New Kit

[Hot_Charlie]

Whinge whinge whinge

Moan moan moan.

So true.

[sk 88]

Just need to get something off my chest

1. Don’t mind the new strips
2. New logo thing is utterly utterly dreadful marketing gone wrong.

You do realise the new logo will only be used on certain leisure wear, it’s not replacing anything.

It has literally replaced the old logo on all social media channels.

Personally speaking a replacement main logo would have been fine. A subsidiary logo is a fine idea. A "fashion" logo is a fine idea. Don't think this works as a subsidiary logo, it has no relevance to the main one; it could work as a pure "fashion" logo but why then use it to replace everything on the main communication channels?

Feels a bit confused to me.

[aslongaswebeatsaints]

[quote=fleabane post_id=747388 time=<a href="tel:1594988061">1594988061</a> user_id=3701]
[quote=Mark62 post_id=747387 time=<a href="tel:1594987444">1594987444</a> user_id=11593]
[quote=aslongaswebeatsaints post_id=747384 time=<a href="tel:1594987002">1594987002</a> user_id=15896]
Just need to get something off my chest

1. Don’t mind the new strips
2. New logo thing is utterly utterly dreadful marketing gone wrong.

You do realise the new logo will only be used on certain leisure wear, it’s not replacing anything.
[/quote]


It is a dreadful piece of design!
[/quote]

Maybe try dragging yourself into 2020, the idea is to modernise not go backwards.
[/quote]

I am well aware of the 21st Century thank you very much. Including the undesirable part were people increasingly attack someone personally for having a different opinion......

Bad (and good) branding and logo design is a long learned business lesson. It’s absolutely essential to modernise and innovate but you have to be dynamic enough to quickly judge whether the impact is a positive or negative one as branding and logos are notoriously difficult to get right as evidenced by big brand failures in the past. Though you can mitigate some of this through market research (in simple terms ask your current and future customers FANS what they think).

My personal opinion is that the the “T” just confuses me while the existing tiger emblem just needs a tweak - the shield is a bit outdated but otherwise the main Tigers Logo is spot on and something my family like wearing. We are the Tigers after all and everyone knows this regardless as to whether they support us or not.

But as I said, it’s a personal opinion and doesn’t change the fact that the club is going in the right direction at the moment.

[Mark62]

Well I’m sorry you are aggrieved at the personal attack, but to make a sweeping statement like it’s a dreadful design needs a forthright response.
Design needs to be innovative and to be liked by the majority of the target market, which for me this does.

As for people being attacked for having a different opinion, surely that is one of the basic fundamentals of any forum. It has always happened it’s just that social media makes it more immediate and visible.

[Mark62]

Just need to get something off my chest

1. Don’t mind the new strips
2. New logo thing is utterly utterly dreadful marketing gone wrong.

You do realise the new logo will only be used on certain leisure wear, it’s not replacing anything.

It has literally replaced the old logo on all social media channels.

Personally speaking a replacement main logo would have been fine. A subsidiary logo is a fine idea. A "fashion" logo is a fine idea. Don't think this works as a subsidiary logo, it has no relevance to the main one; it could work as a pure "fashion" logo but why then use it to replace everything on the main communication channels?

Feels a bit confused to me.

Well they’ve obviously decided it is more in keeping with the various social media formats.
I’m personally glad they haven’t lost the Tigers logo as that is a fundamental part of the club, but this as a fashion and social media symbol works, imo.

[Tiglon]

I think most of us are missing the point. Sports clubs are like banks - once you're a customer, you rarely change. Therefore all the branding etc is not aimed at selling a few more bits of merch to adults, it's aimed at getting more kids in because, once they are in, they are more often than not fans for life.

Personally I'd rather we had stuck with the old crest, but regardless of what they do with designs and branding I'll still buy one shirt every 4-5 years for wearing to matches.

Edit: by "the old crest" I mean the OLD crest. Not the silly green and red thing with a tigers head in it that we still use.

[TigerFeetSteve]

I actually think the tiger logo will go back on the social media channels soon, I think they're trying to build recognition of it a bit.

[Cagey Tiger]

I think most of us are missing the point. Sports clubs are like banks - once you're a customer, you rarely change. Therefore all the branding etc is not aimed at selling a few more bits of merch to adults, it's aimed at getting more kids in because, once they are in, they are more often than not fans for life.

