|
Post by Gary Hackett on May 29, 2014 0:57:07 GMT
Since Hughes was appointed manager our transfer strategy has improved markedly.
Let's stop blaming Cartwright it's clear the problem was Pulis.
|
|
|
Post by Trouserdog on May 29, 2014 4:52:59 GMT
Agenda: The underlying intentions or motives of a particular person or group. I'd like to know what Momo's agenda is? I don't really fully agree with his opinion but openly stating he doesn't rate someone isn't really an agenda is it? It's just that he doesn't rate them. He's pretty open and plain about it. Now is Tony Scholes found a cure for cancer and Momo trashed the research because he couldn't stand thr thought of Scholes becoming a world wide hero that might count as an agenda. :-) Or is agenda just a word people love to throw around on here to try to look smart? If we're tossing the word "agenda"around, doesn't it (like everything else) all hark back to Tony Pulis? Slating Cartwright is a typical Rimmer agenda, as he embodied the wind of change that ultimately saw the downfall of the Rimmers' hero. It's propoganda, written with the intention of trying to influence collective opinion that there was nothing wrong with the old system and the new system isn't working any better. In other words, an attempt by people to prove, to themselves more than anything, that they were RIGHT- because we know that nobody can be wrong on here, EVER. The proof's in the pudding (no fat pun intended) though. Arnie, Pieters, Muniesa and Ireland for a combined fee of £5m is fucking brilliant value for money, and we wouldn't have got close to acquiring that kind of talent for such little outlay under the old regime. So while Momo and others can rant on about the fact that Cartwright hasn't found some unknown Ghanaian wonderkid playing in the Kenyan Third Division as some kind of proof that his role isn't needed, I'd much rather have a team of people scouting Europe and beyond than handing £20m to one man who develops a multi-million pound stiffy over some 32 year-old midfielder on the basis that Harry Redknapp's recommended him. What Cartwright's done over the last twelve months is shown that he's good at his job. We don't know the minutiae of who does what behind the scenes, but overall the system is working a lot better than it was. However, at he risk of sounding like Ukyestony, we don't like people to be good at their jobs in Stoke, do we? We like incompetence and failure as it gives us something to moan about. And if there's nothing to moan about then we'll make something up, like an imaginary pizza, and use that as a stick to beat someone with.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 29, 2014 5:26:02 GMT
I don't think it was the rather camp pizza celebrations in isolation that annoyed people was it. It was the fact that the feckless Dough Boys had just failed to deliver a striker for the third window running. Marvellous isn't it that on Full Crust Friday with the stench of relegation still very firmly in the air, the talk wasn't of what wonderful jobs were going on behind the scenes, the talk was of 'legacy' and Coates pulling the rug from under the feet of his man. I could bring the posts back up to the top......but I wont.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on May 29, 2014 5:34:48 GMT
Agenda: The underlying intentions or motives of a particular person or group. I'd like to know what Momo's agenda is? I don't really fully agree with his opinion but openly stating he doesn't rate someone isn't really an agenda is it? It's just that he doesn't rate them. He's pretty open and plain about it. Now is Tony Scholes found a cure for cancer and Momo trashed the research because he couldn't stand thr thought of Scholes becoming a world wide hero that might count as an agenda. :-) Or is agenda just a word people love to throw around on here to try to look smart? If we're tossing the word "agenda"around, doesn't it (like everything else) all hark back to Tony Pulis? Slating Cartwright is a typical Rimmer agenda, as he embodied the wind of change that ultimately saw the downfall of the Rimmers' hero. It's propoganda, written with the intention of trying to influence collective opinion that there was nothing wrong with the old system and the new system isn't working any better. In other words, an attempt by people to prove, to themselves more than anything, that they were RIGHT- because we know that nobody can be wrong on here, EVER. The proof's in the pudding (no fat pun intended) though. Arnie, Pieters, Muniesa and Ireland for a combined fee of £5m is fucking brilliant value for money, and we wouldn't have got close to acquiring that kind of talent for such little outlay under the old regime. So while Momo and others can rant on about