No Expense spared at BDTBL

[davidpinder]

First the pitch is having a full make over and now the superstore, wasn't that long ago the superstore had a full referb was it?? Have we come into to cash or just splashing out??

http://www.sufc.co.uk/page/Superstore/0,,10418~1143936,00.html

I like the bit at the bottom "Hopefully all work will be completed by the end of July." for the open day would be a bit shit if it was closed.

 

[SotonBlade]

I would imagine it's being part funded by Macron

 

[wardlowwanderer]

First the pitch is having a full make over and now the superstore,


For 'make over' you can probably insert 'being reduced in size'. Smaller gates = Fewer customers = smaller 'super'store

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

First the pitch is having a full make over and now the superstore,


For 'make over' you can probably insert 'being reduced in size'. Smaller gates = Fewer customers = smaller 'super'store

Why shrink it, what do they need the space for? Why spend money on it if the new space isn't revenue generating?

Or maybe it isn't being reduced at all.

 

[Oreyt]

"For 'make over' you can probably insert 'being reduced in size'. Smaller gates = Fewer customers = smaller 'super'store"

Let's move all our operations to TJ Hughes and have done with it.

I can pick up my £4.99 bottles of Peter Andre's Insania After Shave at the same time then.

 

[Worksop_Blade]

I would imagine it's being part funded by Macron

Does this mean that Macron will take more £ from each shirt sold to cover cost of the refurb?

If so I thought this was the reason why Umbro, Nike etc were considered the devil as they would "take over the shop"

3rd year into a 4 year deal Macron decide to start giving a shit?

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Does this mean that Macron will take more £ from each shirt sold to cover cost of the refurb?

If so I thought this was the reason why Umbro, Nike etc were considered the devil as they would "take over the shop"

3rd year into a 4 year deal Macron decide to start giving a shit?

No the problem with Nike/Umbro is that we would have to pay them for making our kits, which would be off the peg standard strips.
They would also take a high percentage of income from the shop, and other merchandising.

All in all we would be out of pocket and still have kits of the same quality as we do now.

 

[Worksop_Blade]

No the problem with Nike/Umbro is that we would have to pay them for making our kits, which would be off the peg standard strips.
They would also take a high percentage of income from the shop, and other merchandising.

All in all we would be out of pocket and still have kits of the same quality as we do now.

So your saying Barnsley, Doncaster, Wednesday, Rotherham all pay Nike and Puma hand over fist for kits and Merchandise and are just chucking money out of the boardroom window?

When was the last time you saw any of the above clubs selling boxes upon boxes of their kits for £5 a shirt in march?

An off the peg, well made and fitting Red & White striped shirt would out sell the last two baggy ass market stall quality kits United have stocked combined.

It's something that's always got me about United, They don't seem to give a **** about brand image.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

So your saying Barnsley, Doncaster, Wednesday, Rotherham all pay Nike and Puma hand over fist for kits and Merchandise and are just chucking money out of the boardroom window?

Yes, I bet they don't make more money than we do off our shirts.

This is just a poor argument by those who think a brand name kit it superior just because it is made by Nike/Puma etc. It's about revenue generation not brand image.

 

[raul]

How much will we have made out of the £5 I was prepared to pay?

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

How much will we have made out of the £5 I was prepared to pay?

about a tenner, give or take.

 

[Darren]

So your saying Barnsley, Doncaster, Wednesday, Rotherham all pay Nike and Puma hand over fist for kits and Merchandise and are just chucking money out of the boardroom window?

When was the last time you saw any of the above clubs selling boxes upon boxes of their kits for £5 a shirt in march?

An off the peg, well made and fitting Red & White striped shirt would out sell the last two baggy ass market stall quality kits United have stocked combined.

It's something that's always got me about United, They don't seem to give a **** about brand image.

Any person or company who thinks brand image is a load of bollocks gets my vote.

 

[Worksop_Blade]

Yes, I bet they don't make more money than we do off our shirts.

This is just a poor argument by those who think a brand name kit it superior just because it is made by Nike/Puma etc. It's about revenue generation not brand image.

This subject come up the other regarding Liverpool's new £25 million contract with Warrior.

Although he club is getting £25mil from the company, how many Liverpool fans are going to stock up on a Warrior filled wardrobe as they do now with adidas?

They wont lose out financially but the merchandising sales will be down.

If united got together with an evil big brand and produced 2 kits and a range of training gear you would see a lot more people wearing club Merch around Sheffield not just replica shirts.

The next time you see someone in an old (15 years +) umbro/laver tracky top just ask them are they wearing it because:


a) its got the SUFC badge on it

b) Its well made, comfy, well fitting and has lasted

c) It was the only thing clean this morning

or

d) other

Then follow up with the question how come you don't have a new macron track top?

It's not a poor argument its a valid argument, why should the fans have to pay £45 for a shirt, £25 for a polo shirt, £40 for a jumper that are sub standard in quality, comfort and design to the gear in the Barnsley/Donny shops that is priced the same.

If the club think the shirts are worth £5 in March then why aren't they worth £5 the previous July?