Personally I'd rather we had stuck with the old crest, but regardless of what they do with designs and branding I'll still buy one shirt every 4-5 years for wearing to matches.

Edit: by "the old crest" I mean the OLD crest. Not the silly green and red thing with a tigers head in it that we still use.

To anyone who is not aware, the "silly green and red thing" was created because the OLD crest could not be trademarked (or whatever) so anyone could copy it and create fake merchandise, pretty much guaranteed to be of poor quality and deprive the club of revenue. The new one has been 'trademarked'.

[sk 88]

I think most of us are missing the point. Sports clubs are like banks - once you're a customer, you rarely change. Therefore all the branding etc is not aimed at selling a few more bits of merch to adults, it's aimed at getting more kids in because, once they are in, they are more often than not fans for life.

Personally I'd rather we had stuck with the old crest, but regardless of what they do with designs and branding I'll still buy one shirt every 4-5 years for wearing to matches.

Edit: by "the old crest" I mean the OLD crest. Not the silly green and red thing with a tigers head in it that we still use.

To anyone who is not aware, the "silly green and red thing" was created because the OLD crest could not be trademarked (or whatever) so anyone could copy it and create fake merchandise, pretty much guaranteed to be of poor quality and deprive the club of revenue. The new one has been 'trademarked'.

This hoary old chestnut. Unfortunately the Intellectual Property Office search is down now so I can't link but the old club crest IS copyrighted property of the club, that is simply not true.

[fleabane]

Mark 62 “ Maybe try dragging yourself into 2020, the idea is to modernise not go backwards.”

Poor design is poor design. Modernising has nothing to do with it.

What does the new logo represent? What connection is there to the club? What values does it represent? Will it appear on all “company” products? If not, why not? Will it be confusing if more than one logo is present? (yes!). Is it part of a rebranding exercise for the whole organisation, if not what is the point?

It’s not about modernisation, it’s about “brand”, and all that represents.

And it is a poor derivative design.

[BFG]

Having a suitable logo for fashion is a good idea as many establishments do not allow in heavily branded sports clothing.
It's pretty sad that just about anything and everything is viewed as an opportunity to mock for some brief feeling of one-upmanship these days, which in turn often leads to some sensitivity amongst those associated.
The T logo is a good sleek modern design.
You either move with the times or get left behind.

[Duncan B]

Just seen the new photos of the kit on the competition, think the Darker tiger stripes look great, but don’t know why their only on one side of the kit? Not sure about that, think it looks better centred on the away kit!

[Cagey Tiger]

I think most of us are missing the point. Sports clubs are like banks - once you're a customer, you rarely change. Therefore all the branding etc is not aimed at selling a few more bits of merch to adults, it's aimed at getting more kids in because, once they are in, they are more often than not fans for life.

Personally I'd rather we had stuck with the old crest, but regardless of what they do with designs and branding I'll still buy one shirt every 4-5 years for wearing to matches.

Edit: by "the old crest" I mean the OLD crest. Not the silly green and red thing with a tigers head in it that we still use.

To anyone who is not aware, the "silly green and red thing" was created because the OLD crest could not be trademarked (or whatever) so anyone could copy it and create fake merchandise, pretty much guaranteed to be of poor quality and deprive the club of revenue. The new one has been 'trademarked'.

This hoary old chestnut. Unfortunately the Intellectual Property Office search is down now so I can't link but the old club crest IS copyrighted property of the club, that is simply not true.

Just going on my memory of discussions many moons ago, summed up by this post by Bill W in 2011:

"This has been discussed before.

The consensus appeared to be that the "old" coat of arms logo could not be used without the "new" tiger one because the former could not be protected by copyright or whatever."

Happy to be proved wrong.

[Tiglon]

Are there lots of unscrupulous companies queuing up to make knock off Tigers gear? I doubt it.

[johnthegriff]

Leicester is the British capital of fake merchandise, there would be no shortage of factories turning out replicas of Tiger gear for sale on Leicester market and cut price shops if our designs were not registered and protected. The volumes are not sufficient for illegitimate manufactures to take the risks of breaching registration rules so they will concentrate on cheating Adidas, Nike, Disney, Manchester United etc.
Our original heraldic crest could be used but there are so many similar designs including the City of Leicester crest that imitation could be done by using a design so near that only close examination would reveal the differences.