Kanji Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 RedBull's brand has been all about pushing boundaries etc. Being a boring mid-table team would be 100% against their brand identity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 The motivation is essentially the same though, isn't it? I doubt it's deep in Red Bull's reason for existing that they must create a Champions League football club. They want to promote their brand just like Sports Direct do. They've trotted out a couple of quotes about making a CL team, I'm quite surprised everyone is so willing to take it at face value. Judging how well they do elsewhere, Im sure they could do a lot better then the fat man child and his trashy sportswear company. Hovering itself all over the premiership with its stink. You're probably right about that, I would just expect people to be a bit sceptical about football clubs being bought by non-football brands for promotional purposes. But surely it's just common sense to build a successful club if you want to use it to promote your brand? It's not going to do much for your image if you are hovering between mid-table and the relegation spots every season. Probably depends how much it costs. If you run a serious business then investing in the image is a necessary cost. I'm sure M&S could buy a lot cheaper fixtures and fittings from ebay, but they want to portray a quality image so their stores are fitted out to the highest standards. I don't see why you would want to buy a football club to raise awareness of your brand unless you wanted it to be in a good light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 RedBull's brand has been all about pushing boundaries etc. Being a boring mid-table team would be 100% against their brand identity. Certainly push boundaries. SV Austria Salzburg - After the takeover, Red Bull changed the club's name, management, and staff, declaring "this is a new club with no history." Red Bull initially claimed on the club website that the club was founded in 2005, but was ordered to remove this claim by the Austrian F.A. The new authority removed all trace of violet from the club logo and the team now play in the colours of red and white, to the consternation of much of the club's traditional support. There's no doubt they'd bring money and almost certain success to whichever English club they take over. Just depends how much you are willing to sacrifice to jump into bed with them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 If and when Ashley goes, I'd love us to be owned by somebody or something that wanted to build success. I'd take a Chelsea or Man City takeover because I'm sick of winning nowt but building up the club would be much better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 The motivation is essentially the same though, isn't it? I doubt it's deep in Red Bull's reason for existing that they must create a Champions League football club. They want to promote their brand just like Sports Direct do. They've trotted out a couple of quotes about making a CL team, I'm quite surprised everyone is so willing to take it at face value. Judging how well they do elsewhere, Im sure they could do a lot better then the fat man child and his trashy sportswear company. Hovering itself all over the premiership with its stink. You're probably right about that, I would just expect people to be a bit sceptical about football clubs being bought by non-football brands for promotional purposes. But surely it's just common sense to build a successful club if you want to use it to promote your brand? It's not going to do much for your image if you are hovering between mid-table and the relegation spots every season. Probably depends how much it costs. If you run a serious business then investing in the image is a necessary cost. I'm sure M&S could buy a lot cheaper fixtures and fittings from ebay, but they want to portray a quality image so their stores are fitted out to the highest standards. I don't see why you would want to buy a football club to raise awareness of your brand unless you wanted it to be in a good light. Yeah, but what I mean is, it's all about return on investment. You might decide spending £200m on buying the club is enough, and the extra £200m to compete at the top isn't worth it. Obviously they'd very likely be 'better' than Ashley in a lot of ways, especially considering how much we now hate him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toondave Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 The motivation is essentially the same though, isn't it? I doubt it's deep in Red Bull's reason for existing that they must create a Champions League football club. They want to promote their brand just like Sports Direct do. They've trotted out a couple of quotes about making a CL team, I'm quite surprised everyone is so willing to take it at face value. Judging how well they do elsewhere, Im sure they could do a lot better then the fat man child and his trashy sportswear company. Hovering itself all over the premiership with its stink. You're probably right about that, I would just expect people to be a bit sceptical about football clubs being bought by non-football brands for promotional purposes. But surely it's just common sense to build a successful club if you want to use it to promote your brand? It's not going to do much for your image if you are hovering between mid-table and the relegation spots every season. Probably depends how much it costs. If you run a serious business then investing in the image is a necessary cost. I'm sure M&S could buy a lot cheaper fixtures and fittings from ebay, but they want to portray a quality image so their stores are fitted out to the highest standards. I don't see why you would want to buy a football club to raise awareness