the fact that Cartwright hasn't found some unknown Ghanaian wonderkid playing in the Kenyan Third Division as some kind of proof that his role isn't needed, I'd much rather have a team of people scouting Europe and beyond than handing £20m to one man who develops a multi-million pound stiffy over some 32 year-old midfielder on the basis that Harry Redknapp's recommended him. What Cartwright's done over the last twelve months is shown that he's good at his job. We don't know the minutiae of who does what behind the scenes, but overall the system is working a lot better than it was. However, at he risk of sounding like Ukyestony, we don't like people to be good at their jobs in Stoke, do we? We like incompetence and failure as it gives us something to moan about. And if there's nothing to moan about then we'll make something up, like an imaginary pizza, and use that as a stick to beat someone with. Well said TD. As a Rimmer myself during most of TP's reign, even I can buy into that. As you say, the signings of Arnie, Pieters, Muniesa and Ireland (and the Wingie swap) represent the sort of value for money for a group of players in a 12 month period which we rarely if ever saw under TP's reign. Obviously Hughes will have been the main instigator of the Ireland transfer and, equally obviously, the signing of Pieters owes a lot to the previous regime but, taken as a group, the signings under Hughes (with Carto's assistance) have been of a quality and cost which we never saw in TP's time whether Carto or anyone else was assisting. One of the things which pissed me off towards the end of TP's reign were the constant Official site stories of trips all over Europe and beyond by teams of staff to scout players and, if my memory is correct, in 7 years none of those trips ever came to anything - apart from the signings of De Laet, Arismendi and Pennant - plus the Shea and Cameron signings which may have owed a lot to the Orlando City connection. Momo clearly blames Carto for this state of affairs and I might have been tempted to agree with him at the time but the dramatic change since Hughes has arrived suggests that Carto was probably trying to do what he was paid for in TP's time but that TP had little or no interest in deviating from what, to him, was a tried and tested policy of shopping in the English market even if he often bought bought goods which had a foreign country of origin. My advice to Momo is to lay off Carto - you're only upsetting yourself and achieving nothing other than boring the pants off many on this board. There are still a lot of things at our club which could and should change - Carto is well down the list and I doubt if he merits inclusion on it at all.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 29, 2014 6:19:07 GMT
Hold on Squirrel tickler, I haven't been unduly harsh on this thread about Cartwright, mainly because I don't think its particularly about him. My contributions have been 95% about the brass neck of that verminous scumbag Scholes in criticising the previous regime. Perhaps this is what the wankstains meant when they warned of impending dripping poison a year ago?
The fact that people are willing to defend him and forget those dreadful things he has been a part off, some barely six weeks ago tells you all you need to know about the modern Platinum Ponce Stoke fan.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on May 29, 2014 6:44:34 GMT
They've not ordered enough. Plain and simple. Any amount of weasel words in justification cannot divert you from it. It reminds of his slimy explanation when he under ordered Chelsea tickets in the Cup a few years back. They've exceeded previous years sales - so maybe they ordered a sensible amount and they've sold more than expected? Given that pretty much every serious football club in the world change strips at this time of year, don't you think there's a bit of pressure on manufacturers and factories to produce orders at the moment? We're certainly not top of the priorities for most kit manufacturers. Again you blame Scholes when you haven't got the faintest idea of who is really at fault - if anyone.
Given the big build up of the launch of the new kit from both Stoke City and Warrior it's piss poor beyond belief that they have run out. It's not the first time such a thing has happened either.
It strikes of people not doing their job properly, whether that is Scholes or his pygmies who work for him. They're all just a bunch of lazy arsed free loaders who can't be bothered to put in the hard yards. If I was Warrior or Coates I'd be livid - missing out on more revenue.
You're telling me that Warrior are unable to produce enough shirts for Stoke City in their factory? Behave. Or are they hand sewn by umpa lumpas?
