blue-bluebird on badge represent the city of cardiff. What more identity do you need. And as for Manchester devils v Manchester citizens well thats just laughable. Dear me university education is slipping badly since my day.

Get real, football became a worldwide brand the moment the Premier League was born by taking Sky money. If you don't like it move on cos it ain't gonna change back to just being a football club for as long as you take the coin from the TV companies. Can fully understand why the owner wants to change it to Hull Tigers, it's for marketing in the Far East, Tiger is huge out there, not just Tiger Beer, but things like Tiger Balm, Tiger Oil, as anyone whose lived out there could tell you.

Why aren't the most successful clubs in asia all called tigers then? Why dont chelsea and spurs play in red etc etc. What a load of ballucks. Of course they are brands but they have been brands for 100+ years. But any clown owner who thinks you can mess with a clubs identity without it going wrong has spend too much time listening to spoty marketing students rather than succesful football owners.

I seriously doubt that changing from city to tigers will see a significant increase if any in revenues. Brand consistency I would love to see how many people who choose their football club by their brand consistency.

The visit Malaysia sign has changed, and quite frankly I'm annoyed at their lack of consistency when promoting their brand. Maybe you should go and teach them their ways on your gap yaaar

As someone who graduate with a marketing degree probably before you were born what you have just posted somes up nicely exactly what is wrong with our education system these days.

Marketing and business has moved on. You clearly have not. Dinosaur.

Wheres your comon sense son? Typical of the apprentice generation.

Do one with your generalisations sunshine. You abuse me for being a product of a bad education system yet your spelling and grammar is an abomination. Laughable really.

A football club is so different to so many businesses. Its not a brand its a club.

No. Football clubs these days are businesses that trade with other businesses. Their sole aim is profit making from providing a service to consumers. You are a consumer of a service being provided.

And not all successful businesses have a logo that instantly identifies it to its name in such a literal way.

Didn't say it did hence my reference to Nike. Successful brands who don't need rebranding are not going to do so as its more damaging to do so. Hull are not a successful brand on a global level. Manchester United are. Thats what you do not understand. Rebranding is done on the back of a thorough analysis factoring many variables.

The nieve nature of your posts is startling to be honest and completly misses the issues of existing fans, identity and the key stakeholders.

Stop with the fans nonsense. We're customers in the modern football world. We pay for a service as a consumer.

A football club from hull is only ever going to make money from two sources. A) tv B) the local fanbase.

1) That could have been applied to any number of other clubs before takeovers and investment yet with it and successfully growing as a brand image they progressed.

2) Your lack of ambition is shocking to be fair. Hull is a city with trading ports with numerous opportunities in terms of investment in many other areas to create an overall brand. There's room for significant growth over time so your assumption that they'll only ever make money from fans in Hull is idiotic.

Talk of overseas fans is complete pie in the sky for all but a small handful of clubs. Of which Cardiff and hull are defn not part of.

Complete and utter nonsense. This could have been applied to any number of clubs before takeovers as pointed out above. Investors come on board and things change. Who's to say that Hull's owner won't rename them, invest some more money into the club and then sell them on as Hull Tigers to a rich investor like Peter Lim? Who sold Chelsea to Abramovich? Im sure you know it was Ken Bates and Im sure you know he bought them for next to nothing and sold them for a massive sum. Also, Chelsea changed their badge in 2004, one year after Roman took over in 2003. It was an exercise to modernise it. Arsenal have been through similar exercises.

Chelsea were a nearly club for many years before he took over and with his extra cash they pushed on and have under his ownership won the Premier League and Champions League. If you think a club like Hull cant be taken over and turned into a top club then you're more foolish than I initially thought. There are investors buying out clubs like Monaco for crying out loud.

The game is modernising and changing all the time. Red Bull Salzburg, New York Red Bulls, Hull Tigers, etc. are examples of name changes. Everton, Cardiff, Arsenal and Chelsea are examples of badge changes. Stadia is changing all of the time and the more modern lego type stadiums are being put in place. They're easy to build within a reasonable budget whilst also complying with regulations as they're tried and tested.

It wasn't long ago that Chelsea and Man City had very few fans abroad and now they have loads of them. Their image is everywhere across Europe and many other parts of the world. Its all about success and a successful brand. The players are part of that brand image. Thats why teams like LA Galaxy bought David Beckham because of shirt sales. Its really not that hard to work out. Its all about building a package of consistency and success.

Why aren't the most successful clubs in asia all called tigers then? Why dont chelsea and spurs play in red etc etc. What a load of ballucks. Of course they are brands but they have been brands for 100+ years. But any clown owner who thinks you can mess with a clubs identity without it going wrong has spend too much time listening to spoty marketing students rather than succesful football owners.

