As I said above, more people are worried about their own perceived lack of street cred than the actual benefit to our club. Everyone would have liked the Charlton brand to be associated with Microsoft (except Apple addicts) but it wasn't to be was it.
Instead we get a local company, clearly on the up, run by fans who were prepared to back us financially. Well done to all concerned I say and lets hope it works out well for us both.
No one likes the LOGO it's nothing to do with the brand!!
Give it a rest with the street cred nonsense. if it doesnt look nice then why would anyone want to wear it.
Walk down any street and witness people wearing all kinds of crap because it has a crocodile on it, or whatever other "designer" logo they have decided will impress other equally shallow folk.
Like people in Ugg boots or Louis Vuitton handbags, purses, wallets, belts, etc. Horrific.
As I said above, more people are worried about their own perceived lack of street cred than the actual benefit to our club. Everyone would have liked the Charlton brand to be associated with Microsoft (except Apple addicts) but it wasn't to be was it.
Instead we get a local company, clearly on the up, run by fans who were prepared to back us financially. Well done to all concerned I say and lets hope it works out well for us both.
No one likes the LOGO it's nothing to do with the brand!!
Give it a rest with the street cred nonsense. if it doesnt look nice then why would anyone want to wear it.
Walk down any street and witness people wearing all kinds of crap because it has a crocodile on it, or whatever other "designer" logo they have decided will impress other equally shallow folk.
Like people in Ugg boots or Louis Vuitton handbags, purses, wallets, belts, etc. Horrific.
Exactly SLL.
To be fair, a lot of people buy consumer goods with brand names on them because the manufacturer can be trusted to make quality products.
Sure, the price increases exponentially with the relative increase in quality, but for some they are willing to pay the extra money for the extra quality.
For all those that buy these items to 'pretend' they have the same as those that can, actually, afford them they are still getting the extra quality that the brand is known for.
if a logo isn't descriptive doesn't it get people talking and asking exactly that question?
To a point, and certainly we would as supporters. But if you were watching a game on Sky or saw the shirt in the paper, you probably expect to be able to see what a company does. We're intrigued because it's our club wearing the shirt. I read above that Barnsley are sponsored by Beckitt. I don't know what they do and I'm not interested enough to check
Don't think that Air conditioning type needs to be the same size as Andrews though. Nothing stands out they way it's designed. Personally think it should primarily say Andrews maybe air conditioning or climate control smaller underneath. The logo mark is pretty generic also which doesn't help.
Don't think that Air conditioning type needs to be the same size as Andrews though. Nothing stands out they way it's designed. Personally think it should primarily say Andrews maybe air conditioning or climate control smaller underneath. The logo mark is pretty generic also which doesn't help.
Nug, I have commented on the other thread under the pic you posted. The way Andrews Air Conditioning is shown on our new shirts is the same as it is displayed on their web site & products etc. Its all about brand awareness so why should they change their company branding to suit us?
Don't think that Air conditioning type needs to be the same size as Andrews though. Nothing stands out they way it's designed. Personally think it should primarily say Andrews maybe air conditioning or climate control smaller underneath. The logo mark is pretty generic also which doesn't help.
Nug, I have commented on the other thread under the pic you posted. The way Andrews Air Conditioning is shown on our new shirts is the same as it is displayed on their web site & products etc. Its all about brand awareness so why should they change their company branding to suit us?
Not saying they should, although I think the elements of their identity could be designed better, and that's not just from our point of view but from theirs as well. Nothing gets noticed on that arrangement, it's very amateurishly designed and put together.
if a logo isn't descriptive doesn't it get people talking and asking exactly that question?
To a point, and certainly we would as supporters. But if you were watching a game on Sky or saw the shirt in the paper, you probably expect to be able to see what a company does. We're intrigued because it's our club wearing the shirt. I read above that Barnsley are sponsored by Beckitt. I don't know what they do and I'm not interested enough to check
As I said above, more people are worried about their own perceived lack of street cred than the actual benefit to our club. Everyone would have liked the Charlton brand to be associated with Microsoft (except Apple addicts) but it wasn't to be was it.
Instead we get a local company, clearly on the up, run by fans who were prepared to back us financially. Well done to all concerned I say and lets hope it works out well for us both.
No one likes the LOGO it's nothing to do with the brand!!
Give it a rest with the street cred nonsense. if it doesnt look nice then why would anyone want to wear it.
Walk down any street and witness people wearing all kinds of crap because it has a crocodile on it, or whatever other "designer" logo they have decided will impress other equally shallow folk.