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on May 29, 2014 7:18:52 GMT
Hold on Squirrel tickler, I haven't been unduly harsh on this thread about Cartwright, mainly because I don't think its particularly about him. My contributions have been 95% about the brass neck of that verminous scumbag Scholes in criticising the previous regime. Perhaps this is what the wankstains meant when they warned of impending dripping poison a year ago? The fact that people are willing to defend him and forget those dreadful things he has been a part off, some barely six weeks ago tells you all you need to know about the modern Platinum Ponce Stoke fan. Sheikh, just because you may have (by your standards!) gone easy on Cartwright on this thread, doesn't mean that you don't harp on about him far too much. I was backing up what Trouserdog says and his post was on this thread right above mine. I think you are far too obsessed with Cartwight and I think your obsession probably puts people off accepting some of your other criticisms of the club which might have more validity. The other point, I'd make is that it should be possible for an adult to criticise without being abusive ALL the time. Most of us learn quite early on in life that abuse has its place but that its impact is diluted if you use it all the time. A sudden loud noise always attracts people's attention more easily than a constant low pitched drone which, whilst it might irritate at first, soon just merges into the background and is ignored.
|
|
|
Post by ParaPsych on May 29, 2014 7:38:18 GMT
Agenda: The underlying intentions or motives of a particular person or group. I'd like to know what Momo's agenda is? I don't really fully agree with his opinion but openly stating he doesn't rate someone isn't really an agenda is it? It's just that he doesn't rate them. He's pretty open and plain about it. Now is Tony Scholes found a cure for cancer and Momo trashed the research because he couldn't stand thr thought of Scholes becoming a world wide hero that might count as an agenda. :-) Or is agenda just a word people love to throw around on here to try to look smart? If we're tossing the word "agenda"around, doesn't it (like everything else) all hark back to Tony Pulis? Slating Cartwright is a typical Rimmer agenda, as he embodied the wind of change that ultimately saw the downfall of the Rimmers' hero. It's propoganda, written with the intention of trying to influence collective opinion that there was nothing wrong with the old system and the new system isn't working any better. In other words, an attempt by people to prove, to themselves more than anything, that they were RIGHT- because we know that nobody can be wrong on here, EVER. The proof's in the pudding (no fat pun intended) though. Arnie, Pieters, Muniesa and Ireland for a combined fee of £5m is fucking brilliant value for money, and we wouldn't have got close to acquiring that kind of talent for such little outlay under the old regime. So while Momo and others can rant on about the fact that Cartwright hasn't found some unknown Ghanaian wonderkid playing in the Kenyan Third Division as some kind of proof that his role isn't needed, I'd much rather have a team of people scouting Europe and beyond than handing £20m to one man who develops a multi-million pound stiffy over some 32 year-old midfielder on the basis that Harry Redknapp's recommended him. What Cartwright's done over the last twelve months is shown that he's good at his job. We don't know the minutiae of who does what behind the scenes, but overall the system is working a lot better than it was. However, at he risk of sounding like Ukyestony, we don't like people to be good at their jobs in Stoke, do we? We like incompetence and failure as it gives us something to moan about. And if there's nothing to moan about then we'll make something up, like an imaginary pizza, and use that as a stick to beat someone with. You're probably correct about people not wanting to be wrong. Agenda is a weirdly overused Oatcakian word these days though and I find it quite funny how often it's thrown around. See infinitely.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 29, 2014 7:50:24 GMT
Hold on Squirrel tickler, I haven't been unduly harsh on this thread about Cartwright, mainly because I don't think its particularly about him. My contributions have been 95% about the brass neck of that verminous scumbag Scholes in criticising the previous regime. Perhaps this is what the wankstains meant when they warned of impending dripping poison a year ago? The fact that people are willing to defend him and forget those dreadful things he has been a part off, some barely six weeks ago tells you all you need to know about the modern Platinum Ponce Stoke fan. Sheikh, just because you may have (by your standards!) gone easy on Cartwright on this thread, doesn't mean that you don't harp on about him far too much. I was backing up what Trouserdog says and his post was on this thread right above mine. I think you are far too obsessed with Cartwight and I think your obsession probably puts people off accepting some of your other criticisms of the club which might have more validity. The other point, I'd make is that it should be possible for an adult to criticise without being abusive ALL the time. Most of us learn quite early on in life that abuse has its place but that its impact is diluted if you use it all the time. A sudden loud noise always attracts people's attention more easily than a constant low pitched drone which, whilst it might irritate at first, soon just merges into the background and is ignored. A brief look at my posting history suggests I have never started one thread about Cartwright...ever. Agendas eh?