of your brand unless you wanted it to be in a good light. Yeah, but what I mean is, it's all about return on investment. You might decide spending £200m on buying the club is enough, and the extra £200m to compete at the top isn't worth it. Obviously they'd very likely be 'better' than Ashley in a lot of ways, especially considering how much we now hate him. Well the extra £200m clearly isn't worth the investment to Ashley, but from the sounds of it, it is to RB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 We aint going to be doing nothing with the one trick man child pony in charge. So our only hope is someone buys the club of him and looks to build something worth while. Instead of just ripping the guts out of a business/product and then using the brand name as way to sell shit. Will it be red bull, most likely not, who will it be, fuck knows, will he sell eventually, god knows. But our only hope is the day he leaves. Hopefully when his helicopter crashes and kills him...but the pilot gets out ok. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 The motivation is essentially the same though, isn't it? I doubt it's deep in Red Bull's reason for existing that they must create a Champions League football club. They want to promote their brand just like Sports Direct do. They've trotted out a couple of quotes about making a CL team, I'm quite surprised everyone is so willing to take it at face value. I'd be surprised if a massive conglomerate like Red Bull bought a Premier League club without the intentions of making it a regular Champions League entity. On top of the Premier League coverage, all told, the exposure would be absolutely colossal. Ashley, on the other hand, doesn't see it as an idea worth investing in, for some reason. Imagine the brand recognition he would have built from birds-eye-view coverage of the stadium, with Sports Direct plastered all over the Gallowgate roof. He tried it with the Cisse signing a couple of Januarys ago but that's the last shred of 'ambition' we'll ever see from this owner, I fear. That being said, I'd have no interest in being FC Billboard. New ownership is a nice thought but that would just be another extreme. On that train of thought, football clubs in this country should be protected by English heritage, or whatever it is that 'protects' things. For eg, Cardiff City's kit shouldn't have been changed, just like St James' Park should never have been renamed or Hull City changing their name. Football is etched into the fabric of modern history in this country, and it shouldn't be meddled with to the extent it has been in some cases. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 On that train of thought, football clubs in this country should be protected by English heritage, or whatever it is that 'protects' things. For eg, Cardiff City's kit shouldn't have been changed, just like St James' Park should never have been renamed or Hull City changing their name. Football is etched into the fabric of modern history in this country, and it shouldn't be meddled with to the extent it has been in some cases. Absolutely. Any name change, kit change, crest change or stadium name change (new stadiums excepted for fairly obvious reasons) should have to go to a season ticket holder vote imo. Even Southampton essentially changing their colours the way they have really pisses me off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 If and when Ashley goes, I'd love us to be owned by somebody or something that wanted to build success. I'd take a Chelsea or Man City takeover because I'm sick of winning nowt but building up the club would be much better. I agree with that wholeheartedly, btw. I've lost sight of my hatred for Man City and Chelsea, because I've been too busy whinging about the polar opposite (Us/Ashley)... but I still definitely wouldn't like to see what's happened there happen here (in an ideal world). Plonk, success out of nowhere. It still seems so fake. It's why I would have more time for Ashley & Co if their policies weren't so transparent. If they thought: "hmm, Alan Pardew, bit of a no-mark but I really believe Newcastle could succeed under him." Or "hmm, scraping the bargain bins, not a conventional way to success but I really believe this is the way to make Newcastle as good as they can be." It would still be misguided and I would still want us to sort our shit pronto, but it wouldn't be as utterly desperate as it is now - knowing that all decisions are made through 'un-footballing' motivations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 On that train of thought, football clubs in this country should be protected by English heritage, or whatever it is that 'protects' things. For eg, Cardiff City's kit shouldn't have been changed, just like St James' Park should never have been renamed or Hull City changing their name. Football is etched into the fabric of modern history in this country, and it shouldn't be meddled with to the extent it has been in some cases. Absolutely. Any name change, kit change, crest change or stadium name change (new stadiums excepted for fairly obvious reasons) should have to go to a season ticket holder vote imo. Even Southampton essentially changing their colours the way they have really pisses me off. The league itself should protect these marks, kits, stadium names (historic ones) as part & parcel of being part of the league. If you are in the league, and your stadium was built before (set parameters) these items should be protected, the same with the club's badge, kits, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 Urgh, Southampton as well. Forgot that one. Last season was bad enough but at least they had stripes of some description. This season's is disgraceful imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 Urgh, Southampton as well. Forgot that one. Last season was bad enough but at least they had stripes of some description. This season's is disgraceful imo. A Southampton fan on SSC was saying that during the close season they were in negotiations with RB about shirt sponsorship but RB had insisted on more than just shirt sponsorship, basically they wanted a stadium name change etc, Southampton were going with until they got more demanding hence why they have plain red shirts this season, it was all part of the RB sponsorship deal that collapsed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 Makes nee sense, soz. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMc Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 The motivation is essentially the same though, isn't it? I doubt it's deep in Red Bull's reason for existing that they must create a Champions League football club. They want to promote their brand just like Sports Direct do. They've trotted out a couple of quotes about making a CL team, I'm quite surprised everyone is so willing to take it at face value. I'd be surprised if a massive conglomerate like Red Bull bought a Premier League club without the intentions of making it a regular Champions League entity. On top of the Premier League coverage, all told, the exposure would be absolutely colossal. Ashley, on the other hand, doesn't see it as an idea worth investing in, for some reason. Imagine the brand recognition he would have built from birds-eye-view coverage of the stadium, with Sports Direct plastered all over the Gallowgate roof. He tried it with the Cisse signing a couple of Januarys ago but that's the last shred of 'ambition' we'll ever see from this owner, I fear. That being said, I'd have no interest in being FC Billboard. New ownership is a nice thought but that would just be another extreme. On that train of thought, football clubs in this country should be protected by English heritage, or whatever it is that 'protects' things. For eg, Cardiff City's kit shouldn't have been changed, just like St James' Park should never have been renamed or Hull City changing their name. Football is etched into the fabric of modern history in this country, and it shouldn't be meddled with to the extent it has been in some cases. Cardiff wouldn't like being protected by English Heritage like Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 The motivation is essentially the same though, isn't it? I doubt it's deep in Red Bull's reason for existing that they must create a Champions League football club. They want to promote their brand just like Sports Direct do. They've trotted out a couple of quotes about making a CL team, I'm quite surprised everyone is so willing to take it at face value. I'd be surprised if a massive conglomerate like Red Bull bought a Premier League club without the intentions of making it a regular Champions League entity. On top of the Premier League coverage, all told, the exposure would be absolutely colossal. Ashley, on the other hand, doesn't see it as an idea worth investing in, for some reason. Imagine the brand recognition he would have built from birds-eye-view coverage of the stadium, with Sports Direct plastered all over the Gallowgate roof. He tried it with the Cisse signing a couple of Januarys ago but that's the last shred of 'ambition' we'll ever see from this owner, I fear. That being said, I'd have no interest in being FC Billboard. New ownership is a nice thought but that would just be another extreme. On that train of thought, football clubs in this country should be protected by English heritage, or whatever it is that 'protects' things. For eg, Cardiff City's kit shouldn't have been changed, just like St James' Park should never have been renamed or Hull City changing their name. Football is etched into the fabric of modern history in this country, and it shouldn't be meddled with to the extent it has been in some cases. Cardiff wouldn't like being protected by English Heritage like Cadw then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 'Listing' club heritage is a good idea in theory, but I don't know how government could act to list the branding of private companies, which is essentially what a football club now is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 'Listing' club heritage is a good idea in theory, but I don't know how government could act to list the branding of private companies, which is essentially what a football club now is. Perhaps not at present but maybe an opportunity for some scoundrel MP in a marginal seat somewhere, or even a safe Northumberland seat, to do something populist and even useful for once. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouldy_uk Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Sports Direct on Watchdog next week. On in a few mins... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Fat man will love this! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Mike Ashley in 'misleading money-making scam' shocker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 What's the deal, just his constant "sale"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 What's the deal, just his constant "sale"? No, you automatically buy a magazine unless you un-tick a box which it seems a lot of people don't do and end up with something they didn't want. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 What's the deal, just his constant "sale"? No, you automatically buy a magazine unless you un-tick a box which it seems a lot of people don't do and end up with something they didn't want. Ah right, typical low-level retail shite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Ah right, typical low-level retail s****. Are you saying they all do it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts