Gen Z tend to choose brands that reflect their values which is why we see so much socially and environmentally conscious marketing these days. But is that how people choose their football team? I don't know about that. I would be very surprised if there are people who say they support X FC "because of their work in the community."
It is certainly one of the reasons (a very big reason) why I genuinely believe I support the best football club in the land.
If there is a problem with older people wanting to keep things as they have always been, evidently the solution is to propose something completely incomprehensible to said older people so they can’t comment on it. As the film says, Pigeon Toed Orange Peel.
“Change is the law of life, and those who look only to the past and present are certain to miss the future” -John F. Kennedy
“An economist is a person who states the obvious in terms of the incomprehensible” - Alfred A Knopf
Is there nobody on Charlton Life that has a child able to explain this bollox? Perhaps the announcement makes sense to the target audience perhaps not but IMHO as a marketing approach is misses the mark like most of Dobbos shots. I genuinely hope that whatever the plan is that it's successful, but right now it appears that absolutely nobody knows what that is.
Let me have a go:-
The company are sponsoring Charlton, so I imagine they will be paying the club a fee as any other sponsor would.
For that sponsorship fee, Footballco. get access to Charlton "assets" such as Chucks, to create content for distribution on their various digital platforms.
The content is targeting a specific demographic (young / urban) that like the sort of content that is produced (urban / gritty / "street" etc) hence the title of the Chucks video ("The ends").
Through the power of the interweb and targeting algorithms, the content is widely distributed through platforms (tiktok etc) with likeminded others. The content drives traffic to the various platforms used by Footballco. that are then "monetised" through advertising or explicit product connections. (if you look on the website of footballco you will see, for example, a Crystal Palace youth player and Adidas).
There are potentially other commercial elements at play, such as affiliate fees (ie if their site drives traffic to the Charlton club shop for example, the club shop operators may pay a fee to Footballco. (this is supposition on my part)).
Both parties benefit. Footballco. get to use the assets of a club which is based in South London (demographic tick) and which has a strong community element (ethical tick), and earn from the content they produce.
Charlton gets its name out amongst a potential local and international fanbase, and get sponsorship income to boot.
This is that way I see it also, but more as a way of making money rather than increasing the fan base.
I don't think many additional fans were 'recruited' after the Sidemen match in 2022.
I have two Gen Z boys (18 and 14) who love football, and I can't imagine them deciding to support a club because of engaging TikTok videos.
And if they didn't like football, I can't imagine them deciding to support a club because of engaging TikTok videos!
Really can't see the problem, it's not like our results will bring/keep kids supporting CAFC. If we didn't have our brief Premier League stint, we'd be knackered regards the curent younger generations of fans and attendances would be even worse.
It’s progress. The world is a very different place to what it was when Seth and I started supporting. Just because a certain generation doesn’t get it doesn’t mean others won’t and let’s face it what harm can it do. I have no idea why but I’m pleased to see it happen.
Is there nobody on Charlton Life that has a child able to explain this bollox? Perhaps the announcement makes sense to the target audience perhaps not but IMHO as a marketing approach is misses the mark like most of Dobbos shots. I genuinely hope that whatever the plan is that it's successful, but right now it appears that absolutely nobody knows what that is.
Let me have a go:-
The company are sponsoring Charlton, so I imagine they will be paying the club a fee as any other sponsor would.
For that sponsorship fee, Footballco. get access to Charlton "assets" such as Chucks, to create content for distribution on their various digital platforms.
The content is targeting a specific demographic (young / urban) that like the sort of content that is produced (urban / gritty / "street" etc) hence the title of the Chucks video ("The ends").
Through the power of the interweb and targeting algorithms, the content is widely distributed through platforms (tiktok etc) with likeminded others. The content drives traffic to the various platforms used by Footballco. that are then "monetised" through advertising or explicit product connections. (if you look on the website of footballco you will see, for example, a Crystal Palace youth player and Adidas).
There are potentially other commercial elements at play, such as affiliate fees (ie if their site drives traffic to the Charlton club shop for example, the club shop operators may pay a fee to Footballco. (this is supposition on my part)).
Both parties benefit. Footballco. get to use the assets of a club which is based in South London (demographic tick) and which has a strong community element (ethical tick), and earn from the content they produce.
Charlton gets its name out amongst a potential local and international fanbase, and get sponsorship income to boot.
This is that way I see it also, but more as a way of making money rather than increasing the fan base.
I don't think many additional fans were 'recruited' after the Sidemen match in 2022.
I have two Gen Z boys (18 and 14) who love football, and I can't imagine them deciding to support a club because of engaging TikTok videos.
And if they didn't like football, I can't imagine them deciding to support a club because of engaging TikTok videos!
I have two boys, 32 and 34 (not sure what generation that is - millennial?) and they support Charlton because of me - they were born and raised 25 miles from The Valley. I support Charlton because my brother took me to my first game when I was 7 (but I did live a bit closer!). That's probably typical of most of our fanbase, plus a love of football and we are the closest club, and peer pressure.
This isn't of course going to fill The Valley in the current pub league we are in (and hopefully stay for another season after this) but it can't do any harm to try and get the 'community club' message out there with an organisation with huge reach. Community values, EDI and so on does influence Gen Z - TikTok et al is just the media to get that message across, not the message itself.
Is there nobody on Charlton Life that has a child able to explain this bollox? Perhaps the announcement makes sense to the target audience perhaps not but IMHO as a marketing approach is misses the mark like most of Dobbos shots. I genuinely hope that whatever the plan is that it's successful, but right now it appears that absolutely nobody knows what that is.
Let me have a go:-
The company are sponsoring Charlton, so I imagine they will be paying the club a fee as any other sponsor would.
For that sponsorship fee, Footballco. get access to Charlton "assets" such as Chucks, to create content for distribution on their various digital platforms.
The content is targeting a specific demographic (young / urban) that like the sort of content that is produced (urban / gritty / "street" etc) hence the title of the Chucks video ("The ends").
Through the power of the interweb and targeting algorithms, the content is widely distributed through platforms (tiktok etc) with likeminded others. The content drives traffic to the various platforms used by Footballco. that are then "monetised" through advertising or explicit product connections. (if you look on the website of footballco you will see, for example, a Crystal Palace youth player and Adidas).
There are potentially other commercial elements at play, such as affiliate fees (ie if their site drives traffic to the Charlton club shop for example, the club shop operators may pay a fee to Footballco. (this is supposition on my part)).
Both parties benefit. Footballco. get to use the assets of a club which is based in South London (demographic tick) and which has a strong community element (ethical tick), and earn from the content they produce.
Charlton gets its name out amongst a potential local and international fanbase, and get sponsorship income to boot.
This is that way I see it also, but more as a way of making money rather than increasing the fan base.
I don't think many additional fans were 'recruited' after the Sidemen match in 2022.
I have two Gen Z boys (18 and 14) who love football, and I can't imagine them deciding to support a club because of engaging TikTok videos.
And if they didn't like football, I can't imagine them deciding to support a club because of engaging TikTok videos!
I have two boys, 32 and 34 (not sure what generation that is - millennial?) and they support Charlton because of me - they were born and raised 25 miles from The Valley. I support Charlton because my brother took me to my first game when I was 7 (but I did live a bit closer!). That's probably typical of most of our fanbase, plus a love of football and we are the closest club, and peer pressure.
This isn't of course going to fill The Valley in the current pub league we are in (and hopefully stay for another season after this) but it can't do any harm to try and get the 'community club' message out there with an organisation with huge reach. Community values, EDI and so on does influence Gen Z - TikTok et al is just the media to get that message across, not the message itself.
Sure, and as Shooters says, what harm can it do if it costs Charlton zero £s and there is some possibility of making a bit of money while raising the profile of the club.
As long as all the image, storytelling, 'optics', algorithms, influencers, clicks, etc., are backed up by good football, I doubt anyone would object.
Any new initiative is welcome in my book. I'm one of the 'oldies' and don't understand the offering to be honest, BUT, if it enhances the club to youngsters, other parts of the world then I'm all for it. We can't keep relying on old stagers, like me, to get new people interested or involved, I don't understand why people are moaning or criticising it? We live in different times now, with different methods of marketing, and so be it, we have to move with the times, it keeps the club in people's minds. If it helps by allowing us to get a better calibre of player and hence better product on the pitch, what's the harm?
Any new initiative is welcome in my book. I'm one of the 'oldies' and don't understand the offering to be honest, BUT, if it enhances the club to youngsters, other parts of the world then I'm all for it. We can't keep relying on old stagers, like me, to get new people interested or involved, I don't understand why people are moaning or criticising it? We live in different times now, with different methods of marketing, and so be it, we have to move with the times, it keeps the club in people's minds. If it helps by allowing us to get a better calibre of player and hence better product on the pitch, what's the harm?
Now you just know @T_C_E will bite on that one, Malc!
There’s some decent stuff there. The Jauntro page, with a video pub crawl in Peckham is an entertaining way of reviewing locals…”supping their £6.50 pint of Hepcat, the yuppie elixir of life” 😁
Is there nobody on Charlton Life that has a child able to explain this bollox? Perhaps the announcement makes sense to the target audience perhaps not but IMHO as a marketing approach is misses the mark like most of Dobbos shots. I genuinely hope that whatever the plan is that it's successful, but right now it appears that absolutely nobody knows what that is.
Let me have a go:-
The company are sponsoring Charlton, so I imagine they will be paying the club a fee as any other sponsor would.
For that sponsorship fee, Footballco. get access to Charlton "assets" such as Chucks, to create content for distribution on their various digital platforms.
The content is targeting a specific demographic (young / urban) that like the sort of content that is produced (urban / gritty / "street" etc) hence the title of the Chucks video ("The ends").
Through the power of the interweb and targeting algorithms, the content is widely distributed through platforms (tiktok etc) with likeminded others. The content adds traffic to the various platforms owned by Footballco. that are then "monetised" through advertising or explicit product connections. (if you look on the website of footballco you will see, for example, a Crystal Palace youth player and Adidas).
There are potentially other commercial elements at play, such as affiliate fees (ie if their site drives traffic to the Charlton club shop for example, the club shop operators may pay a fee to Footballco. (this is supposition on my part)).
Both parties benefit. Footballco. get to use the assets of a club which is based in South London (demographic tick) and which has a strong community element (ethical tick), and earn from the content they produce.
Charlton gets its name out amongst a potential local and international fanbase, and get sponsorship income to boot.
Spot on.
Is it "spot on" though? Take the first line - who is paying who a fee? It doesnt say. Or maybe there is no initial fee in either direction?
Aside from the announcement being a load of words that dont actually say or tell us much, I think a lot of people on this thread would just like to know is this something that we are getting paid for or are paying for. No real need to bring ages into it and starting chucking stones at Generation A B or C.
In my business I try to work on the basis that if someone doesnt understand what you're telling them then you're probably not explaining it well enough. Of course theres a limit to how many times you can explain things before you have to conclude you're just dealing with stupidity, but as an opening communication piece it was pretty shit.
Gen Z tend to choose brands that reflect their values which is why we see so much socially and environmentally conscious marketing these days. But is that how people choose their football team? I don't know about that. I would be very surprised if there are people who say they support X FC "because of their work in the community."
It is certainly one of the reasons (a very big reason) why I genuinely believe I support the best football club in the land.
There is a gap between perceptions of the trust among fans and the reality, which is one reason why successive new ownerships have talked about harnessing it better and never been able to do so. It gets very little scrutiny, understandably, but also very helpfully, and it is not and cannot be under the control of the club, ownership or management, which is why they have not been able to wreck it.
Of course the relationship is mutually dependent, although at one point it was being suggested within the trust that they should walk away from Charlton completely. I think this was delusional.
Is there nobody on Charlton Life that has a child able to explain this bollox? Perhaps the announcement makes sense to the target audience perhaps not but IMHO as a marketing approach is misses the mark like most of Dobbos shots. I genuinely hope that whatever the plan is that it's successful, but right now it appears that absolutely nobody knows what that is.
Let me have a go:-
The company are sponsoring Charlton, so I imagine they will be paying the club a fee as any other sponsor would.
For that sponsorship fee, Footballco. get access to Charlton "assets" such as Chucks, to create content for distribution on their various digital platforms.
The content is targeting a specific demographic (young / urban) that like the sort of content that is produced (urban / gritty / "street" etc) hence the title of the Chucks video ("The ends").