Like people in Ugg boots or Louis Vuitton handbags, purses, wallets, belts, etc. Horrific.
Exactly SLL.
To be fair, a lot of people buy consumer goods with brand names on them because the manufacturer can be trusted to make quality products.
Sure, the price increases exponentially with the relative increase in quality, but for some they are willing to pay the extra money for the extra quality.
For all those that buy these items to 'pretend' they have the same as those that can, actually, afford them they are still getting the extra quality that the brand is known for.
Yes, with regards to tellies, computers etc, but clothes... No. They are no better made than high street versions, unless you are talking proper designer stuff, which does not need the label on the outside...
As I said above, more people are worried about their own perceived lack of street cred than the actual benefit to our club. Everyone would have liked the Charlton brand to be associated with Microsoft (except Apple addicts) but it wasn't to be was it.
Instead we get a local company, clearly on the up, run by fans who were prepared to back us financially. Well done to all concerned I say and lets hope it works out well for us both.
No one likes the LOGO it's nothing to do with the brand!!
Give it a rest with the street cred nonsense. if it doesnt look nice then why would anyone want to wear it.
Walk down any street and witness people wearing all kinds of crap because it has a crocodile on it, or whatever other "designer" logo they have decided will impress other equally shallow folk.
Like people in Ugg boots or Louis Vuitton handbags, purses, wallets, belts, etc. Horrific.
Exactly SLL.
To be fair, a lot of people buy consumer goods with brand names on them because the manufacturer can be trusted to make quality products.
Sure, the price increases exponentially with the relative increase in quality, but for some they are willing to pay the extra money for the extra quality.
For all those that buy these items to 'pretend' they have the same as those that can, actually, afford them they are still getting the extra quality that the brand is known for.
Yes, with regards to tellies, computers etc, but clothes... No. They are no better made than high street versions, unless you are talking proper designer stuff, which does not need the label on the outside...
Precisely , anyone who buys football shirts anticipating fine craftsmanship from the eight year old who sewed it together in a windowless room in the developing world is nuts.
As an aside, I've noticed that most big and international teams now offer two kinds of replica shirt, authentic (£100) and supporters (£50) - what exactly is the difference ?
As I said above, more people are worried about their own perceived lack of street cred than the actual benefit to our club. Everyone would have liked the Charlton brand to be associated with Microsoft (except Apple addicts) but it wasn't to be was it.
Instead we get a local company, clearly on the up, run by fans who were prepared to back us financially. Well done to all concerned I say and lets hope it works out well for us both.
No one likes the LOGO it's nothing to do with the brand!!
Give it a rest with the street cred nonsense. if it doesnt look nice then why would anyone want to wear it.
Walk down any street and witness people wearing all kinds of crap because it has a crocodile on it, or whatever other "designer" logo they have decided will impress other equally shallow folk.
Like people in Ugg boots or Louis Vuitton handbags, purses, wallets, belts, etc. Horrific.
Exactly SLL.
To be fair, a lot of people buy consumer goods with brand names on them because the manufacturer can be trusted to make quality products.
Sure, the price increases exponentially with the relative increase in quality, but for some they are willing to pay the extra money for the extra quality.
For all those that buy these items to 'pretend' they have the same as those that can, actually, afford them they are still getting the extra quality that the brand is known for.
Yes, with regards to tellies, computers etc, but clothes... No. They are no better made than high street versions, unless you are talking proper designer stuff, which does not need the label on the outside...
Precisely , anyone who buys football shirts anticipating fine craftsmanship from the eight year old who sewed it together in a windowless room in the developing world is nuts.
As an aside, I've noticed that most big and international teams now offer two kinds of replica shirt, authentic (£100) and supporters (£50) - what exactly is the difference ?
The authentic kits (or at least the Adidas ones) have a stretchy rubber membrane bit across the shouldersm chest and back designed to pull your ribcage up and out, increasing lung capacity and therefore performance. The kit is also fitted and really hugs the player, look at recent chelsea kits and you will see how tight they all look. They are also lighter and wick moisture away from the body more effectively than the supporters kit. However seeing as most people wear the kit to watch the team instead of wearing it to play football in, it's not really that popular.
"Walk down any street and witness people wearing all kinds of Like people in Ugg boots or Louis Vuitton handbags, purses, wallets, belts, etc. Horrific."
"Yes, with regards to tellies, computers etc, but clothes... No. They are no better made than high street versions, unless you are talking proper designer stuff, which does not need the label on the outside..."