Just because you did a degree in marketing in 200BC don't assume others are doing them as well. Just because a brand has been around for 100 years it doesn't mean its a successful brand.

You name Spurs and Chelsea but both clubs have a long established successful history at the top level or near it. Expecting them to change their brand identity is like asking Apple to do so in their sector. Teams like ourselves and Hull haven't had that success or stability near the top of the football sector. We're rather unsuccessful in the grand scheme of things in comparison to giants like Manchester United, Chelsea and Liverpool. These clubs, if they were to change their identity, would do more damage than good because they're already well established. Clubs like us and Hull aren't so you make changes to market more effectively. Its really not hard to fathom.

Wow. Cant believe some of the shit I have read in this thread.
This isn't a brand its a football club. If we thought of our clubs as we thinkof other businesess the clubs would be fucked. 45 quid to watch 90mins football? 50quod for a shocking polyester tshirt? 4 quid a pint etc etc. Fans are the club not some jumped up prick from overseas. Our clubd arent franchises Like the states they represent the town and city they have been based in. Have a look at rugbys regions and tell me that works? Hull City are not going to become mpre profitable overseas because they are now called tigers ffs. Nobody outside hull gives a guck what they are called. Brand identity? The brand is already there ffs. Cardiff city-bluebirds' play in blue-bluebird on badge represent the city of cardiff. What more identity do you need. And as for Manchester devils v Manchester citizens well thats just laughable. Dear me university education is slipping badly since my day.

Get real, football became a worldwide brand the moment the Premier League was born by taking Sky money. If you don't like it move on cos it ain't gonna change back to just being a football club for as long as you take the coin from the TV companies. Can fully understand why the owner wants to change it to Hull Tigers, it's for marketing in the Far East, Tiger is huge out there, not just Tiger Beer, but things like Tiger Balm, Tiger Oil, as anyone whose lived out there could tell you.

Why aren't the most successful clubs in asia all called tigers then? Why dont chelsea and spurs play in red etc etc. What a load of ballucks. Of course they are brands but they have been brands for 100+ years. But any clown owner who thinks you can mess with a clubs identity without it going wrong has spend too much time listening to spoty marketing students rather than succesful football owners.

your missing a few things here.........we are not talking about football clubs in Asia..its the EPL...biggest most watched football league in the world.........Chelsea and Spurs etc?.. both groups of fans would never tolerate it . both have a huge UK fan base and both clubs already enjoy relative success.........with both Hull and ourselves top division football is new,as are many fans now attending..........and......it isnt JB that rebranded us,it was Tan.a billionaire,so your marketing degree from dot spit put down for JB is ten fold back on you, unless of course you yourself are a successful billionaire

I really thought Tan would be good for this club of ours , how fking wrong I was. The only thing that I'm afraid of now is ,If he does walk all the creditor will run frightened and will line up for there money which of course will mean back to court and bankrupt us.

Funny you should should say that,thats just where Tan found us.Hours for Liquidation(not administration either)

Just look at the worlds top clubs,none of them have changed their names.

I seriously doubt that changing from city to tigers will see a significant increase if any in revenues. Brand consistency I would love to see how many people who choose their football club by their brand consistency.

The visit Malaysia sign has changed, and quite frankly I'm annoyed at their lack of consistency when promoting their brand. Maybe you should go and teach them their ways on your gap yaaar

Its not about just increasing revenues directly though. Thats one thing people fail to understand. Its about presence and being out there as a known and easily identifiable brand package. When we got promoted our image was portrayed around the world in red. Channels like NBC started calling us the dragons even though our nickname is the bluebirds. Why? Because they saw us in red and they saw the dragon on our badge and they made that instant connection subconsciously without even realising it. It made sense to them just as it makes sense to call a team with a dolphin as its emblem the dolphins.

Of course there are other routes to increasing revenue and one of them is success but are we or Hull going to become successful overnight? No we are not. The next best thing is to build a consistent brand package to put out there that others see and easily identify just as people easily identify Apple's logo as Apple.

Why aren't the most successful clubs in asia all called tigers then? Why dont chelsea and spurs play in red etc etc. What a load of ballucks. Of course they are brands but they have been brands for 100+ years. But any clown owner who thinks you can mess with a clubs identity without it going wrong has spend too much time listening to spoty marketing students rather than succesful football owners.

Just because you did a degree in marketing in 200BC don't assume others are doing them as well. Just because a brand has been around for 100 years it doesn't mean its a successful brand.

