O'Neills - New Kit Supplier (Confirmed)

[westonred]

Just now, exAtyeoMax said:

they weren't available first thing this morning

Well try now i was lucky enough to get hold of two for me and my mate

[exAtyeoMax]

8 minutes ago, westonred said:

Well try now i was lucky enough to get hold of two for me and my mate

Women's were in stock but only have size 12 left…

Just bought one. I'm on a health kick, won't be wearing it to any games.

#allthegearnoidea 

Edited September 15, 2023 by exAtyeoMax

[1960maaan]

29 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

The comments about brand snobbery always makes me smile, as if anyone could be snobbish about a high street brand like Puma/Adidas etc etc which is mass produced crap sold in down market sports shops and worn by unpaid walking advertising bill boards. Now THAT is snobbery.

Puma and specially Adidas are massive brands . Puma supply some top teams and Adidas signed a record deal with Man U last year. Some of it may be mass produced tat but the Brand, in football kit terms, are very much big hitters.

 

[westonred]

2 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

Women's were in stock but only have size 12 left…

Sorry about that mate defo had them half hour ago

 

23/24 Bristol City Away Shirt - Adult - Black - MediumBCFC23001871£50.00

23/24 Bristol City Away Shirt - Adult - Black - MediumBCFC23001871£50.00

£100.00

Postage£0.00

Total£100.00

[Not Banksy]

2 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

It has to be brand snobbery. 

I think people make the mistake of thinking that O'Neills have designed the kits and then just sent them to us. 

The whole design, branding or whatever is down to us. So all the criticism O'Neills is getting for those things is incredibly unwarranted. 

I believe that in normal circumstances kits have a year-18 months lead time. O'Neills have produced thousands of shirts and training wear of different designs for both us and the Bears in what, 7 or 8 months? For a relatively small British/Irish firm, that is pretty incredible. 

I have no doubt that their staff have been working around the clock to manufacture all these various kits and the negative criticism of O'Neills I feel is incredibly unfair on those staff. 

To a point I agree... but the fit of the shirts and the fact that the collar has had about 17 variations has to come down to the manufacturer. The socks being a different colour and the poor iron transfer looking badges on the training polo tops to name a couple other things. Most have been sorted so hopefully moving forward there wont be any major issues but it doesn't exactly show O'Neills as the most professional outfit.

Despite this though brand snobbery will come into it for sure I agree. 

[exAtyeoMax]

26 minutes ago, westonred said:

Sorry about that mate defo had them half hour ago

 

23/24 Bristol City Away Shirt - Adult - Black - MediumBCFC23001871£50.00

23/24 Bristol City Away Shirt - Adult - Black - MediumBCFC23001871£50.00

£100.00

Postage£0.00

Total£100.00

It's ok, I'm not a bloke. I've bought a ladies shirt for myself 

[iamalagerdrinker]

Are they the same quality / fit as the home?

[BasSavage88]

1 hour ago, iamalagerdrinker said:

Are they the same quality / fit as the home?

Quality seems better than the home. Better material

[Pickle Rick]

For anyone wandering about stock, they can’t get it out quickly enough at the mo to fill the shop. But the stock online is currently less than in-store in terms of sizes, especially kids sizes

This is based on what I saw in store today.

[westonred]

3 hours ago, exAtyeoMax said:

It's ok, I'm not a bloke. I've bought a ladies shirt for myself 

Whoops, my apologies

[W-S-M Seagull]

4 hours ago, Not Banksy said:

To a point I agree... but the fit of the shirts and the fact that the collar has had about 17 variations has to come down to the manufacturer. The socks being a different colour and the poor iron transfer looking badges on the training polo tops to name a couple other things. Most have been sorted so hopefully moving forward there wont be any major issues but it doesn't exactly show O'Neills as the most professional outfit.

Despite this though brand snobbery will come into it for sure I agree. 

But people are acting like Hummel was the mecca of football shirts and that their were no issues with their kits. 