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on May 29, 2014 7:54:25 GMT
Sheikh, just because you may have (by your standards!) gone easy on Cartwright on this thread, doesn't mean that you don't harp on about him far too much. I was backing up what Trouserdog says and his post was on this thread right above mine. I think you are far too obsessed with Cartwight and I think your obsession probably puts people off accepting some of your other criticisms of the club which might have more validity. The other point, I'd make is that it should be possible for an adult to criticise without being abusive ALL the time. Most of us learn quite early on in life that abuse has its place but that its impact is diluted if you use it all the time. A sudden loud noise always attracts people's attention more easily than a constant low pitched drone which, whilst it might irritate at first, soon just merges into the background and is ignored. A brief look at my posting history suggests I have never started one thread about Cartwright...ever. Agendas eh? Sheikh, I never said you had started a thread about Carto. That's not stopped you being very vociferous when you have commented about him on threads started by others.
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 29, 2014 7:56:39 GMT
I'm always puzzled how these types arouse so much passion. They're a couple of paper shufflers. I don't think any of us is really sure what they do, whether they're any good at it or what boundaries they work within to achieve their targets. Talking up the new ways of working and discrediting the old is just standard institutional politics.
|
|
|
Post by MuddyWoody on May 29, 2014 9:05:21 GMT
I think Momo has made his point that someone has to be culpable for past failings, whether they be the continued failure to sign a fontline striker or the club shop running out of shirts.
In any other "Business" the Chief Exec would be held accountable for basic failings, as he/she is ultimately responsible for business activities. Should it be any different at SCFC?
Are we to assume that the Chief Executive will not be directly involved in the highest level business, player signings, that a football club will be conducting? If he isn't, what does he do?
I agree that recent signings such as Arnie, PO and Pieters have all been good for the club. But think about it, these players all came to us with reputations attached and were considered as gambles to a greater or lesser degree, so could easily have gone either way. Arnie was supposedly hard to handle and a bit of a nutter, Cardiff literally couldn't wait to get rid of PO, so much so they swapped him for Jones and Pieters reputation was in tatters, much like his arm, after his sending off and window punching antics. The signing negotiations with parent clubs for these players must have been fairly simple.
We are however still looking for the frontline marquee striker we have needed for many windows. The signings of Diouf, Riviere and Assaidi are supposedly very close but have still yet to be completed. My point being that we seem to be able to complete the signings of "gamble" players easily enough, however when it comes to high value targets we have a very poor record. Why is that? The logical place to send accusing looks in my opinion, rightly or wrongly, is Scholes.
Are Scholes recent comments also trying to deflect blame for past transfer failings firmly at the door of TP? It could be taken that way.
If we have a good summer window and sign Diouf, Riviere, Assaidi and another winger then I will congratulate all involved on a job well done, including Scholes. Until that happens my opinion is that the job done hasn't been great and that TS should shoulder at least part of the blame.
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 29, 2014 9:30:24 GMT
I think Momo has made his point that someone has to be culpable for past failings, whether they be the continued failure to sign a fontline striker or the club shop running out of shirts. In any other "Business" the Chief Exec would be held accountable for basic failings, as he/she is ultimately responsible for business activities. Should it be any different at SCFC? Are we to assume that the Chief Executive will not be directly involved in the highest level business, player signings, that a football club will be conducting? If he isn't, what does he do? I agree that recent signings such as Arnie, PO and Pieters have all been good for the club. But think about it, these players all came to us with reputations attached and were considered as gambles to a greater or lesser degree, so could easily have gone either way. Arnie was supposedly hard to handle and a bit of a nutter, Cardiff literally couldn't wait to get rid of PO, so much so they swapped him for Jones and Pieters reputation was in tatters, much like his arm, after his sending off and window punching antics. The signing negotiations with parent clubs for these players must have been fairly simple. We are however still looking for the frontline marquee striker we have needed for many windows. The signings of Diouf, Riviere and Assaidi are supposedly very close but have still yet to be completed. My point being that we seem to be able to complete the signings of "gamble" players easily enough, however when it comes to high value targets we have a very poor record. Why is that? The logical place to send accusing looks in my opinion, rightly or wrongly, is Scholes. Are Scholes recent comments also trying to deflect blame for past transfer failings firmly at the door of TP? It could be taken that way. If we have a good summer window and sign Diouf, Riviere, Assaidi and another winger then I will congratulate all involved on a job well done, including Scholes. Until that happens my opinion is that the job done hasn't been great and that TS should shoulder at least part of the blame. So if you gave your Mrs a quid and told her to go out and buy you a nice big thick juicy fillet steak and despite her best efforts including offering sexual favours to the Butcher she hadn't managed to get one by teatime that would be her fault. She failed you. You're a hard man.
