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

In terms of the actual business model, explain how its different.

Well for starters, no matter what brand of football you are offering up, "customers" are not going to change?

Eg. During the 90s - when Man City were down in the third tier, do you think the fans there stopped & looked at the "superior brand" on offer at Manchester Utd (better players, better opposition, champions etc) and defected across? Of course not!

Whereas tesco can offer better/cheaper deals & "refresh" their brand to entice custom away from other supermarkets, football supporters don't work like this.

Unless you are really suggesting that people are going to change allegiance because they like the kit or the new symbol.

If you want to gain support from a different nation, appoint one of their star players... Just look at the Norwegian interest in Cardiff since the appointment of Solskjaer.

You're confusing consumer relations with business models. Good grief Alex. You do realise some people have no allegiance to begin with right? Theres new football fans being born all over the world every day. Some grow up to support the same club as their parents. Others don't. Thats life. These fans are selecting a side to support. If our image is out there it gives us a chance to be selected by them. Its all about brand awareness. Its no guarantee but its about being seen, heard, etc.

Again, the business model is no different to any other club. Consumer relations are vastly different yes but they're only a small part of the overall business model as they're not the only revenue stream.

You're confusing consumer relations with business models. Good grief Alex. You do realise some people have no allegiance to begin with right? Theres new football fans being born all over the world every day. Some grow up to support the same club as their parents. Others don't. Thats life. These fans are selecting a side to support. If our image is out there it gives us a chance to be selected by them. Its all about brand awareness. Its no guarantee but its about being seen, heard, etc.

Again, the business model is no different to any other club. Consumer relations are vastly different yes but they're only a small part of the overall business model as they're not the only revenue stream.

Fair play, you don't half talk some nonsense. One minute you hate tan, the next you love the red and dragons, next thing you're bogging up his business model. surely you can see why nobody takes you seriously?!

FACT: Since Tan's rebrand, the income from merchandise has gone DOWN. This rather messes up your ridiculous theory.

FACT: Look at some of the biggest clubs in UK, especially the ones big in Asia - why are they big? SUCCESS - pure and simple.

Are you really suggesting that those in Asia will switch from the club they support to support Cardiff, just because they wear red or wear a dragon?

Man City didn't have to rebrand to become big out there - they simply became successful & the Asian support followed.

Shares in a football club is very different to owning shares in lets say ftse100.
ask annis if he's made any money from his shares in Cardiff.
most people who invest in football clubs are fans of that club and never make a penny.Quite different from any other business.

depends if the company is floated or not

Doesn't make a flying dot if they floated or not

A share is a share.

The worth comes from the value.

Ratners were on the stock market

You wouldn't have heard of them nipper - they went tits up after a tad of rebranding !

Ratner's didn't go tits up because of rebranding, simply because Gerald gave a speech where he stated that the stuff they sold was crap, and also that a pair of earrings at Ratner's were cheaper and wouldn't last as long as a M&S prawn sandwich. Amazingly he's still in the jewellery business as head of Gerald's Online.

You're confusing consumer relations with business models. Good grief Alex. You do realise some people have no allegiance to begin with right? Theres new football fans being born all over the world every day. Some grow up to support the same club as their parents. Others don't. Thats life. These fans are selecting a side to support. If our image is out there it gives us a chance to be selected by them. Its all about brand awareness. Its no guarantee but its about being seen, heard, etc.

Again, the business model is no different to any other club. Consumer relations are vastly different yes but they're only a small part of the overall business model as they're not the only revenue stream.

Fair play, you don't half talk some nonsense. One minute you hate tan, the next you love the red and dragons, next thing you're bogging up his business model. surely you can see why nobody takes you seriously?!

FACT: Since Tan's rebrand, the income from merchandise has gone DOWN. This rather messes up your ridiculous theory.

FACT: Look at some of the biggest clubs in UK, especially the ones big in Asia - why are they big? SUCCESS - pure and simple.

Are you really suggesting that those in Asia will switch from the club they support to support Cardiff, just because they wear red or wear a dragon?

Man City didn't have to rebrand to become big out there - they simply became successful & the Asian support followed.

yes cost of success? £300 to 500 mil??? or whatever ammount of money it has taken your right about other facts though.

You're confusing consumer relations with business models. Good grief Alex. You do realise some people have no allegiance to begin with right? Theres new football fans being born all over the world every day. Some grow up to support the same club as their parents. Others don't. Thats life. These fans are selecting a side to support. If our image is out there it gives us a chance to be selected by them. Its all about brand awareness. Its no guarantee but its about being seen, heard, etc.