The 'Arsenal' shirt I found to be a tight fit. On a training shirt I once brought (which I absolutely loved) the Hummel logo has come off and the letters on our badge have also come off. On the other home shirt it has freyed. So I could say that doesn't show Hummel as the most professional outfit?

Coventry have had huge problems with their Hummel kits this season too.

What I'm saying is issues on Hummel kits would be overlooked where as issues on O'Neills is highlighted, because of brand snobbery. 

 

[phantom]

7 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

But, O Neills are the so called 'experts' in this field and surely their desire is to make as much money on sales as possible. They would have had a large say in branding and would / should be advising the club that too much (confusing) branding waters down the effect of said brand.

True, but they would have by had zero knowledge of what sells at Bristol City and would have been led by us 

[phantom]

1 hour ago, westonred said:

Whoops, my apologies

Not making that mistake again

We'll get it right on Sunday

[James54De]

9 hours ago, BCFCGav said:

Ah I see. @phantom is this what you meant? A laugh react gets me nowhere! 

It is what he does. Pretends to know things he clearly does not know. Ignore him, knows no more than you or I. 

[phantom]

1 hour ago, James54De said:

It is what he does. Pretends to know things he clearly does not know. Ignore him, knows no more than you or I. 

Don’t be bitter just because I was clearly correct here yet again 

 

[Dredd]

I think football fans are entitled to have a it of brand snobbery when they are spending £50 on a shirt £25 on a pair of shorts £40 on a training top etc that will all be outdated in 12 months (or less if we get a new kit supplier in February)

[James54De]

Just now, phantom said:

Don’t be bitter just because I was clearly correct here yet again 

 

Need I go through and bring up quotes where you evidently don’t have a ******* clue. 

[Ronnie Sinclair]

Watching Ayr v Partick on the BBC website tonight, both decked out in O'Neills attire (Ayr's shirt is particularly garish as is the Partick goalkeepers) 

[t_b]

For people who have bought from a Gate which may or may not be DH… 

Are any of the sellers any different in reality? There can’t be loads of sellers all producing knock off City kits surely?

If there are in fact different productions / quality standards, might someone know which are better?

[RedM]

11 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

How many more times are people going to try to claim it’s “brand snobbery” without acknowledging the quality of the items being produced?

Look at the quality, fit and finish of the Oneill items and compare it to Hummel, Adidas or Nike. It’s miles off. It’s chalk and cheese. At one point Oneill weren’t even producing the kits consistently.

If Oneill were producing good quality items, people would not mind about the brand. They aren’t. Everything we’ve seen so far has been poor.

And that’s before we even consider the absolute lack of any consistent use of a colour scheme. Look at the range here. It’s shambolic mismanagement of the brand.

I agree. it looks and feels cheap, nothing like any of the kits we have had previously. We had embroidered badges, embossed sponsors logos, holographic bits sewn into the kit, etc.  These kits are easy to copy by the Chinese knock off factories, as they look like chinese knock offs to start with!

[BasSavage88]

29 minutes ago, t_b said:

For people who have bought from a Gate which may or may not be DH… 

Are any of the sellers any different in reality? There can’t be loads of sellers all producing knock off City kits surely?

If there are in fact different productions / quality standards, might someone know which are better?

All the kits will be the same. Buy from the seller with the most sales 

[ChippenhamRed]

14 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

But people are acting like Hummel was the mecca of football shirts and that their were no issues with their kits. 

The 'Arsenal' shirt I found to be a tight fit. On a training shirt I once brought (which I absolutely loved) the Hummel logo has come off and the letters on our badge have also come off. On the other home shirt it has freyed. So I could say that doesn't show Hummel as the most professional outfit?

Coventry have had huge problems with their Hummel kits this season too.

What I'm saying is issues on Hummel kits would be overlooked where as issues on O'Neills is highlighted, because of brand snobbery. 

 

The issues on Oneills have been highlighted because there is a broad consensus that the quality is poor and there have been obvious issues like the collar, the sock colour mismatch, and the laughably poor training wear such as the yellow sweater with the splat on it.

