New home shirt (confirmed)

[urban genie]

Just received the shirt this morning, it's my review of it, and I'm mightily impressed, is that not allowed on BM without being an employee of the club?



Your opinion. If you're talking about the replica shirt I would agree it's much poorer quality than the 90 quid shirt but it's made with the more generous frame in mind and will probably suit a lot of the more generously sized fans. As far as I'm concerned, they're not changing the core colours just playing around with them. I like it, you don't, that's just an opinion, nothing to do with changing the core colours.



I'd be p*ssed off if the new shirt was just a continuation of what went before. I like the change in design and seeing what they come up with, that's the point of a new shirt imo



Again, it's just your opinion. I read continually on here about bringing back red and black stripes, a kit which I personally absolutely hate as I detest anything red. Sales prove that more blues feel the same as me as it doesn't sell, but you wouldn't think so reading this forum.

Rest assured, the 90 quid kit is the best quality shirt I've ever bought and I have bought every new home kit release for over 25 years since I started buying my own. The negativity is unwarranted in my view and if you want the good quality version then I would recommend people who want the latest shirt should buy that version and save for it if necessary.

You shouldn't need to pay an extra 30 sheets for the same shirt to guarantee quality and £90 for a football kit is ridiculous and you don't need to arse about with the club colours to be constantly inovative and modern, foitball is a life long love and tribal, colours, badge, identity all matter, we are city and what we wear shows our pride and kinmanship, changing it so differently every year messes our identity, blue and white they go together, we will carry on forevermore.

even non kit buyers tend to have a pin badge either the old crest or eagle, worn like a badge of honour, that kit bar the badge says nothing to me about city the training polo does so I bought that instead.

 

[ballinio]

It's got be a pisstake, no-one could be that stupid.
I went to the shop at the ground on Friday morning, there were 3 times as many staff than fans....or should I say customers these days. Got to say it's the vilest kit we've ever had, cheap nasty shit. The colour on the sleeves makes the blue look dull & almost grey/blue, it's hideous & it's not a City kit, you could tell the staff were embarrassed by the sales, just no-body was buying it. Saw a few training tops go & t-shirts & like the previous poster I bought the blue & whit polo shirt which looks like Manchester City .

 

[Blue Mooner]

You shouldn't need to pay an extra 30 sheets for the same shirt to guarantee quality and £90 for a football kit is ridiculous and you don't need to arse about with the club colours to be constantly inovative and modern, foitball is a life long love and tribal, colours, badge, identity all matter, we are city and what we wear shows our pride and kinmanship, changing it so differently every year messes our identity, blue and white they go together, we will carry on forevermore.

even non kit buyers tend to have a pin badge either the old crest or eagle, worn like a badge of honour, that kit bar the badge says nothing to me about city the training polo does so I bought that instead.

90 quid is a lot of money, but in reality it's the going rate for 'designer' clothes. Look at the cost of Diesel jeans or a Paul Smith shirt. As a fan, you have the choice, buy the 'designer' high quality players version or the replica version which looks like the kit but without the bells and whistles. I decided to stump up the extra and think it was worth it. Nike are a business stumping up millions each year and whether we like it or not they have to get a return. Clearly, they can't deliver this quality of shirt at a 55 quid price point.

I don't think the new shirt looks anything 'but' a City shirt, it's instantly recognisable, but with a variation in design from previous shirts, in the same way laser blue was a massive departure from our traditional sky blue. Should we still, have SAAB or Brother as the sponsor, as that was instantly recognisable City in the 80's and 90's ?

Everything you have said is nothing but your opinion and your entitled to it, but im constantly irritated by fans who seem to think they speak for all City fans. My opinions are mine and no one else's and to reiterate - I really like the new shirt.

Ultimately, our 'opinion' is irrelevant. It will be the sales that dictate whether the shirt is a success or not. If it doesn't sell, they won't repeat it, and ultimately I'm fine with that. My guess is that it will sell well because this club is no longer simply appealing to a working class manc demographic who's stuck in some 60's 70’s timewarp - and thank God - because otherwise the club would never progress.

 

[dario2739]

90 quid is a lot of money, but in reality it's the going rate for 'designer' clothes. Look at the cost of Diesel jeans or a Paul Smith shirt. As a fan, you have the choice, buy the 'designer' high quality players version or the replica version which looks like the kit but without the bells and whistles. I decided to stump up the extra and think it was worth it. Nike are a business stumping up millions each year and whether we like it or not they have to get a return. Clearly, they can't deliver this quality of shirt at a 55 quid price point.

I don't think the new shirt looks anything 'but' a City shirt, it's instantly recognisable, but with a variation in design from previous shirts, in the same way laser blue was a massive departure from our traditional sky blue. Should we still, have SAAB or Brother as the sponsor, as that was instantly recognisable City in the 80's and 90's ?

Everything you have said is nothing but your opinion and your entitled to it, but im constantly irritated by fans who seem to think they speak for all City fans. My opinions are mine and no one else's and to reiterate - I really like the new shirt.

Ultimately, our 'opinion' is irrelevant. It will be the sales that dictate whether the shirt is a success or not. If it doesn't sell, they won't repeat it, and ultimately I'm fine with that. My guess is that it will sell well because this club is no longer simply appealing to a working class manc demographic who's stuck in some 60's 70’s timewarp - and thank God - because otherwise the club would never progress.