Again, the business model is no different to any other club. Consumer relations are vastly different yes but they're only a small part of the overall business model as they're not the only revenue stream.

Fair play, you don't half talk some nonsense. One minute you hate tan, the next you love the red and dragons, next thing you're bogging up his business model. surely you can see why nobody takes you seriously?!

FACT: Since Tan's rebrand, the income from merchandise has gone DOWN. This rather messes up your ridiculous theory.

FACT: Look at some of the biggest clubs in UK, especially the ones big in Asia - why are they big? SUCCESS - pure and simple.

Are you really suggesting that those in Asia will switch from the club they support to support Cardiff, just because they wear red or wear a dragon?

Man City didn't have to rebrand to become big out there - they simply became successful & the Asian support followed.

He's a chameleon what do you expect.I bet he supports half a dozen clubs jumping from one to the other depending on how their doing.

yes cost of success? £300 to 500 mil??? or whatever ammount of money it has taken your right about other facts though.

The amount of money out into the club is irrelevant. The success was the reason for the clubs rise in profile in Asia, nothing else.. No need to change to red or modernise their "brand".

It's pathetic ..... If someone could tell me where changing the name to Tigers would increase club revenues then I would listen but I can't see where in any shape or form it would make a difference.

Just an egotistic foreign owner .

* serious post *

From a business perspective it makes sense.

Everyone knows Hull is a city. You don't need a degree in Geography to work that out. They just want to create a complete brand for example like Apple.

Apple is the name. The logo is an Apple. Its consistent.

Hull Tigers is the name. The logo is a tiger. Its consistent. It makes sense from a marketing perspective thats for sure.

Brand consistency is of key importance.

I wouldn't mind being called Cardiff Bluebirds with a Bluebird logo. Its consistent and makes sense. We'll be called the bluebirds all over the world as people call the Miami Dolphins the Dolphins and our bluebird logo would be on display proudly.

Instead we've got Tans red dragon. The problem with that is to add brand consistency a renaming would most likely be Cardiff Dragons, which I would not accept. I would accept Cardiff Bluebirds however as I can see that as a natural progression from our historical and traditional ways to a more modern business/marketing approach.

If Tan called us Cardiff Bluebirds and changed our badge to a bluebird I am pretty certain most wouldnt mind. Theres only a minority angry because of the red and the dragon crap.

Progression is fine as long as its in the right direction.

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

That's a very good point

Fair play, you don't half talk some nonsense. One minute you hate tan, the next you love the red and dragons, next thing you're bogging up his business model. surely you can see why nobody takes you seriously?!

So you make an attack on me because you cant come up with an intellectual retort. Nice.

FACT: Since Tan's rebrand, the income from merchandise has gone DOWN. This rather messes up your ridiculous theory.

and I have also said that. Do you read what people say? I said its done for brand consistency so it looks good when floating. I mentioned that I don't think it was done for shirt sales. Here you go going off on one again.

FACT: Look at some of the biggest clubs in UK, especially the ones big in Asia - why are they big? SUCCESS - pure and simple.

Again, I said this was a major factor. Other factors include Asian players and so on as the Swansea fan pointed out. I've not disputed this either. Again, you're going off on one Belinda. [/quote]

Are you really suggesting that those in Asia will switch from the club they support to support Cardiff, just because they wear red or wear a dragon?

I didn't suggest this either. I suggested that fans with no current allegiance may go on to support a club for a number of reasons and image is one of them. Just like image is one of the factors when buying a car and so on. Performance is also a factor in both scenarios of course. Didn't dispute that either and I never said fans would SWITCH allegiance so again you've either failed to read the point or you've gone off on your usual tirade.

Man City didn't have to rebrand to become big out there - they simply became successful & the Asian support followed.

Points stated above. I said that the rebrand was clearly done to float the club. That is my belief to appeal to investors. I don't believe it has anything to do with shirt sales. Of course success is one of the major factors of football fans reasons to follow in Asia and I haven't disputed that point either.

I agree with most of your points so as you can see Chuckles, you're jumping the gun. Im simply stating that from a business sense to present the club as an entire package on the SE thats why I believed the rebrand happened. Its about image and image is a player when selling something to somebody regardless of whether its a house, car or anything else. People buy/invest in things that appeal to them.

