CarryOnVilla

1 minute ago, Spoony said:

 

Deep, deep sigh. Football really is over. 

Welcome to football marketing!!!

1 minute ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

 

Trust that some casuals actually just buy certain kits because they like them, or have heard of the team/player, not even necessarily just fans of the club.

 

The amount of young British people I see walking around in Juve, Barca, R.Madrid and PSG kits is oddly high. I’d love the idea of French, Italian, Spanish kids walking around in Villa kits, because it’s that cool club in champions league 

4 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Could we get 8 - 10 mill for Tim?

I’d say that would be the buyback clause fee, without the clause we’d get more 

Fanatics were absolute garbage. Particularly when you buying online. 
 

Order my stuff,

get to the checkout page, ohh here’s a “handling fee” of £454

ohh and the postage is £4433

…a week later

Delivered to my neighbours across the road by Evri/Yodel

me bankrupt and sad by the experience, going over like

please sir, may I have my Villa kits?

Just now, Jas10 said:

Don’t worry, according to Heck we have 300m fans worldwide

If we still had Trez and samatta, I’d believe it. 

Guess Bayern got their new manager 

Just now, Hank Scorpio said:

And here's the reason it's insane to start threads based on one spurious rumor. 

I’d love to go back to a new thread can be made after a confirmed signing. 
 

always starts a thread with exciment, rather than analysis if the link is good or bad 

Just now, Awol said:

@Jas10 can we actually sell Archer this summer if we have to re-sign him from Sheffield? 

Yes, but buying club can’t sell him until the next window.

A player can have 2 transfers per window, if I’m correct

Wtf, how did I miss this?!!

Todd Beohly is on a massive wind up, right? 

Like this is the biggest troll behaviour ever and I’m here for it 

2 minutes ago, Jas10 said:

 

Would

Just now, Jas10 said:

 

If that’s true, we got £13m this year. 
What is the likelihood hood that we can sell 300k of kits?!? I have no idea what we do sell now?!? 

I don’t really see the marketing week article full of (provable) lies. Lots of ambiguous language that could have multiple meanings. 

The issues that the article does bring up is that there was concerns about the round badge (what there was) and the process of getting to it (lack of options) and these were the reasons why we changed to our current badge. However there is fan concerns about this one too and fans had no options or any (known) consultation regarding it or its design. There should have been, but it’s clear the fans were cut out from the process. However, working in an adjacent industry, this stuff does take a lot of time and it appears Heck/club decided to cut the fans out to save time and meet this deadline. 

Now, we have a serviceable badge, with wider branding, but it’s not exactly ideal for the fans, particularly with their input this current badge could of been made a tad more acceptable and in turn a lot more accepted by the fans. 

5 minutes ago, thabucks said:

Poss a missed opportunity with the home shirt unless it’s just a place holder design before the big reveal … 

 

I’d rep a scarf with this pattern. 

Just now, ml1dch said:

Doesn't want to play so has removed himself from selection. 

I wonder why 

What’s with the Ben White thing? 

2 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Ever since I joined villatalk about 20 years ago people have been moaning that our claret isn’t dark enough. So it would be nice if it was finally right now

Even Villa talk can’t decide what’s the correct Claret for itself

6 minutes ago, colhint said:

Who'd of thought a bunch of miserable old sods on a football forum, don't get Taylor Swift. 

I’d like to think she doesn’t get us. 

3 minutes ago, CarryOnVilla said:

the “Scottish kit” had to be part of our 150th celebration, right? 

McGregor tartan colours? 

the “Scottish kit” had to be part of our 150th celebration, right? 

Just now, Stevo985 said:

They know people don't like it so they're just quietly releasing it alongside a much more positive announcement

That’s basically it…

“Get it out there and let’s move on”

Peaky Blinders music.. didn’t no one tell anyone that they were Blues supporters in any point of the production or publication? 
 

18 minutes ago, Teale's 'tache said:

I think it depends on how much value you place on it popping off the kit, some will say how it looks on the kit is THE most important part of our branding, others not so much. Should it dictate a large chunk of our branding? I don't know, it's an interesting discussion to have.

The fact is we've evolved from a crest that had plenty of issues, too many to fix in one go, the evolution has arguably fixed some and potentially set up to fix others down the line, but the lack of contrast between the blue and yellow was my biggest pet peeve and the drop shadow is just a sticking plaster for that.

At least the plaster wasn’t a gradient

as of that pop off the shirt… it’s a compromise at best really. It’s that, or tone it back so it works elsewhere.

The logical answer is tone it back, for the greater whole. But the designer in me wants that pop and make it work. 

but alas, it feels like this moment 

15 minutes ago, RichiBoi11 said:

This would be a wise mantra for us this summer to be fair

Looks like it’s already happening. A few squad players and maybe 1 or 2 big (ish) signings at best this summer 

4 minutes ago, Teale's 'tache said:

From a technical point of view, the less offensive drop shadow does look much better at this size as you say, however, when you shrink it down to a smaller size, it becomes less effective than the flat shadow, so I imagine that would have been a consideration.

 

You’re totally right about the entire drop shadow issue. Yet, finding that shirt to shield to lion contrast that has that same (dare I say) “pop” that the blue and yellow has is damn hard. The blue and yellow badge just glows off our shirts. Yet you switch the lion to a claret lion (the logical choice) it just loses that glow. 

it’s odd, and a fun problem to solve 

3 hours ago, nepal_villan said:

Based on these links looks like the focus is on strengthening the squad opposed  to the first 11

Makes sense when you’re under a budget and the current set of benchwarmers struggle to match the effort of the first team players they replace. 

if you can’t afford to raise the ceiling, lift the floor instead