 

[Linz]

The truth of the matter was that somebody over-ordered previous shirts... with supply far outstripping demand.

Apparently, United are hoping to tip the balance the other way a bit this year.

 

[Worksop_Blade]

Any person or company who thinks brand image is a load of bollocks gets my vote.

A company who doesn't give a toss about their brand is usually found feeding off the scraps of the companies that do.

 

[davidpinder]

The truth of the matter was that somebody over-ordered previous shirts... with supply far outstripping demand.

Apparently, United are hoping to tip the balance the other way a bit this year.

So we are having a shirt then??

 

[Linz]

So we are having a shirt then??

Yep... just not as much stock of them.

 

[Vancouver]

Any person or company who thinks brand image is a load of bollocks gets my vote.

Without a solid brand image we're far less likely to get any investment from sources other than the McCabe family. Investment from overseas only goes to those clubs who've established themselves as solid brands.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Any person or company who thinks brand image is a load of bollocks gets my vote.

I take it you wouldn't have a problem with the people at your firm conducting client meetings or going to court in jeans, trainers and a cannabis t-shirt then?

 

[yorkshirecoast]

Seems we are making the windows bigger & clearer so people can browse the merchandise from outside. Unfortunately, this will just mean they can see how shit the merchandise is and won't even bother going in the shop! Macron out!! And how about getting the new kit on sale in time for the lucrative summer market - you know, like just about every other club in the country manages to do.

 

[frechyblade]

Seems we are making the windows bigger & clearer so people can browse the merchandise from outside. Unfortunately, this will just mean they can see how shit the merchandise is and won't even bother going in the shop! Macron out!! And how about getting the new kit on sale in time for the lucrative summer market - you know, like just about every other club in the country manages to do.

Because the kit would be wrecked for first game of season with sponsors name peeling of etc, if past experience is anything to go by! The shirts really are poor quality.

UTB

 

[Darren]

I take it you wouldn't have a problem with the people at your firm conducting client meetings or going to court in jeans, trainers and a cannabis t-shirt then?

But that has nothing to do with brand image does it - i.e. trying, via superficial means, to project an image of our firm as a brand that distingushes us from our competitors. All lawyers generally dress in a conservative formal way so, in actual fact, dressing as you suggest would give us a definite brand image - i.e. one that tried to suggest we were down with our clients.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

A company who doesn't give a toss about their brand is usually found feeding off the scraps of the companies that do.

You way costs us money, the way the club is going gets us money.

Now unless you happen to have a bit of spare cash to cover this I would guess the argument is dead in the water.

Basically it revolves around you wanting to have a brand name, which we will pay for while getting hardly any benefit.

P.S. you keep bringing up quality, all the Macron kits I've bought are still in pretty good nick, so I'm not buying this poor quality argument.

 

[Darren]

You way costs us money, the way the club is going gets us money.

Now unless you happen to have a bit of spare cash to cover this I would guess the argument is dead in the water.

Basically it revolves around you wanting to have a brand name, which we will pay for while getting hardly any benefit.

P.S. you keep bringing up quality, all the Macron kits I've bought are still in pretty good nick, so I'm not buying this poor quality argument.

Assuming a reasonable quality, does anyone really give a flying fuck as to who manufactures our kit?

 

[JohnDenver]

P.S. you keep bringing up quality, all the Macron kits I've bought are still in pretty good nick, so I'm not buying this poor quality argument.

Hmmm.... The Macron shirts' cut is pretty dreadful. It's sports clothing shaped like maternity dresses. The top-end brands are more of a fashion fit.

Not that I'm suggesting United should use Nike to look better but lose cash...

 

[Highbury_Blade]

But that has nothing to do with brand image does it - i.e. trying, via superficial means, to project an image of our firm as a brand that distingushes us from our competitors. All lawyers generally dress in a conservative formal way so, in actual fact, dressing as you suggest would give us a definite brand image - i.e. one that tried to suggest we were down with our clients.

It's a brand image, but it isn't one you'd probably want to project.

Any company that doesn't want to protect their brand image, is a company that doesn't want to succeed in business.

 

[Darren]

It's a brand image, but it isn't one you'd probably want to project.

Any company that doesn't want to protect their brand image, is a company that doesn't want to succeed in business.

I would define "brand image" as something that distinguishes one firm in a particular area of business from its competitors. If all lawyers dress in a formal manner, then me dressing that way does not distinguish me in any way from other lawyers and thus does not constitute a "brand image". You wouldn't say that United players wearing football boots when they play games as opposed to 6 inch stilettos was part of SUFC's brand image would you?

 

[JJ Sefton]

Assuming a reasonable quality, does anyone really give a flying fuck as to who manufactures our kit?

I insist that our next kit is made from renewable hemp grown by Sting.

 

[Darren]

I insist that our next kit is made from renewable hemp grown by Sting.

I agree with the proviso that the people sewing the kit should be large breasted ladies from the Amazonian jungle.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Assuming a reasonable quality, does anyone really give a flying fuck as to who manufactures our kit?

No. I want which ever brings in the most revenue to the club.