Always going to be Puma?

juanpablo
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1010
Joined: 12 May 2004 17:50
Location: on a beach with jack johnson

by juanpablo » 15 Sep 2007 10:44

the kit on doyle looks good

User avatar
parky
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1346
Joined: 09 May 2004 18:22
Location: Looking for the promised land

by parky » 16 Sep 2007 21:23

juanpablo the kit on doyle looks good


gayer

New Traditionalist
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 14 Feb 2007 09:25

by New Traditionalist » 18 Sep 2007 02:49

I hope we can have a proper hooped shirt next time around. Interesting to see Sunderland getting away with a striped shirt front and back.

User avatar
royalp-we
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2242
Joined: 30 Sep 2010 11:04

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by royalp-we » 28 Feb 2017 20:40

Yes

peterroyal76
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2427
Joined: 03 May 2009 20:14
Location: North stand B13.......where all the empty seats are!

Re:

by peterroyal76 » 28 Feb 2017 21:09

paultheroyal Pelada is what its all about.


And a red and yellow hooped away shirt.


No Fixed Abode

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by No Fixed Abode » 02 Mar 2017 14:27

Matchwinner was better than Pelada.

Forbury Lion
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 8688
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 08:37
Location: https://youtu.be/c4sX57ZUhzc

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by Forbury Lion » 08 Mar 2017 13:24

Money talks, If we can get a better deal with a different kit manufacturer then we probably would.

User avatar
St Pauli
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 23790
Joined: 22 Sep 2006 14:17
Location: Vote Brogue for Mod!

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by St Pauli » 17 Mar 2017 07:14

RobRoyale Would our kit ever be changed to addidas for instance?


Never.

We have a reputation for being a middle class IT consultant club with awful support. I don't think this reputation is accurate and don't care if it is, but it's our reputation, and does not make us a 'cool' club at all.

For football, and generally, adidas is probably the most marketable and fashionable casual sports clothing brand worldwide, because of its association with the British football casual scene and the German antifascist scene (quite ironic for a brand started by a German called Adolf).

There is absolutely no way adidas would touch us with barge pole in our and their current form.

User avatar
royalp-we
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2242
Joined: 30 Sep 2010 11:04

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by royalp-we » 17 Mar 2017 09:21

St Pauli
RobRoyale Would our kit ever be changed to addidas for instance?


Never.

We have a reputation for being a middle class IT consultant club with awful support. I don't think this reputation is accurate and don't care if it is, but it's our reputation, and does not make us a 'cool' club at all.

For football, and generally, adidas is probably the most marketable and fashionable casual sports clothing brand worldwide, because of its association with the British football casual scene and the German antifascist scene (quite ironic for a brand started by a German called Adolf).

There is absolutely no way adidas would touch us with barge pole in our and their current form.


Sorry St Pauli not following. Birmingham, Brentford & Aldersh*t are far less marketable imo. In the last few seasons Reading have been FA Cup semi finalists and also had 3 seasons in the top flight in the last 10 years. That must count for something, regardless of how others perceive our fans.

I think it could be simply that Puma tend to offer longer contracts but are now broadening in to F1 etc., perhaps Adidas offer shorter & tend to be able to react to demand in different markets?


User avatar
St Pauli
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 23790
Joined: 22 Sep 2006 14:17
Location: Vote Brogue for Mod!

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by St Pauli » 17 Mar 2017 11:51

royalp-we
St Pauli
RobRoyale Would our kit ever be changed to addidas for instance?


Never.

We have a reputation for being a middle class IT consultant club with awful support. I don't think this reputation is accurate and don't care if it is, but it's our reputation, and does not make us a 'cool' club at all.

For football, and generally, adidas is probably the most marketable and fashionable casual sports clothing brand worldwide, because of its association with the British football casual scene and the German antifascist scene (quite ironic for a brand started by a German called Adolf).

There is absolutely no way adidas would touch us with barge pole in our and their current form.


Sorry St Pauli not following. Birmingham, Brentford & Aldersh*t are far less marketable imo. In the last few seasons Reading have been FA Cup semi finalists and also had 3 seasons in the top flight in the last 10 years. That must count for something, regardless of how others perceive our fans.

I think it could be simply that Puma tend to offer longer contracts but are now broadening in to F1 etc., perhaps Adidas offer shorter & tend to be able to react to demand in different markets?


It's not about footballing success, unless you're right at the top, top of your country, regular Champions League appearances etc.

It's about the cool image a club has. Brentford are probably one of the coolest clubs around with their 4 pubs. Aldershot are a traditional club, with a nice old ground, lower league, not plastic and have an Ultras group: Cool.

