Afc Liverpool's new club badge

[Vermilion]

My one point in all this is, if it wasn't set up as a reaction to the yanks, why wasn't it done sooner, it sounds to me, just my opinion, that it was in fact a knee jerk reaction against the americans. As was the Scum with theirs.

Nothing against it, each to their own, but a bit of honesty as to the reasons behind it would be good. It must be because of the takeover, or should i say because of who Tookover.

Also the aim of every club is to progress up the leagues, yes it will take years, & no matter how unlikely the scenario the aim of the club is to win, become a force, the long term effect of this if successful, will be another club people can't afford to go & see, what then, another club.

[Vermilion]

dont like any of the designs TBH. the first one looks like its should be a logo for a swiss company, the second is a bit tacky, and the third looks like a label of Stolichnaya vodka

I'm amazed that those 3 were the best they could do.

[Red_hot]

I'm amazed that those 3 were the best they could do.

FFS. There were loads done and those were shortlisted by the members themselves and then the winner chosen AGAIN by the members. And in answer to your other post, did you read The Glove's post above? It was a reaction to the 39th game thing NOT the Yanks.

If it's not some peoples thing fair enough but really it's not harming anyone. LFC themselves are happy for AFC to exist and for lots of people it will be more than welcome. I go to loads of games at Anfield but I can't take my kids very often cos of the cost. I will still go to Anfield.

This however, I could take my kids to every game and they get to watch a decent game of footy, sing Liverpool songs and have a laugh. I don't see why people should object to that.

[Vermilion]

FFS. There were loads done and those were shortlisted by the members themselves and then the winner chosen AGAIN by the members. And in answer to your other post, did you read The Glove's post above? It was a reaction to the 39th game thing NOT the Yanks.

If it's not some peoples thing fair enough but really it's not harming anyone. LFC themselves are happy for AFC to exist and for lots of people it will be more than welcome. I go to loads of games at Anfield but I can't take my kids very often cos of the cost. I will still go to Anfield.

This however, I could take my kids to every game and they get to watch a decent game of footy, sing Liverpool songs and have a laugh. I don't see why people should object to that.

Never said i objected, if you read right you would see i said each to their own. As for it being a reaction to the extra game, well sorry, i'm not buying that. My opinion.

As for the badges, those 3 were the short listed ones, hence you would imagine the best. no.

[Red_hot]

Never said i objected, if you read right you would see i said each to their own. As for it being a reaction to the extra game, well sorry, i'm not buying that. My opinion.

As for the badges, those 3 were the short listed ones, hence you would imagine the best. no.

Well the one I thought was best wasn't shortlisted so not imo.

As for not buying it, I guess thats your perogative.

[Vermilion]

Well the one I thought was best wasn't shortlisted so not imo.

As for not buying it, I guess thats your perogative.

[SK]

kind of similar isn't it?



The coat of arms of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia featured six torches surrounded by wheat and burning together in one flame; this represented brotherhood and unity of the six republics forming the ex-Yugoslavia: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Slovenia. The date imprinted is November 29, 1943 - on this date the Anti-Fascist Council of National Liberation of Yugoslavia met in Jajce on its second meeting and established the basis for post-war organisation of the country, establishing a federation (this date was celebrated as Republic Day after the Second World War).

The original coat of arms (1943-1963) featured five torches, representing five nations of Yugoslavia, Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Montenegrins and Macedonians. The Muslims weren't represented as a nation and neither were ethnic Albanians, so the coat of arms was redesigned in 1963 to represent Yugoslavian republics instead of nations.

[The Glove]

My one point in all this is, if it wasn't set up as a reaction to the yanks, why wasn't it done sooner, it sounds to me, just my opinion, that it was in fact a knee jerk reaction against the americans. As was the Scum with theirs.

Nothing against it, each to their own, but a bit of honesty as to the reasons behind it would be good. It must be because of the takeover, or should i say because of who Tookover.