In the future Mr Clarke, before you go off on tirades and attacks and saying people chat nonsense read the points made. Whether or not you take me seriously or not I couldn't care less. I don't need to seek validation from you. As you were.

yes cost of success? £300 to 500 mil??? or whatever ammount of money it has taken your right about other facts though.

The amount of money out into the club is irrelevant. The success was the reason for the clubs rise in profile in Asia, nothing else.. No need to change to red or modernise their "brand".

So the signing of Ki didn't help promote Swansea's profile in Asia? Only success right? No you're wrong. It was a number of factors. Success isn't the be all and end all to every Asian Chuckles and the fact you think so is ignorant at best. You're assuming all Asian football fans are success hungry and glory supporters. A lot of them are. So are a lot in South Wales if you hadn't noticed. Shove your generalisations of entire continents up your arse.

So the signing of Ki didn't help promote Swansea's profile in Asia? Only success right? No you're wrong. It was a number of factors. Success isn't the be all and end all to every Asian Chuckles and the fact you think so is ignorant at best. You're assuming all Asian football fans are success hungry and glory supporters. A lot of them are. So are a lot in South Wales if you hadn't noticed. Shove your generalisations of entire continents up your arse.

I alluded to this in a previous post, so you're incorrect.

If you want to gain support from a different nation, appoint one of their star players... Just look at the Norwegian interest in Cardiff since the appointment of Solskjaer.

Which also shows that there in no need to rebrand, Swansea didn't have to.

So thanks for giving me an example which proves your own theory wrong.

Last edited by Barry Chuckle on Tue Jan 14, 2014 9:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Shares in a football club is very different to owning shares in lets say ftse100.
ask annis if he's made any money from his shares in Cardiff.
most people who invest in football clubs are fans of that club and never make a penny.Quite different from any other business.

depends if the company is floated or not

Doesn't make a flying dot if they floated or not

A share is a share.

The worth comes from the value.

Ratners were on the stock market

You wouldn't have heard of them nipper - they went tits up after a tad of rebranding !

Ratner's didn't go tits up because of rebranding, simply because Gerald gave a speech where he stated that the stuff they sold was crap, and also that a pair of earrings at Ratner's were cheaper and wouldn't last as long as a M&S prawn sandwich. Amazingly he's still in the jewellery business as head of Gerald's Online.

You missed the punch line

Calling your product crap is rebranding. Unless you've called it crap before.

* serious post *

So the signing of Ki didn't help promote Swansea's profile in Asia? Only success right? No you're wrong. It was a number of factors. Success isn't the be all and end all to every Asian Chuckles and the fact you think so is ignorant at best. You're assuming all Asian football fans are success hungry and glory supporters. A lot of them are. So are a lot in South Wales if you hadn't noticed. Shove your generalisations of entire continents up your arse.

I alluded to this in a previous post, so you're incorrect.

If you want to gain support from a different nation, appoint one of their star players... Just look at the Norwegian interest in Cardiff since the appointment of Solskjaer.

Fair enough. Im not saying its right. I wish football was just about the football. The sad thing Chuckles is it isn't. Its more a business now. Thats a fact. Doesn't make it right though.

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.

Nonsense. It would have been down to numerous factors. If you think its just down to the purchase of one player then you are clearly clueless. It had nothing at all to do with the fact you're in Europe competing against top teams and the fact that you won the cup.

Your sponsorship deals would have been down to your success as well. No company wants to back or be affiliated with an unsuccessful brand regardless of the personal. You are clueless.

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.

Business in football is no different. Look at the finances and you'll see a self sufficient football club is no different to any other self sufficient business. The players are just staff with a job to do. They're paid handsomely for that job. Is the business model of the NFL different then just because a sport is involved? No its not. Business is pretty simple really. You trade to make a profit and increase revenue streams and you reinvest where needs be. This aids growth. Arsenal reinvested in Ozil in a hope to grow as a business and put in a real challenge for the title. The underlying principles are the same. You invest more because you've got more and you bring in quality and you grow. If its not the case how did Monaco grow so fast? They invested loads, like in any other business, and they grew on the back of that investment. They invested in highly skilled personnel.

Many clubs are saddled with debt just as many business are saddled with debt. Thats something those in Dragons Den specialise in - saving companies who need it or are on the brink and turning around their fortunes. Its Tans idea with us to get more revenue from Sky and he'll only do that by keeping us up hence him backing Solskjaer to invest in the players to do so. Its still no given just like employing a highly trained software engineer is no given to build you the app you require to push to market. You're investing in these people and various factors come into play in all sectors, not just football.