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on May 29, 2014 9:56:14 GMT
So if you gave your Mrs a quid and told her to go out and buy you a nice big thick juicy fillet steak and despite her best efforts including offering sexual favours to the Butcher she hadn't managed to get one by teatime that would be her fault. She failed you. You're a hard man. Are you saying Scholes offers sexual favours? You've found the answer to our striker signing problems. Either we target a gay striker or get rid of Scholes and replace him with a hottie!
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on May 29, 2014 10:10:22 GMT
They've exceeded previous years sales - so maybe they ordered a sensible amount and they've sold more than expected? Given that pretty much every serious football club in the world change strips at this time of year, don't you think there's a bit of pressure on manufacturers and factories to produce orders at the moment? We're certainly not top of the priorities for most kit manufacturers. Again you blame Scholes when you haven't got the faintest idea of who is really at fault - if anyone.
Given the big build up of the launch of the new kit from both Stoke City and Warrior it's piss poor beyond belief that they have run out. It's not the first time such a thing has happened either.
It strikes of people not doing their job properly, whether that is Scholes or his pygmies who work for him. They're all just a bunch of lazy arsed free loaders who can't be bothered to put in the hard yards. If I was Warrior or Coates I'd be livid - missing out on more revenue.
You're telling me that Warrior are unable to produce enough shirts for Stoke City in their factory? Behave. Or are they hand sewn by umpa lumpas?
Please tell me how you know "They're all just a bunch of lazy arsed free loaders who can't be bothered to put in the hard yards"? The club obviously placed an order based on what they've sold previously and what the supplier could provide. You don't think that this is a really busy time for kit manufacturers? I'm assuming that the same factories will be producing kits for lots of different companies. 100s, maybe even thousands of clubs wanting kits in the stores in a very short space of time puts pressure on production runs. Doesn't sound like incompetence to me - just logistics.
|
|
|
Post by greenhoff74 on May 29, 2014 10:10:50 GMT
Yes sign Alice up for the job
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 29, 2014 11:09:04 GMT
As the Sentinel put it. 'The club have been forced to defend their new shirt sales strategy'
Why do you think the club felt the need to do that?
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on May 29, 2014 11:11:12 GMT
I think Momo has made his point that someone has to be culpable for past failings, whether they be the continued failure to sign a fontline striker or the club shop running out of shirts. In any other "Business" the Chief Exec would be held accountable for basic failings, as he/she is ultimately responsible for business activities. Should it be any different at SCFC? But isn't SCFC as a business going pretty well at the moment? There's some problems but there always are in any business. If you're going to blame the Chief Exec for running out of a few shirts, then you must also give him credit for other many things in SCFC. Are we to assume that the Chief Executive will not be directly involved in the highest level business, player signings, that a football club will be conducting? If he isn't, what does he do? I agree that recent signings such as Arnie, PO and Pieters have all been good for the club. But think about it, these players all came to us with reputations attached and were considered as gambles to a greater or lesser degree, so could easily have gone either way. Arnie was supposedly hard to handle and a bit of a nutter, Cardiff literally couldn't wait to get rid of PO, so much so they swapped him for Jones and Pieters reputation was in tatters, much like his arm, after his sending off and window punching antics. The signing negotiations with parent clubs for these players must have been fairly simple. Why was Pieter's reputation in tatters? He lost his temper - in private - but unfortunately with a TV camera on him and put his arm through a window. Why does that leave his reputation in tatters? He was young and with quite a few Dutch international caps. Arnie had got a poor reputation but you can't tell me that signing a player with his talent - even with his baggage - for £2m wasn't a coup? We are however still looking for the frontline marquee striker we have needed for many windows. The signings of Diouf, Riviere and Assaidi are supposedly very close but have still yet to be completed. My point being that we seem to be able to complete the signings of "gamble" players easily enough, however when it comes to high value targets we have a very poor record. Why is that? The logical place to send accusing looks in my opinion, rightly or wrongly, is Scholes.? So your saying its more difficult to sign players who have more options and are in demand? And that's a fault of Scholes?