Through the power of the interweb and targeting algorithms, the content is widely distributed through platforms (tiktok etc) with likeminded others. The content adds traffic to the various platforms owned by Footballco. that are then "monetised" through advertising or explicit product connections. (if you look on the website of footballco you will see, for example, a Crystal Palace youth player and Adidas).
There are potentially other commercial elements at play, such as affiliate fees (ie if their site drives traffic to the Charlton club shop for example, the club shop operators may pay a fee to Footballco. (this is supposition on my part)).
Both parties benefit. Footballco. get to use the assets of a club which is based in South London (demographic tick) and which has a strong community element (ethical tick), and earn from the content they produce.
Charlton gets its name out amongst a potential local and international fanbase, and get sponsorship income to boot.
Spot on.
Is it "spot on" though? Take the first line - who is paying who a fee? It doesnt say. Or maybe there is no initial fee in either direction?
Aside from the announcement being a load of words that dont actually say or tell us much, I think a lot of people on this thread would just like to know is this something that we are getting paid for or are paying for. No real need to bring ages into it and starting chucking stones at Generation A B or C.
In my business I try to work on the basis that if someone doesnt understand what you're telling them then you're probably not explaining it well enough. Of course theres a limit to how many times you can explain things before you have to conclude you're just dealing with stupidity, but as an opening communication piece it was pretty shit.
As I read it Footballco are a sponsor- they will be paying the club.
Charlton is the vehicle for content that the sponsor is tapping into and likely to pay for.
It is unlikely that the club would pay a media company to create content without any immediate benefit to the club as nothing they do could drive any immediate revenue stream.
Is there nobody on Charlton Life that has a child able to explain this bollox? Perhaps the announcement makes sense to the target audience perhaps not but IMHO as a marketing approach is misses the mark like most of Dobbos shots. I genuinely hope that whatever the plan is that it's successful, but right now it appears that absolutely nobody knows what that is.
Let me have a go:-
The company are sponsoring Charlton, so I imagine they will be paying the club a fee as any other sponsor would.
For that sponsorship fee, Footballco. get access to Charlton "assets" such as Chucks, to create content for distribution on their various digital platforms.
The content is targeting a specific demographic (young / urban) that like the sort of content that is produced (urban / gritty / "street" etc) hence the title of the Chucks video ("The ends").
Through the power of the interweb and targeting algorithms, the content is widely distributed through platforms (tiktok etc) with likeminded others. The content adds traffic to the various platforms owned by Footballco. that are then "monetised" through advertising or explicit product connections. (if you look on the website of footballco you will see, for example, a Crystal Palace youth player and Adidas).
There are potentially other commercial elements at play, such as affiliate fees (ie if their site drives traffic to the Charlton club shop for example, the club shop operators may pay a fee to Footballco. (this is supposition on my part)).
Both parties benefit. Footballco. get to use the assets of a club which is based in South London (demographic tick) and which has a strong community element (ethical tick), and earn from the content they produce.
Charlton gets its name out amongst a potential local and international fanbase, and get sponsorship income to boot.
Spot on.
Is it "spot on" though? Take the first line - who is paying who a fee? It doesnt say. Or maybe there is no initial fee in either direction?
Aside from the announcement being a load of words that dont actually say or tell us much, I think a lot of people on this thread would just like to know is this something that we are getting paid for or are paying for. No real need to bring ages into it and starting chucking stones at Generation A B or C.
In my business I try to work on the basis that if someone doesnt understand what you're telling them then you're probably not explaining it well enough. Of course theres a limit to how many times you can explain things before you have to conclude you're just dealing with stupidity, but as an opening communication piece it was pretty shit.
As I read it Footballco are a sponsor- they will be paying the club.
Charlton is the vehicle for content that the sponsor is tapping into and likely to pay for.
It is unlikely that the club would pay a media company to create content without any immediate benefit to the club as nothing they do could drive any immediate revenue stream.
You may well be right. But we're both guessing because it's not clear.
Obviously I dont expect them to disclose every financial detail, that would never be the case, but if theres enough people thinking " what does that actually mean", then I would suggest the communication isnt great!