As for showing myself up, I don't think so. You are. You think football is a completely different business model when it isn't. Just because so many clubs are saddled with debt, it doesn't mean that the business model is different. It just means that the businesses are not being regulated properly. Football clubs are franchises now, by the actual definition of a true business model, and a franchise is a business model used by many other non football related businesses.

Arsenal are perfect proof that a normal business model can and does work in football. That is a fact. The only major difference between a football club as a business and a standard business is allegiance and tribalistic fan bases that follow no matter what because of attachment. You wouldnt exactly get this at TESCO as they'd just go to ASDA or Morrisons. However, you do get Apple fan boys and so on who pledge strict allegiance.

How is football as a business model any different? Are the shareholders in it to make a loss then? I very much doubt it.

But I sponsored The old cardiff City as did others

* disclaimer - Non serious post *

But I sponsored The old cardiff City as did others

* disclaimer - Non serious post *

You're assuming all Asian football fans are success hungry and glory supporters. A lot of them are. So are a lot in South Wales if you hadn't noticed. Shove your generalisations of entire continents up your arse.

You mean just like you're assuming that they will all be swayed by a nice new brand and a red shirt? you can do the same with your generalisations too.

yes cost of success? £300 to 500 mil??? or whatever ammount of money it has taken your right about other facts though.

The amount of money out into the club is irrelevant. The success was the reason for the clubs rise in profile in Asia, nothing else.. No need to change to red or modernise their "brand".

So the signing of Ki didn't help promote Swansea's profile in Asia? Only success right? No you're wrong. It was a number of factors. Success isn't the be all and end all to every Asian Chuckles and the fact you think so is ignorant at best. You're assuming all Asian football fans are success hungry and glory supporters. A lot of them are. So are a lot in South Wales if you hadn't noticed. Shove your generalisations of entire continents up your arse.

So the lack of sales since ki went is a coincidence then?

It's pathetic ..... If someone could tell me where changing the name to Tigers would increase club revenues then I would listen but I can't see where in any shape or form it would make a difference.

Just an egotistic foreign owner .

* serious post *

From a business perspective it makes sense.

Everyone knows Hull is a city. You don't need a degree in Geography to work that out. They just want to create a complete brand for example like Apple.

Apple is the name. The logo is an Apple. Its consistent.

Hull Tigers is the name. The logo is a tiger. Its consistent. It makes sense from a marketing perspective thats for sure.

Brand consistency is of key importance.

I wouldn't mind being called Cardiff Bluebirds with a Bluebird logo. Its consistent and makes sense. We'll be called the bluebirds all over the world as people call the Miami Dolphins the Dolphins and our bluebird logo would be on display proudly.

Instead we've got Tans red dragon. The problem with that is to add brand consistency a renaming would most likely be Cardiff Dragons, which I would not accept. I would accept Cardiff Bluebirds however as I can see that as a natural progression from our historical and traditional ways to a more modern business/marketing approach.

If Tan called us Cardiff Bluebirds and changed our badge to a bluebird I am pretty certain most wouldnt mind. Theres only a minority angry because of the red and the dragon crap.

Progression is fine as long as its in the right direction.

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

That's a very good point

You're assuming all Asian football fans are success hungry and glory supporters. A lot of them are. So are a lot in South Wales if you hadn't noticed. Shove your generalisations of entire continents up your arse.

You mean just like you're assuming that they will all be swayed by a nice new brand and a red shirt? you can do the same with your generalisations too.

I didn't assume that though. Again, you're not reading. I stated the rebrand was done to get investors on board, people like Lim, not to sell shirts in Asia. I doubt Tan gives a crap about £20 here and there and I'm pretty sure he knows most shirts sold there are knock offs anyway.

I didn't assume that though. Again, you're not reading. I stated the rebrand was done to get investors on board, people like Lim, not to sell shirts in Asia. I doubt Tan gives a crap about £20 here and there and I'm pretty sure he knows most shirts sold there are knock offs anyway.

That's not what Vincent said though.

You've gone and proved yourself wrong when you used the Swansea example, so that's it really.

yes cost of success? £300 to 500 mil??? or whatever ammount of money it has taken your right about other facts though.

The amount of money out into the club is irrelevant. The success was the reason for the clubs rise in profile in Asia, nothing else.. No need to change to red or modernise their "brand".