Now I know you're taking the piss!!! Comparing a Nike footy shirt to 'designer' clothes? Yeah might pop down town Saturday night in my new City shirt..!

Then you bring up Sponsors, like they're anything to do with our identity! Also, the shirt DOES look anything other than a City shirt... and yes we have had shite before, like the laser blue... but like burning your hand in a fire... you shouldn't make the same mistake twice!
People are taking the shirt bollocks out of context - it's not simply about the shirt, it's about the entire kit... and that is definitey NOT City. The ulitmate benchmark is, if you took all badges and sponsor off the kits and showed them to fans up and down the country to see if they recognise it... and I can tell you from a site I visit that is for fans of all clubs, the response from opposition fans is the same as most of ours... it's just not City!

If you like the design, fair enough... buy a training top, as that is what that shirt should be!

 

[Machiavelli]

90 quid is a lot of money, but in reality it's the going rate for 'designer' clothes. Look at the cost of Diesel jeans or a Paul Smith shirt. As a fan, you have the choice, buy the 'designer' high quality players version or the replica version which looks like the kit but without the bells and whistles. I decided to stump up the extra and think it was worth it. Nike are a business stumping up millions each year and whether we like it or not they have to get a return. Clearly, they can't deliver this quality of shirt at a 55 quid price point.

I don't think the new shirt looks anything 'but' a City shirt, it's instantly recognisable, but with a variation in design from previous shirts, in the same way laser blue was a massive departure from our traditional sky blue. Should we still, have SAAB or Brother as the sponsor, as that was instantly recognisable City in the 80's and 90's ?

Everything you have said is nothing but your opinion and your entitled to it, but im constantly irritated by fans who seem to think they speak for all City fans. My opinions are mine and no one else's and to reiterate - I really like the new shirt.

Ultimately, our 'opinion' is irrelevant. It will be the sales that dictate whether the shirt is a success or not. If it doesn't sell, they won't repeat it, and ultimately I'm fine with that. My guess is that it will sell well because this club is no longer simply appealing to a working class manc demographic who's stuck in some 60's 70’s timewarp - and thank God - because otherwise the club would never progress.

Good on yer mate. If @RichardDunneOwnGoal has blocked you and has the neck on him to call you a troll, you're alright by me.

 

[HelloCity]

Personally I would say embroidered is old hat when you can have the quality and definition that this badge provides. It's almost like saying you should go back to an analogue telly compared to HD.

Something not right about this guy....

*Sniff sniff*

*checks posting history*

From the John Stones thread

I'm struggling to rationalise why we would spend money on a defender who isn't considered better than Chris Smalling....

 

[mrtwiceaseason]

90 quid is a lot of money, but in reality it's the going rate for 'designer' clothes. Look at the cost of Diesel jeans or a Paul Smith shirt. As a fan, you have the choice, buy the 'designer' high quality players version or the replica version which looks like the kit but without the bells and whistles. I decided to stump up the extra and think it was worth it. Nike are a business stumping up millions each year and whether we like it or not they have to get a return. Clearly, they can't deliver this quality of shirt at a 55 quid price point.

I don't think the new shirt looks anything 'but' a City shirt, it's instantly recognisable, but with a variation in design from previous shirts, in the same way laser blue was a massive departure from our traditional sky blue. Should we still, have SAAB or Brother as the sponsor, as that was instantly recognisable City in the 80's and 90's ?

Everything you have said is nothing but your opinion and your entitled to it, but im constantly irritated by fans who seem to think they speak for all City fans. My opinions are mine and no one else's and to reiterate - I really like the new shirt.

Ultimately, our 'opinion' is irrelevant. It will be the sales that dictate whether the shirt is a success or not. If it doesn't sell, they won't repeat it, and ultimately I'm fine with that. My guess is that it will sell well because this club is no longer simply appealing to a working class manc demographic who's stuck in some 60's 70’s timewarp - and thank God - because otherwise the club would never progress.

Are you seriously suggesting Nike need to charge £90 for a shirt that probably cost a £5 to make in a sweat shop to make a profit ??
Are Nike paying you for your review of this shirt ?

 

[worsleyweb]

Adults don't buy them do they?

 

[RichardDunneOwnGoal]

Good on yer mate. If @RichardDunneOwnGoal has blocked you and has the neck on him to call you a troll, you're alright by me.

And what's your problem?

He is a troll, and I'm convinced he's a rag.

Someone flagged it up not so long ago that there was a rag bragging on ragcafe that he's been a member on here for years.

I'd put money on that being Blue Mooner. I'm not the only one to make this observation, generally speaking.

Either way, he's got trolling down to a fine art. Rather sad either way, given the effort he puts into it.

 

[Machiavelli]

And what's your problem?

He is a troll, and I'm convinced he's a rag.

Someone flagged it up not so long ago that there was a rag bragging on ragcafe that he's been a member on here for years.

I'd put money on that being Blue Mooner. I'm not the only one to make this observation, generally speaking.

Either way, he's got trolling down to a fine art. Rather sad either way, given the effort he puts into it.

Trolling is against the CoC isn't it? If he is a troll in breach of the rules - how has he lasted so long? why haven't you reported him for it? He's obviously got to you enough for you to block him!