The issues on Hummel haven’t been “overlooked”, because the products have been satisfactory and there haven’t been any broad issues.

Coventry’s problems have related to supply, not the product itself. And it hasn’t been discussed here at length…because this is a Bristol City forum, not Coventry.

None of it has anything to do with “brand snobbery” and everything to do with the quality of the product, and it’s weird that you’re so determined to suggest otherwise.

[RedM]

I'm not a brand snob at all, I will wear primark if I like it enough and it doesn't look cheap . But regarding football shirts I always go into the club shop at away grounds. I couldn't go into Swansea's shop due to security this time but one of the nicest shirts, training gear etc was theirs over the past few years. Looks nice, feels, nice and reasonably priced. Made by Joma. Is that a brand good enough to be snobby about, I don't know?

I think O'Neills have the potential to get it right, it is their business afterall. I really feel though that their hands have been tied by the club, possibly under pressure to produce something as cheaply as possible and too many corners have been cut. 

[Full nelson]

Jeez, quality is so poor. Tried a medium and the neck and arms must have been put on the wrong shirt size, they wouldn't look out of place on a XS or S. 

 

[exAtyeoMax]

1 hour ago, Full nelson said:

Jeez, quality is so poor. Tried a medium and the neck and arms must have been put on the wrong shirt size, they wouldn't look out of place on a XS or S. 

 

That does concern me, I have a neck like a weightlifter and do find some necklines too tight

[Pickle Rick]

2 hours ago, Full nelson said:

Jeez, quality is so poor. Tried a medium and the neck and arms must have been put on the wrong shirt size, they wouldn't look out of place on a XS or S. 

 

Same. There’s nothing I like this year, unfortunately. Can’t justify the prices of the training/leisure wear this season either when you look at the quality of the product. £40 for a training t-shirt ffs!

[W-S-M Seagull]

3 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

The issues on Oneills have been highlighted because there is a broad consensus that the quality is poor and there have been obvious issues like the collar, the sock colour mismatch, and the laughably poor training wear such as the yellow sweater with the splat on it.

The issues on Hummel haven’t been “overlooked”, because the products have been satisfactory and there haven’t been any broad issues.

Coventry’s problems have related to supply, not the product itself. And it hasn’t been discussed here at length…because this is a Bristol City forum, not Coventry.

None of it has anything to do with “brand snobbery” and everything to do with the quality of the product, and it’s weird that you’re so determined to suggest otherwise.

Apart the the collar issues which seemed to just be a poor batch I've not seen any complaints about the actual quality. Seems fine to me. 

You're quick to defend Coventrys issues as just supply issues, a quick look on social media would show you that many are also complaining about the quality, yet you're not giving O'Neills the same courtesy and that has to be due to brand snobbery.

The socks, the look of the training wear, the splat is down to US, not O'Neills. The actual quality is fine. That's why I'm defending O'Neills because I feel they are getting lots of criticism when that criticism should instead be given to JL, because the branding (which your complaints are about) is down to his poor choices.

[RedM]

11 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Apart the the collar issues which seemed to just be a poor batch I've not seen any complaints about the actual quality. Seems fine to me. 

You're quick to defend Coventrys issues as just supply issues, a quick look on social media would show you that many are also complaining about the quality, yet you're not giving O'Neills the same courtesy and that has to be due to brand snobbery.

The socks, the look of the training wear, the splat is down to US, not O'Neills. The actual quality is fine. That's why I'm defending O'Neills because I feel they are getting lots of criticism when that criticism should instead be given to JL, because the branding (which your complaints are about) is down to his poor choices.

Your idea about quality is different to mine. I think this is poor

[RedM]

Compared to this 

[Slack]

10 minutes ago, RedM said:

Compared to this 

Tbf the Hummel shirts used to fade/fall apart pretty quick, may look good on first wear but one of my shirts now says "Humm" instead of "Hummel"

Where as by looks of it O'Neils may not have that issue