Also the aim of every club is to progress up the leagues, yes it will take years, & no matter how unlikely the scenario the aim of the club is to win, become a force, the long term effect of this if successful, will be another club people can't afford to go & see, what then, another club.

Look back on this forum, use the search facility and you will see it did come about when they announced the 39th game. You will see the honesty you crave for then.

The club is owned and run by its supporters. Its not for profit. Its not going to be bought out by anyone ever. All the money stays in the club so it can afforsd to run things evenly unlike any other football club which has to make profits to pay its share holders/ower etc.

Never said i objected, if you read right you would see i said each to their own. As for it being a reaction to the extra game, well sorry, i'm not buying that. My opinion.

Liverpool Football Club accept the reasoning when presented with the facts. You dont, fair enough.

[The Glove]

Oh and as regards the badge, any fool can cobble together something with a Liverbird but you'll find that the Liverbird is 'owned' so it needs to get past the various branding rights. Hence the 3 choices, they all pass various branding, allowing them to be used.

[The Glove]

See here for the proof since you wont look.

http://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=47349

[kev776]

I think AFC Liverpool is a very positive thing and great credit has to go to the likes of Alun Parry for getting off his arse and doing something about an idea he believed in.

It's a shame that a bit of negativity has to creep into every thread about this.

As for the badge, I quite like it although I didn't get a chance to see the other contenders.

Matt,

It isn't negativity mate, it is just other opinions. I am not for or against the idea, not sure yet, but for all those who think it is good there are as many who dont and they deserve to be heard too. Alan has done a grand job and the idea is noble but the point of supporting other local teams is also valid.

[livvy145]

Rick Parry gives thumbs-up for AFC Liverpool

May 27 2008 by Luke Traynor, Liverpool Echo




REDS chief executive Rick Parry today backed new fans' club AFC Liverpool and vowed to "co-operate" with the venture.

The surprise move saw the Anfield supremo this week write to the newly-formed outfit to offer his support.

AFC Liverpool, set up by fans fed up with rising Premiership match prices, is likely to start its first season in the Vodkat (North West Counties) League this autumn.

Mr Parry’s support is a big boost for the club, who say they are not trying to be an alternative to Liverpool FC.

It is believed to be one of the first times a big football club has publicly backed an alternative shoot-off venture.

A letter from Mr Parry to AFC officials read: “Bryce Morrison (club secretary) has passed me your letter. On the basis of your letter there is every reason to believe that we can co-exist and co-operate and that will certainly be my aim.

“Doubtless there will be issues that will arise and will need to be solved. But I approach this with a positive frame of mind.

“I’d like to wish you the best of luck with your endeavour and I know how much hard work will be required.

“Yours sincerely, Rick Parry.”

AFC Liverpool founder Alun Parry told the ECHO: “I thought what Rick and the club have done is outstanding.

“They didn’t need to come out and do it – they could have stayed in the wings and watched how things develop.

“This shows the outstanding bond between the club and its supporters. They recognise we are a friendly venture and realise that we are interested in people who can’t get in to Anfield.

“The club recognise that, this way, fans will stay within the LFC family.”

AFC Liverpool’s first fixture will be a friendly match against St Helens Town on July 16 at Ashton-in-Makerfield.

The ground has a 1,000 capacity and is likely to be full as early curiosity in the club continues.

So far, 500 people have signed up as paid members of the club, earning it £10,000.

It means they will have a vote in the running of the side.

AFC manager and former Burscough boss Derek Goulding is close to finalising arrangements with the 36 players needed to form first and second string teams.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-news/2008/05/27/rick-parry-gives-thumbs-up-for-afc-liverpool-100252-20979744/

[Kenneth]

Sack Parry

[Pablo]

Sack Parry

It never gets old.

Rick Parry to AFC

[bazza76]

Just out of interest, how many sharholders have we got on this site?
surely we must have a higher member to shareholder ratio as Alun is a member here?