You name Spurs and Chelsea but both clubs have a long established successful history at the top level or near it. Expecting them to change their brand identity is like asking Apple to do so in their sector. Teams like ourselves and Hull haven't had that success or stability near the top of the football sector. We're rather unsuccessful in the grand scheme of things in comparison to giants like Manchester United, Chelsea and Liverpool. These clubs, if they were to change their identity, would do more damage than good because they're already well established. Clubs like us and Hull aren't so you make changes to market more effectively. Its really not hard to fathom.

ok then so you will now go the next step and show to us all how after a rebrand to red and your most successful season in living memory how your income in the far east rise so dramatically to more than counter the loss in revenue in your local market because of the rebrand. I wll then show you how our income revenue was far higher in Asia than yours despite doing nothing in the way of rebranding. Get your head out those books son and live and work in the real world.

People choose football clubs by watching their favorite players who excite them. Not brand consistency, no matter how much your text book or lecturer says different. I don't think a uni student can advise someone of how business works. Your whole argument is based on football being the same as other business models and you are completely off the mark.

Just look at the worlds top clubs,none of them have changed their names.

Because they're already established global brands. It would do more damage than good for them because they are already established in the world. They are market leaders like Red Bull are in the energy drinks market. If you look in the energy drinks market you will see that those who aren't market leaders like Red Bull and Monster have rebranded numerous times to try and become a more successful brand and gain awareness.

Rebranding isn't a marketing exercise where you just say 'why isn't everyone doing it?'. Its done on a case by case basis after thorough analysis and so forth. Rebranding Manchester United and Liverpool would be daft because they are already global brands, massive global brands like Madrid who are established market leaders in the sector.

Even Liverpool have used small scale marketing techniques to cater to other audiences. Their away kit and third kit is clearly designed to appeal to an American sports merchandise purchaser. Look at the design of it and you'll see that easily.

ok then so you will now go the next step and show to us all how after a rebrand to red and your most successful season in living memory how your income in the far east rise so dramatically to more than counter the loss in revenue in your local market because of the rebrand. I wll then show you how our income revenue was far higher in Asia than yours despite doing nothing in the way of rebranding. Get your head out those books son and live and work in the real world.

You really are thick as shit if you think rebranding alone is going to increase revenue. Of course success and other factors are involved. You have been more successful than us and therefore you have been portrayed on Sky as being successful. You're also in Europe being aired all over the world. Of course this is going to be a factor in sales. Nobody disputed that. Not even me. Still doesn't make a difference to brand identity and consistency.

Why aren't the most successful clubs in asia all called tigers then? Why dont chelsea and spurs play in red etc etc. What a load of ballucks. Of course they are brands but they have been brands for 100+ years. But any clown owner who thinks you can mess with a clubs identity without it going wrong has spend too much time listening to spoty marketing students rather than succesful football owners.

Just because you did a degree in marketing in 200BC don't assume others are doing them as well. Just because a brand has been around for 100 years it doesn't mean its a successful brand.

You name Spurs and Chelsea but both clubs have a long established successful history at the top level or near it. Expecting them to change their brand identity is like asking Apple to do so in their sector. Teams like ourselves and Hull haven't had that success or stability near the top of the football sector. We're rather unsuccessful in the grand scheme of things in comparison to giants like Manchester United, Chelsea and Liverpool. These clubs, if they were to change their identity, would do more damage than good because they're already well established. Clubs like us and Hull aren't so you make changes to market more effectively. Its really not hard to fathom.

ok then so you will now go the next step and show to us all how after a rebrand to red and your most successful season in living memory how your income in the far east rise so dramatically to more than counter the loss in revenue in your local market because of the rebrand. I wll then show you how our income revenue was far higher in Asia than yours despite doing nothing in the way of rebranding. Get your head out those books son and live and work in the real world.

He's an internet baby,no common sense.These keyboard warriors are slowly infecting society.

Why aren't the most successful clubs in asia all called tigers then? Why dont chelsea and spurs play in red etc etc. What a load of ballucks. Of course they are brands but they have been brands for 100+ years. But any clown owner who thinks you can mess with a clubs identity without it going wrong has spend too much time listening to spoty marketing students rather than succesful football owners.

Just because you did a degree in marketing in 200BC don't assume others are doing them as well. Just because a brand has been around for 100 years it doesn't mean its a successful brand.

You name Spurs and Chelsea but both clubs have a long established successful history at the top level or near it. Expecting them to change their brand identity is like asking Apple to do so in their sector. Teams like ourselves and Hull haven't had that success or stability near the top of the football sector. We're rather unsuccessful in the grand scheme of things in comparison to giants like Manchester United, Chelsea and Liverpool. These clubs, if they were to change their identity, would do more damage than good because they're already well established. Clubs like us and Hull aren't so you make changes to market more effectively. Its really not hard to fathom.

ok then so you will now go the next step and show to us all how after a rebrand to red and your most successful season in living memory how your income in the far east rise so dramatically to more than counter the loss in revenue in your local market because of the rebrand. I wll then show you how our income revenue was far higher in Asia than yours despite doing nothing in the way of rebranding. Get your head out those books son and live and work in the real world.

mmm havnt you got 2years head start in premier ? with the head start, how can you compare sales? we have had 20 games in premier which we all know is what matters to asia market.; wonder what like for like sales are this season between our clubs?