Are Scholes recent comments also trying to deflect blame for past transfer failings firmly at the door of TP? It could be taken that way. If we have a good summer window and sign Diouf, Riviere, Assaidi and another winger then I will congratulate all involved on a job well done, including Scholes. Until that happens my opinion is that the job done hasn't been great and that TS should shoulder at least part of the blame.
There are constraints that Scholes and Cartwright are working under - transfer budgets, wage demands, FFP. Sometimes when they fail to land a target it's not anybody's fault. So far they appear to be doing a sound job.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on May 29, 2014 11:11:29 GMT
As the Sentinel put it. 'The club have been forced to defend their new shirt sales strategy' Why do you think the club felt the need to do that? Erm, because people like you will be criticising them?
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 29, 2014 11:19:52 GMT
As the Sentinel put it. 'The club have been forced to defend their new shirt sales strategy' Why do you think the club felt the need to do that? Erm, because people like you will be criticising them? It's not 'people like me' though is it forny. It's genuinely disappointed fans whose kids can't go on holiday with the new top. If it was just gobshites like me the club wouldn't have been forced to defend anything. The fact is they launched a massive marketing campaign with a product released to almost universal acclaim and haven't been able to fulfil demand. In other businesses people get the bullet for such things - for Stoke City under Tony Scholes, this is an annual event.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on May 29, 2014 11:23:29 GMT
As the Sentinel put it. 'The club have been forced to defend their new shirt sales strategy' Why do you think the club felt the need to do that? ..because people were a bit pissed off not being able to buy a shirt. Wow. Please tell me how you know that the club didn't order the maximum number of shirts they could at the time? Maybe it's a manufacturer problem at this time of year? Maybe the factories are busy producing kit for Liverpool, or Man U?
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on May 29, 2014 11:24:31 GMT
Erm, because people like you will be criticising them? It's not 'people like me' though is it forny. It's genuinely disappointed fans whose kids can't go on holiday with the new top. If it was just gobshites like me the club wouldn't have been forced to defend anything. The fact is they launched a massive marketing campaign with a product released to almost universal acclaim and haven't been able to fulfil demand. In other businesses people get the bullet for such things - for Stoke City under Tony Scholes, this is an annual event. Whilst you are here, Sheikh, I assume you are standing for the Supporters' Council this year. I've just voted but, of course, I don't know your real name, so I don't know if I have voted for you or not. I did note that none of the candidates described themselves as a Sheikh! My apologies if I didn't vote for you - the council needs vocal fans able to argue their case with passion.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 29, 2014 11:25:37 GMT
It's not 'people like me' though is it forny. It's genuinely disappointed fans whose kids can't go on holiday with the new top. If it was just gobshites like me the club wouldn't have been forced to defend anything. The fact is they launched a massive marketing campaign with a product released to almost universal acclaim and haven't been able to fulfil demand. In other businesses people get the bullet for such things - for Stoke City under Tony Scholes, this is an annual event. Whilst you are here, Sheikh, I assume you are standing for the Supporters' Council this year. I've just voted but, of course, I don't know your real name, so I don't know if I have voted for you or not. I did note that none of the candidates described themselves as a Sheikh! My apologies if I didn't vote for you - the council needs vocal fans able to argue their case with passion. Once I saw Ilford Dave was standing I knew I couldn't compete with a legend so I've removed myself from the running
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 29, 2014 11:27:02 GMT
As the Sentinel put it. 'The club have been forced to defend their new shirt sales strategy' Why do you think the club felt the need to do that? ..because people were a bit pissed off not being able to buy a shirt. Wow. Please tell me how you know that the club didn't order the maximum number of shirts they could at the time? Maybe it's a manufacturer problem at this time of year? Maybe the factories are busy producing kit for Liverpool, or Man U? A GCSE level marketing student would be able to tell you what they had done was absolutely mental in that case then.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on May 29, 2014 11:29:01 GMT
Erm, because people like you will be criticising them? It's not 'people like me' though is it forny. It's genuinely disappointed fans whose kids can't go on holiday with the new top. If it was just gobshites like me the club wouldn't have been forced to defend anything. The fact is they launched a massive marketing campaign with a product released to almost universal acclaim and haven't been able to fulfil demand. In other businesses people get the bullet for such things - for Stoke City under Tony Scholes, this is an annual event. So maybe we should congratulate him for running a really successful marketing campaign?