Is there nobody on Charlton Life that has a child able to explain this bollox? Perhaps the announcement makes sense to the target audience perhaps not but IMHO as a marketing approach is misses the mark like most of Dobbos shots. I genuinely hope that whatever the plan is that it's successful, but right now it appears that absolutely nobody knows what that is.
Let me have a go:-
The company are sponsoring Charlton, so I imagine they will be paying the club a fee as any other sponsor would.
For that sponsorship fee, Footballco. get access to Charlton "assets" such as Chucks, to create content for distribution on their various digital platforms.
The content is targeting a specific demographic (young / urban) that like the sort of content that is produced (urban / gritty / "street" etc) hence the title of the Chucks video ("The ends").
Through the power of the interweb and targeting algorithms, the content is widely distributed through platforms (tiktok etc) with likeminded others. The content adds traffic to the various platforms owned by Footballco. that are then "monetised" through advertising or explicit product connections. (if you look on the website of footballco you will see, for example, a Crystal Palace youth player and Adidas).
There are potentially other commercial elements at play, such as affiliate fees (ie if their site drives traffic to the Charlton club shop for example, the club shop operators may pay a fee to Footballco. (this is supposition on my part)).
Both parties benefit. Footballco. get to use the assets of a club which is based in South London (demographic tick) and which has a strong community element (ethical tick), and earn from the content they produce.
Charlton gets its name out amongst a potential local and international fanbase, and get sponsorship income to boot.
Spot on.
Is it "spot on" though? Take the first line - who is paying who a fee? It doesnt say. Or maybe there is no initial fee in either direction?
Aside from the announcement being a load of words that dont actually say or tell us much, I think a lot of people on this thread would just like to know is this something that we are getting paid for or are paying for. No real need to bring ages into it and starting chucking stones at Generation A B or C.
In my business I try to work on the basis that if someone doesnt understand what you're telling them then you're probably not explaining it well enough. Of course theres a limit to how many times you can explain things before you have to conclude you're just dealing with stupidity, but as an opening communication piece it was pretty shit.
As I read it Footballco are a sponsor- they will be paying the club.
Charlton is the vehicle for content that the sponsor is tapping into and likely to pay for.
It is unlikely that the club would pay a media company to create content without any immediate benefit to the club as nothing they do could drive any immediate revenue stream.
It’s a ‘partnership’. I would guess that the chance of this company paying anything to be a ‘sponsor’ as you describe are as remote as our play off chances.
Is there nobody on Charlton Life that has a child able to explain this bollox? Perhaps the announcement makes sense to the target audience perhaps not but IMHO as a marketing approach is misses the mark like most of Dobbos shots. I genuinely hope that whatever the plan is that it's successful, but right now it appears that absolutely nobody knows what that is.
Let me have a go:-
The company are sponsoring Charlton, so I imagine they will be paying the club a fee as any other sponsor would.
For that sponsorship fee, Footballco. get access to Charlton "assets" such as Chucks, to create content for distribution on their various digital platforms.
The content is targeting a specific demographic (young / urban) that like the sort of content that is produced (urban / gritty / "street" etc) hence the title of the Chucks video ("The ends").
Through the power of the interweb and targeting algorithms, the content is widely distributed through platforms (tiktok etc) with likeminded others. The content adds traffic to the various platforms owned by Footballco. that are then "monetised" through advertising or explicit product connections. (if you look on the website of footballco you will see, for example, a Crystal Palace youth player and Adidas).
There are potentially other commercial elements at play, such as affiliate fees (ie if their site drives traffic to the Charlton club shop for example, the club shop operators may pay a fee to Footballco. (this is supposition on my part)).
Both parties benefit. Footballco. get to use the assets of a club which is based in South London (demographic tick) and which has a strong community element (ethical tick), and earn from the content they produce.
Charlton gets its name out amongst a potential local and international fanbase, and get sponsorship income to boot.
Spot on.
Is it "spot on" though? Take the first line - who is paying who a fee? It doesnt say. Or maybe there is no initial fee in either direction?
Aside from the announcement being a load of words that dont actually say or tell us much, I think a lot of people on this thread would just like to know is this something that we are getting paid for or are paying for. No real need to bring ages into it and starting chucking stones at Generation A B or C.