Don't know what Birmingham have, but they've had a similar success to us and don't have the 'middle class mum' image baggage of being sponsored by Waitrose.

Perhaps Fatface could make our kit?

El Diablo
Member
Posts: 244
Joined: 03 Oct 2012 13:20

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by El Diablo » 17 Mar 2017 12:17

St Pauli
royalp-we
St Pauli
Never.

We have a reputation for being a middle class IT consultant club with awful support. I don't think this reputation is accurate and don't care if it is, but it's our reputation, and does not make us a 'cool' club at all.

For football, and generally, adidas is probably the most marketable and fashionable casual sports clothing brand worldwide, because of its association with the British football casual scene and the German antifascist scene (quite ironic for a brand started by a German called Adolf).

There is absolutely no way adidas would touch us with barge pole in our and their current form.


Sorry St Pauli not following. Birmingham, Brentford & Aldersh*t are far less marketable imo. In the last few seasons Reading have been FA Cup semi finalists and also had 3 seasons in the top flight in the last 10 years. That must count for something, regardless of how others perceive our fans.

I think it could be simply that Puma tend to offer longer contracts but are now broadening in to F1 etc., perhaps Adidas offer shorter & tend to be able to react to demand in different markets?


It's not about footballing success, unless you're right at the top, top of your country, regular Champions League appearances etc.

It's about the cool image a club has. Brentford are probably one of the coolest clubs around with their 4 pubs. Aldershot are a traditional club, with a nice old ground, lower league, not plastic and have an Ultras group: Cool.

Don't know what Birmingham have, but they've had a similar success to us and don't have the 'middle class mum' image baggage of being sponsored by Waitrose.

Perhaps Fatface could make our kit?

:lol:

User avatar
lolwut
Member
Posts: 304
Joined: 24 Aug 2012 12:52

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by lolwut » 17 Mar 2017 13:24

What about North Face or some other outdoorsy type brand?

Plenty of middle class waitrosers love these brands despite their idea of adventure being a spa trip for two to the cotswolds.

MoorgateRoyal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1355
Joined: 10 Apr 2015 11:49

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by MoorgateRoyal » 17 Mar 2017 15:45

Big clubs get the big contracts with the likes of adidas and Nike. Smaller clubs can just buy a set of kits out of a catalogue, essentially, which is why you see the likes of Brentford in adidas and PNE in Nike.

Puma have cornered a large part of the Football League market, providing the same kit templates to different clubs. They reserve the unique designs for the likes of Arsenal.

I don't really mid the Puma kits but I wouldn't mind a change.


Top Flight
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3269
Joined: 02 Jun 2006 22:46

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by Top Flight » 17 Mar 2017 15:53

An Italian Manufacturer like Kappa could work with our hoops and give us something really slick.

MoorgateRoyal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1355
Joined: 10 Apr 2015 11:49

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by MoorgateRoyal » 18 Mar 2017 08:50

QPR's Dryworld home kit is basically a Reading kit from the 70s. I wouldn't mind that

User avatar
Jagermesiter1871
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3710
Joined: 25 Jul 2010 01:59

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by Jagermesiter1871 » 18 Mar 2017 17:46

I'd like a small kit manufacturer again i.e kit@ although their kits were shite.

User avatar
CountryRoyal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 10697
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 13:44

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by CountryRoyal » 19 Mar 2017 19:36

Top Flight An Italian Manufacturer like Kappa could work with our hoops and give us something really slick.


+1 to the Kappa love.

Top Flight
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3269
Joined: 02 Jun 2006 22:46

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by Top Flight » 20 Mar 2017 10:03

Jagermesiter1871 I'd like a small kit manufacturer again i.e kit@ although their kits were shite.


I remember the Kit@ strip at the time was marketed to us like it was a really high performance, high-tech garment using all the latest shirt making technology. But you're right. Really it was sh*t.

No Fixed Abode

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by No Fixed Abode » 20 Mar 2017 10:33

MoorgateRoyal QPR's Dryworld home kit is basically a Reading kit from the 70s. I wouldn't mind that


QPR have already dropped Dryworld for next season....

No Fixed Abode

Re: Always going to be Puma?

by No Fixed Abode » 20 Mar 2017 10:33

Top Flight
Jagermesiter1871 I'd like a small kit manufacturer again i.e kit@ although their kits were shite.


I remember the Kit@ strip at the time was marketed to us like it was a really high performance, high-tech garment using all the latest shirt making technology. But you're right. Really it was sh*t.


Wasn't Kit@ owned by Puma anyway?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 74 guests

It is currently 17 Apr 2024 00:36