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on May 29, 2014 11:32:51 GMT
Whilst you are here, Sheikh, I assume you are standing for the Supporters' Council this year. I've just voted but, of course, I don't know your real name, so I don't know if I have voted for you or not. I did note that none of the candidates described themselves as a Sheikh! My apologies if I didn't vote for you - the council needs vocal fans able to argue their case with passion. Once I saw Ilford Dave was standing I knew I couldn't compete with a legend so I've removed myself from the running But as we can each vote for 6 of the 7 candidates we could have voted for both of you - no problem. Still, it isn't too late to stand for the next round of voting for the five "specialist seats" which will be voted for once the current round of voting finishes. Don't be shy, pm me with details of who you are on the ballot when it starts and I'll be sure to vote for you.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 29, 2014 11:33:17 GMT
It's not 'people like me' though is it forny. It's genuinely disappointed fans whose kids can't go on holiday with the new top. If it was just gobshites like me the club wouldn't have been forced to defend anything. The fact is they launched a massive marketing campaign with a product released to almost universal acclaim and haven't been able to fulfil demand. In other businesses people get the bullet for such things - for Stoke City under Tony Scholes, this is an annual event. So maybe we should congratulate him for running a really successful marketing campaign? Well you can if you want to but the campaign he has run has the same logic as on line business investing heavily in advertising shortly before they take a website down for essential maintenance.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on May 29, 2014 11:35:14 GMT
..because people were a bit pissed off not being able to buy a shirt. Wow. Please tell me how you know that the club didn't order the maximum number of shirts they could at the time? Maybe it's a manufacturer problem at this time of year? Maybe the factories are busy producing kit for Liverpool, or Man U? A GCSE level marketing student would be able to tell you what they had done was absolutely mental in that case then. I'll repeat: "Please tell me how you know that the club didn't order the maximum number of shirts they could at the time?" I'll add: maybe they ordered lots - but they've sold really well? I just don't see this as indicative of the ultimate failure of senior management.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 29, 2014 11:36:59 GMT
Once I saw Ilford Dave was standing I knew I couldn't compete with a legend so I've removed myself from the running But as we can each vote for 6 of the 7 candidates we could have voted for both of you - no problem. Still, it isn't too late to stand for the next round of voting for the five "specialist seats" which will be voted for once the current round of voting finishes. Don't be shy, pm me with details of who you are on the ballot when it starts and I'll be sure to vote for you. I don't represent any special groups save maybe 'on line messageboards' which our glorious leader has already cautioned the Council to ignore. I don't have a constituency forny, where as you could represent senior citizens, hill walkers, kagool wearers and busy tailed rodent enthusiasts. Do it.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 29, 2014 11:38:50 GMT
A GCSE level marketing student would be able to tell you what they had done was absolutely mental in that case then. I'll repeat: "Please tell me how you know that the club didn't order the maximum number of shirts they could at the time?" I'll add: maybe they ordered lots - but they've sold really well? I just don't see this as indicative of the ultimate failure of senior management. If you haven't got the supply you don't over egg the pudding marketing wise. Kindergarten stuff that is!
|
|