In my business I try to work on the basis that if someone doesnt understand what you're telling them then you're probably not explaining it well enough. Of course theres a limit to how many times you can explain things before you have to conclude you're just dealing with stupidity, but as an opening communication piece it was pretty shit.
As I read it Footballco are a sponsor- they will be paying the club.
Charlton is the vehicle for content that the sponsor is tapping into and likely to pay for.
It is unlikely that the club would pay a media company to create content without any immediate benefit to the club as nothing they do could drive any immediate revenue stream.
It’s a ‘partnership’. I would guess that the chance of this company paying anything to be a ‘sponsor’ as you describe are as remote as our play off chances.
You never heard of the "official partners" of the Champions League, World Cup, etc, etc. They certainly pay.
The word "partnership" in this context could mean anything - we are paying them to produce content, they are paying us to use our name/assets, or nobody is paying anybody and we are just working with them for mutual benefit.
The question the blurb doesn’t answer is “why Charlton” because however successful the trust and academy are the audience for them is tiny and likely geographically constrained. The women’s team is only a slightly better answer.
There’s some decent stuff there. The Jauntro page, with a video pub crawl in Peckham is an entertaining way of reviewing locals…”supping their £6.50 pint of Hepcat, the yuppie elixir of life” 😁
Its not that funny but I guess its sort of entertaining. Probably because I know a few of the pubs that are mentioned.
Gen Z tend to choose brands that reflect their values which is why we see so much socially and environmentally conscious marketing these days. But is that how people choose their football team? I don't know about that. I would be very surprised if there are people who say they support X FC "because of their work in the community."
It is certainly one of the reasons (a very big reason) why I genuinely believe I support the best football club in the land.
I suggest it's one of the reasons we're proud to support the club, but not the reason most chose to support it - as the 'Why Charlton' thread will attest.
The question the blurb doesn’t answer is “why Charlton” because however successful the trust and academy are the audience for them is tiny and likely geographically constrained. The women’s team is only a slightly better answer.
My guesses.
1. Cheap (or as others suggest, maybe free / contra). 2. South London (cage football demographic). 3. We may be a shocking team, but still the perception of a big (ish) club.
How to increase young and local support materially = get better at football.
Locals with roots in the area probably wont start supporting us now in any great numbers. Locals without roots in the area will armchair support Arsenal in the same why if i moved to Catalonia or Milan I'd support Barca or AC rather than the local third tier ne'r do wells. They'll always be the odd freak that loves a charity case so would pick the odd one or two up that way but will be few and far between.
Local yoot in SE London will go Palace or Millwall whilst they are higher than us if not affiliated. Nigels have premier league football and Millwall have a bit of edge and rep which will appeal to club-less young lads more than us. Or more than likely they'll support arsenal.
Where have the 10s of thousands of Charlton fans disappeared to that were at Wembley and in the premier league? They've stopped coming cos the football has been shit for years and still is. And most of them were probably proper legacy Charlton fans.
If we cant get legacy Charlton supporters to watch the latest set of feeble weaklings try and grind out a result against Burton or Northampton it's unlikely that we'll attract locals who've moved over from Nigeria in the last generation or 2 when they can just as easily support Arsenal and get far more enjoyment and the yoof will far likely want to be tied to Arsenal etc and all that comes with it even if we're the nearest club as the crow flies.
Transport us magically to the premier league and surprise surprise the crowds will grow. And then the marketing stuff kicks in like palace with their South London and Proud nonsense to engage the surrounding area,...but the football success comes first and foremost.
We're not a Sunderland with a captive audience and it's no mystery that locals in Wrexham are suddenly flocking to the racecourse in greater numbers and casting off their Liverpool and man united shirts since the football success has vastly improved.
Money at this stage would be better spent on strengthening the playing squad as best as possible and getting us higher up the pyramid rather than spending on consultants and marketing that will bring fuck all in real terms all the time we're shit on the pitch and going nowhere.
Get up the leagues and then people will flock there including locals and hitherto unaffiliated youngsters. Until the football success is where it needs to be it's just pissing in the wind.
We now have to also consider generation Alphas On the above website it says that the category starts in 2013 but elsewhere I’ve seen that it’s from 2010 and that Beta begins next year. I’ll soon be bringing one Alpha to her first match. I’m telling her already that we’re fighting relegation to the fourth division because it’s ’gritty’ and so she’s well on board.