I wouldn't include the list above in a description of clothes.
The average Next handbag is not made to the same quality as a LV. Ugg boots are not the same as those you can buy from Barratts for a quarter of the price. They have labels on them, but that is not always why the majority of people buy them.
Anyway we are way off track, and I'm not really all that bothered about it, I just didn't want my comment to be misunderstood.
"Walk down any street and witness people wearing all kinds of Like people in Ugg boots or Louis Vuitton handbags, purses, wallets, belts, etc. Horrific."
"Yes, with regards to tellies, computers etc, but clothes... No. They are no better made than high street versions, unless you are talking proper designer stuff, which does not need the label on the outside..."
I wouldn't include the list above in a description of clothes.
The average Next handbag is not made to the same quality as a LV. Ugg boots are not the same as those you can buy from Barratts for a quarter of the price. They have labels on them, but that is not always why the majority of people buy them.
Anyway we are way off track, and I'm not really all that bothered about it, I just didn't want my comment to be misunderstood.
Can you buy the shirts without the logo ? or is it part ofthe deal that all shirts sold musthave the logo? Nothing against this one specifically just a general question?
Can you buy the shirts without the logo ? or is it part ofthe deal that all shirts sold musthave the logo? Nothing against this one specifically just a general question?
I seriously doubt it, besides as the Polo shirts will be, pretty much, the same for about half the price I'd imagine you'd be better to get one of those.
I say welcome to our new sponser at least there not some shoddy betting group or pay day loan sharks which seem to be the trend. Now they would have been embarrasing to have to wear on your shirt.
Can you buy the shirts without the logo ? or is it part ofthe deal that all shirts sold musthave the logo? Nothing against this one specifically just a general question?
I seriously doubt it, besides as the Polo shirts will be, pretty much, the same for about half the price I'd imagine you'd be better to get one of those.
There's a few, but not many. As I posted before, Blackburn are selling their shirts before a sponsor is announced & offering fans a receipt to come back & have logo/name added later. Celtic also offer their shirts with or without sponsor on.
Can you buy the shirts without the logo ? or is it part ofthe deal that all shirts sold musthave the logo? Nothing against this one specifically just a general question?
I seriously doubt it, besides as the Polo shirts will be, pretty much, the same for about half the price I'd imagine you'd be better to get one of those.
There's a few, but not many. As I posted before, Blackburn are selling their shirts before a sponsor is announced & offering fans a receipt to come back & have logo/name added later. Celtic also offer their shirts with or without sponsor on.
In the case of Celtic, is that not because they are sponsored by an alcohol (beer) brand? I can see why they would offer the option, but how would you sell future shirt sponsorship if it turned out that very few (probably almost none with this season's logo) opted for the shirt with the logo?
I think the advertising is as much to do with fans wearing it when not at football as it does to do with the odd photo in the local papers.
Comments
Sure, the price increases exponentially with the relative increase in quality, but for some they are willing to pay the extra money for the extra quality.
For all those that buy these items to 'pretend' they have the same as those that can, actually, afford them they are still getting the extra quality that the brand is known for.
Having my new Andrews a/c system fitted at Grumpy Towers next month in time for the heatwave.
I think all true fans should do the same to show support for our generous sponsor.
You get 2% discount for Red Card holders.
PS Where is the knocking shop in Eliscombe Road? Just a post code will do (for research purposes obviously).
if a logo isn't descriptive doesn't it get people talking and asking exactly that question?
Yes, with regards to tellies, computers etc, but clothes... No. They are no better made than high street versions, unless you are talking proper designer stuff, which does not need the label on the outside...
As an aside, I've noticed that most big and international teams now offer two kinds of replica shirt, authentic (£100) and supporters (£50) - what exactly is the difference ?
"Yes, with regards to tellies, computers etc, but clothes... No. They are no better made than high street versions, unless you are talking proper designer stuff, which does not need the label on the outside..."
I wouldn't include the list above in a description of clothes.
The average Next handbag is not made to the same quality as a LV. Ugg boots are not the same as those you can buy from Barratts for a quarter of the price. They have labels on them, but that is not always why the majority of people buy them.
Anyway we are way off track, and I'm not really all that bothered about it, I just didn't want my comment to be misunderstood.
http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/cash_boost_for_charlton_athletic_as_two_deals_completed/
Worst shirt we have be had.
However I'm really happy if it's the second biggest sponsor. Great work for all involved. Shame it looks bad.
I think the advertising is as much to do with fans wearing it when not at football as it does to do with the odd photo in the local papers.