So the signing of Ki didn't help promote Swansea's profile in Asia? Only success right? No you're wrong. It was a number of factors. Success isn't the be all and end all to every Asian Chuckles and the fact you think so is ignorant at best. You're assuming all Asian football fans are success hungry and glory supporters. A lot of them are. So are a lot in South Wales if you hadn't noticed. Shove your generalisations of entire continents up your arse.

So the lack of sales since ki went is a coincidence then?

READ THE BIT IN BOLD IN MASSIVE WRITING. Of course Ki was one of those factors. He wasn't the only one. There would have been numerous from your success, to the signing of an Asian player and so on. Also, shirt sales decreased, they didn't stop selling, further proving there were other factors other than Ki that got them buying your shirts.

READ THE BIT IN BOLD IN MASSIVE WRITING. Of course Ki was one of those factors. He wasn't the only one. There would have been numerous from your success, to the signing of an Asian player and so on. Also, shirt sales decreased, they didn't stop selling, further proving there were other factors other than Ki that got them buying your shirts.

MY shirts?

So they did it without the need of a new brand, which renders your whole point as nonsense really.

I didn't assume that though. Again, you're not reading. I stated the rebrand was done to get investors on board, people like Lim, not to sell shirts in Asia. I doubt Tan gives a crap about £20 here and there and I'm pretty sure he knows most shirts sold there are knock offs anyway.

That's not what Vincent said though.

You've gone and proved yourself wrong when you used the Swansea example, so that's it really.

What has Vincent said on it? Spoke to him have you. Oh yes, here we go Mr Alex Clarke, the cradle of bullshit strikes again. Tan has never made his business motives other than planning to float the club known to you or I.

I've not proved myself wrong at all. More intellectual people than yourself have got it but you pick at everything anyway so I'm not cared if you get it or not. You're so blinkered by your own hatred of Tan that your views are worthless because you turn into an emotional little cry baby when ever he's mentioned.

READ THE BIT IN BOLD IN MASSIVE WRITING. Of course Ki was one of those factors. He wasn't the only one. There would have been numerous from your success, to the signing of an Asian player and so on. Also, shirt sales decreased, they didn't stop selling, further proving there were other factors other than Ki that got them buying your shirts.

MY shirts?

So they did it without the need of a new brand, which renders your whole point as nonsense really.

You really are thick as shit aren't you Alex? Appealing to investors is different to shirt sales.

Find me a quote where I said that the rebrand itself will increase shirt sales. Go on.

It's pathetic ..... If someone could tell me where changing the name to Tigers would increase club revenues then I would listen but I can't see where in any shape or form it would make a difference.

Just an egotistic foreign owner .

* serious post *

From a business perspective it makes sense.

Everyone knows Hull is a city. You don't need a degree in Geography to work that out. They just want to create a complete brand for example like Apple.

Apple is the name. The logo is an Apple. Its consistent.

Hull Tigers is the name. The logo is a tiger. Its consistent. It makes sense from a marketing perspective thats for sure.

Brand consistency is of key importance.

I wouldn't mind being called Cardiff Bluebirds with a Bluebird logo. Its consistent and makes sense. We'll be called the bluebirds all over the world as people call the Miami Dolphins the Dolphins and our bluebird logo would be on display proudly.

Instead we've got Tans red dragon. The problem with that is to add brand consistency a renaming would most likely be Cardiff Dragons, which I would not accept. I would accept Cardiff Bluebirds however as I can see that as a natural progression from our historical and traditional ways to a more modern business/marketing approach.

If Tan called us Cardiff Bluebirds and changed our badge to a bluebird I am pretty certain most wouldnt mind. Theres only a minority angry because of the red and the dragon crap.

Progression is fine as long as its in the right direction.

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

That's a very good point

How about us. The swans, from swansea, swan badge, white kite. Surely stronger than yours as its incorporated into the citys name as well.

What has Vincent said on it? Spoke to him have you. Oh yes, here we go Mr Alex Clarke, the cradle of bullshit strikes again. Tan has never made his business motives other than planning to float the club known to you or I.

I've not proved myself wrong at all. More intellectual people than yourself have got it but you pick at everything anyway so I'm not cared if you get it or not. You're so blinkered by your own hatred of Tan that your views are worthless because you turn into an emotional little cry baby when ever he's mentioned.

Well you're stating the reasons as fact in your previous post, stop being such a hypocrite.

In the statements regarding the rebrand initially, it was alluded to. which gives my assumption a bit more credibility than yours.

How long before you change your opinion again? You've wanted a Tan in and out more times than the Hokey Cokey.