Comments
It is certainly one of the reasons (a very big reason) why I genuinely believe I support the best football club in the land.
I don't think many additional fans were 'recruited' after the Sidemen match in 2022.
I have two Gen Z boys (18 and 14) who love football, and I can't imagine them deciding to support a club because of engaging TikTok videos.
And if they didn't like football, I can't imagine them deciding to support a club because of engaging TikTok videos!
As long as all the image, storytelling, 'optics', algorithms, influencers, clicks, etc., are backed up by good football, I doubt anyone would object.
Now you just know @T_C_E will bite on that one, Malc!
There’s some decent stuff there. The Jauntro page, with a video pub crawl in Peckham is an entertaining way of reviewing locals…”supping their £6.50 pint of Hepcat, the yuppie elixir of life” 😁
Aside from the announcement being a load of words that dont actually say or tell us much, I think a lot of people on this thread would just like to know is this something that we are getting paid for or are paying for. No real need to bring ages into it and starting chucking stones at Generation A B or C.
In my business I try to work on the basis that if someone doesnt understand what you're telling them then you're probably not explaining it well enough. Of course theres a limit to how many times you can explain things before you have to conclude you're just dealing with stupidity, but as an opening communication piece it was pretty shit.
Obviously I dont expect them to disclose every financial detail, that would never be the case, but if theres enough people thinking " what does that actually mean", then I would suggest the communication isnt great!
The word "partnership" in this context could mean anything - we are paying them to produce content, they are paying us to use our name/assets, or nobody is paying anybody and we are just working with them for mutual benefit.
Its not that funny but I guess its sort of entertaining. Probably because I know a few of the pubs that are mentioned.
1. Cheap (or as others suggest, maybe free / contra).
2. South London (cage football demographic).
3. We may be a shocking team, but still the perception of a big (ish) club.
Locals with roots in the area probably wont start supporting us now in any great numbers. Locals without roots in the area will armchair support Arsenal in the same why if i moved to Catalonia or Milan I'd support Barca or AC rather than the local third tier ne'r do wells. They'll always be the odd freak that loves a charity case so would pick the odd one or two up that way but will be few and far between.
Local yoot in SE London will go Palace or Millwall whilst they are higher than us if not affiliated. Nigels have premier league football and Millwall have a bit of edge and rep which will appeal to club-less young lads more than us. Or more than likely they'll support arsenal.
Where have the 10s of thousands of Charlton fans disappeared to that were at Wembley and in the premier league? They've stopped coming cos the football has been shit for years and still is. And most of them were probably proper legacy Charlton fans.
If we cant get legacy Charlton supporters to watch the latest set of feeble weaklings try and grind out a result against Burton or Northampton it's unlikely that we'll attract locals who've moved over from Nigeria in the last generation or 2 when they can just as easily support Arsenal and get far more enjoyment and the yoof will far likely want to be tied to Arsenal etc and all that comes with it even if we're the nearest club as the crow flies.
Transport us magically to the premier league and surprise surprise the crowds will grow. And then the marketing stuff kicks in like palace with their South London and Proud nonsense to engage the surrounding area,...but the football success comes first and foremost.
We're not a Sunderland with a captive audience and it's no mystery that locals in Wrexham are suddenly flocking to the racecourse in greater numbers and casting off their Liverpool and man united shirts since the football success has vastly improved.
Money at this stage would be better spent on strengthening the playing squad as best as possible and getting us higher up the pyramid rather than spending on consultants and marketing that will bring fuck all in real terms all the time we're shit on the pitch and going nowhere.
Get up the leagues and then people will flock there including locals and hitherto unaffiliated youngsters. Until the football success is where it needs to be it's just pissing in the wind.
https://pieceofcakemarketing.co.uk/the-7-generations-and-why-they-matter-in-marketing/
We now have to also consider generation Alphas
On the above website it says that the category starts in 2013 but elsewhere I’ve seen that it’s from 2010 and that Beta begins next year. I’ll soon be bringing one Alpha to her first match. I’m telling her already that we’re fighting relegation to the fourth division because it’s ’gritty’ and so she’s well on board.