People choose football clubs by watching their favorite players who excite them. Not brand consistency, no matter how much your text book or lecturer says different. I don't think a uni student can advise someone of how business works. Your whole argument is based on football being the same as other business models and you are completely off the mark.

Not really. A business aims for success, to increase revenue and turnover and to increase profits. It aims to be self sufficient and to reinvest when needed. Arsenal invest in football players. Apple invest in staff. If neither deliver the company suffers. Arsenal's business model really is not much different to that of any other company. They have their revenue streams - advertising, selling merchandise, television deals with Sky and they know whats coming in. They can forecast. They have their expenditure and if they are willing to live within their means and be self sufficient. They reinvested in a stadium also.

Arsenals business model is pretty much no different to any other business. You could argue that the strict business model has meant that they haven't spent on quality players like Chelsea and Man City and this has hurt their progress for many years hence their drought. Their strict following of a true business model may very well have put a hold on their footballing ambitions but the model is pretty much similar to any other.

People choose football clubs by watching their favorite players who excite them. Not brand consistency, no matter how much your text book or lecturer says different. I don't think a uni student can advise someone of how business works. Your whole argument is based on football being the same as other business models and you are completely off the mark.

people choose a club for many reasons.......Leeds are well supported in south wales due to the Revie era.........they cheated,kicked,pushed,stretched every rule to its limit.........it wasnt flare...........
as for liking players.........very few swap clubs when the favourite player leaves.........its deeper than that..........
if brand consistency isnt such a big deal.............why is anyone bothered about BLUE..AND BLUEBIRDS.........

mmm havnt you got 2years head start in premier ? with the head start, how can you compare sales? we have had 20 games in premier which we all know is what matters to asia market.; wonder what like for like sales are this season between our clubs?

Spot on Allan. They have had success as well in the cup as well as playing in Europe. They're too daft to understand there are numerous factors and a marketing strategy is only one of them.

People choose football clubs by watching their favorite players who excite them. Not brand consistency, no matter how much your text book or lecturer says different. I don't think a uni student can advise someone of how business works. Your whole argument is based on football being the same as other business models and you are completely off the mark.

people choose a club for many reasons.......Leeds are well supported in south wales due to the Revie era.........they cheated,kicked,pushed,stretched every rule to its limit.........it wasnt flare...........
as for liking players.........very few swap clubs when the favourite player leaves.........its deeper than that..........
if brand consistency isnt such a big deal.............why is anyone bothered about BLUE..AND BLUEBIRDS.........

Agreed. Beckham was bought by LA Galaxy for brand and marketing purposes. He hardly played, went out on loan, but they wanted to sell shirts with his name on. It was a marketing exercise using his image to promote both the club and to increase revenue. He would have had a cut through an image rights deal so it made sense for all parties involved.

As long as we stay in the Cardiff area, and represent the city of my birth, I will support the club no matter what we are called and no matter what colours we play in. And I've been coming to games since 1967.

We get taken over by a female billionaire who loves pink - A Paris Hilton like owner - who sees a struggling club like us financially as a good way to turn around the fortunes of the club and make a profit.

Name: Cardiff Powerpuff Girls
Kit colours: Pink shirt and shorts
Badge: A love heart
Slogan: Girl Power
Stadium: The Sleepover Stadium
Billboards: Barbie all around the stadium

Would you support the club? Its still in Cardiff btw.

No reply yet James.

ok then so you will now go the next step and show to us all how after a rebrand to red and your most successful season in living memory how your income in the far east rise so dramatically to more than counter the loss in revenue in your local market because of the rebrand. I wll then show you how our income revenue was far higher in Asia than yours despite doing nothing in the way of rebranding. Get your head out those books son and live and work in the real world.

You really are thick as shit if you think rebranding alone is going to increase revenue. Of course success and other factors are involved. You have been more successful than us and therefore you have been portrayed on Sky as being successful. You're also in Europe being aired all over the world. Of course this is going to be a factor in sales. Nobody disputed that. Not even me. Still doesn't make a difference to brand identity and consistency.

Nope our shirt sales and sponsorship deals in the far east were down to buy Ki nothing else as was the massive advert in a korean shopping centre. As I said comparing football to other companies is pointless they are unique in the way they operate. You really are showing yoirself up now son. Best if you go and be a customer of mk dons or mk concrete cows as im sure you would like to rebrand them to. Another question for you. Do you think uncle vinny would keep running a business that was losing him 30m a year with debts over 120m if it wasnt a football club? Would he keep on throwing good money into it? Of course he wouldn't. As I keep on saying a football club is unlike any other business out there and therefore many good business practices go out the windo when dealing with such a business.