What has Vincent said on it? Spoke to him have you. Oh yes, here we go Mr Alex Clarke, the cradle of bullshit strikes again. Tan has never made his business motives other than planning to float the club known to you or I.

I've not proved myself wrong at all. More intellectual people than yourself have got it but you pick at everything anyway so I'm not cared if you get it or not. You're so blinkered by your own hatred of Tan that your views are worthless because you turn into an emotional little cry baby when ever he's mentioned.

Well you're stating the reasons as fact in your previous post, stop being such a hypocrite.

In the statements regarding the rebrand initially, it was alluded to. which gives my assumption a bit more credibility than yours.

How long before you change your opinion again? You've wanted a Tan in and out more times than the Hokey Cokey.

It was 'alluded' to. Do one Alex.

Stop making assumptions. I never made that statement at all. You made the assumption and thats your own fault.

I love how you're getting personal because you're so full of BS. You made an assumption.

Chuckles, its fans like yourself who pick all the time why I wouldn't mind us staying red forever because the club could do with out the likes of you. All I have said is I believe the rebrand was done for brand consistency purposes to appeal to investors when the club is floated and you've twisted it to about shirt sales based on an assumption.

You're utter scum.

It was 'alluded' to. Do one Alex.

correct.

Stop making assumptions. I never made that statement at all. You made the assumption and thats your own fault.

no, you made the assumption about why the rebrand was implimented & without any sort of evidence to back this up. I've made my own assumption, but with a statement that alluded to the same reason from the man who implemented it.

I love how you're getting personal because you're so full of BS. You made an assumption.

says the man who started calling me a cry baby for disagreeing with you & countering your posts. More double standards.

Chuckles, its fans like yourself who pick all the time why I wouldn't mind us staying red forever because the club could do with out the likes of you. All I have said is I believe the rebrand was done for brand consistency purposes to appeal to investors when the club is floated and you've twisted it to about shirt sales based on an assumption.

the club could do without fans who disagree with a decision? If that's the sort of club you're after, why not select a club in North Korea? I bet some of them will have some nice shiny brands for you too.

You're utter scum.

says the person who just complained about making it personal.

yes cost of success? £300 to 500 mil??? or whatever ammount of money it has taken your right about other facts though.

The amount of money out into the club is irrelevant. The success was the reason for the clubs rise in profile in Asia, nothing else.. No need to change to red or modernise their "brand".

So the signing of Ki didn't help promote Swansea's profile in Asia? Only success right? No you're wrong. It was a number of factors. Success isn't the be all and end all to every Asian Chuckles and the fact you think so is ignorant at best. You're assuming all Asian football fans are success hungry and glory supporters. A lot of them are. So are a lot in South Wales if you hadn't noticed. Shove your generalisations of entire continents up your arse.

So the lack of sales since ki went is a coincidence then?

READ THE BIT IN BOLD IN MASSIVE WRITING. Of course Ki was one of those factors. He wasn't the only one. There would have been numerous from your success, to the signing of an Asian player and so on. Also, shirt sales decreased, they didn't stop selling, further proving there were other factors other than Ki that got them buying your shirts.

So you have the figures at hand then? Ffs ki was the only driving force nobody in korea gave a f**k about us pre ki and nobody gives a f**k since he left. Same as Denmark and now norway with you. You really are a misguided fool to think otherwise. The type uncle vinny loves. Modern football fans, no passion, no pride, no identity, no atmosphere but a paper on brand awareness. Give me your annis and chuckles even that horrible vile cnut Murphy any day.

no, you made the assumption about why the rebrand was implimented & without any sort of evidence to back this up. I've made my own assumption, but with a statement that alluded to the same reason from the man who implemented it.

You assumed. I gave my opinion. I believe and still believe regardless of what a scrote like you thinks that the rebrand has been implemented to appeal to investors when the club gets floated on the SE. Thats not to sell shirts. Thats to appeal to investors like Lim. In my opinion, Tan will know investors and he will have targets and ideas about those he believes may invest. I believe he will have done his homework on it before he floats the club. AGAIN THAT IS MY OPINION. Thats generally what happens on the forum.

I haven't alluded to anything. You assumed. Assume what you like.

I stated the rebrand was done to get investors on board, people like Lim, not to sell shirts in Asia. I doubt Tan gives a crap about £20 here and there and I'm pretty sure he knows most shirts sold there are knock offs anyway.

That's an assumption. You "stated" it.

It's okay though. You call fans scum for not agreeing with the rebrand.. The very same rebrand you formed a protest group against.