Jump to content
IGNORED

New Shirt Sponsor to be announced


Red Army 75

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

Yep. They portray gambling as some kind of fundamental component of the Top LAD lifestyle, basically claiming that there's no way you can be a top, top bloke unless you're chucking half your pay packet on Liverpool 3-1 / Salah to score first. It's clever, dangerous shit, and it definitely has an influence on people, particularly young males who are the obvious target for these firms.

The worst was that Ladbrokes Life one a couple of years ago, with "Mr. Stats" and "The Chancer" and all these stupid caricatures having a bantz-filled Saturday pissing their wages away and drinking crap lager. For some reason they didn't show Mr. Degenerate who's just done his kids' pocket money in betting on Swedish basketball, or Mr Payday Loan who's sleeping on his Mum's sofa at 40 years of age after his Mrs finally chucked him out.

You been there as well then 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Maggersno1Fan said:

Exactly 

 

evidence is lost

That page (https://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/lancer-scott-confirmed-as-new-city-sponsor-3074119.aspx) has definitely been taken down.

It's linked from a Twitter post so was definitely there in the past.  I'm not a big fan of the club rewriting it's previous commercial decisions by selectively deleting news articles.

Anyway, here's an archived version:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160809093817/https://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/lancer-scott-confirmed-as-new-city-sponsor-3074119.aspx

Nothing very controversial to warrant removing the page from the official site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RonWalker said:

If you sign a deal you sign a deal. Like I said, sure there’s nothing untoward, just that the statement on the OS is probably bollocks. Again. I’ve said why I can’t understand that LS would willingly stand aside and give up the kind of exposure they got last season. Not that it needs explaining!

Does your moral high ground over contract duration apply to any players who you might not rate and want the club to ship out?

Because it’s exactly the same...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Xiled said:

That page (https://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/lancer-scott-confirmed-as-new-city-sponsor-3074119.aspx) has definitely been taken down.

It's linked from a Twitter post so was definitely there in the past.  I'm not a big fan of the club rewriting it's previous commercial decisions by selectively deleting news articles.

Anyway, here's an archived version:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160809093817/https://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/lancer-scott-confirmed-as-new-city-sponsor-3074119.aspx

Nothing very controversial to warrant removing the page from the official site.

LS quotes mention the local elements in their links to sponsorship.

Bristol City quotes talk about building community through the redeveloped stadium. 

How have the club pitched LS as a local sponsor for a local club?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maggersno1Fan said:

Exactly 

 

evidence is lost

 

1 hour ago, Xiled said:

That page (https://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/lancer-scott-confirmed-as-new-city-sponsor-3074119.aspx) has definitely been taken down.

It's linked from a Twitter post so was definitely there in the past.  I'm not a big fan of the club rewriting it's previous commercial decisions by selectively deleting news articles.

Anyway, here's an archived version:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160809093817/https://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/lancer-scott-confirmed-as-new-city-sponsor-3074119.aspx

Nothing very controversial to warrant removing the page from the official site.

 

1 hour ago, tommy_b said:

LS quotes mention the local elements in their links to sponsorship.

Bristol City quotes talk about building community through the redeveloped stadium. 

How have the club pitched LS as a local sponsor for a local club?!

Tommy b makes the point clear. There is no evidence because the club has never said they want local sponsors. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RumRed said:

Lansdown made his money in betting!  The financial markets are just the same as putting money on ‘Maggie May’ in the 3.30 at Kempton.  People just make out it’s cleverer and more classy.  

 

Difference being they win both ways as the market goes up or down

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RumRed said:

Lansdown made his money in betting!  The financial markets are just the same as putting money on ** ‘Maggie May’ in the 3.30 at Kempton.  People just make out it’s cleverer and more classy.  

 

 ** Maggie May...

An old nag famously ridden all the way to a big finish in 1971 by a young Scottish schoolboy called Rod Stewart..  :yawn:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BRISTOL86 said:

I completely agree about the adverts to be fair. In my mind there is a world of difference between a corporate sponsorship - logo on a shirt/stand - and what you describe. My biggest qualms with gambling and children’s exposure to it is in video games - ie FIFA packs. 

At last. Something I agree with. 

I couldn’t care less about a shirt sponsor. Means absolutely nothing to me and mine apart from a further step away from being a football club and one closer to a commercial enterprise. That’s probably now a necessary evil and the way of the world.

What really makes me even madder than I am already are those bloody games. As a father of 5 most of them are on them to a greater or lesser extent.

Harmless fun? Or introducing an addiction at an early age? As @BRISTOL86 says “packs” are an example of how that works.

You buy the game and the kids start playing it. How long before they ask “can I buy a pack?”

They love it when I say no....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

With respect you have absolutely no idea what deals were on the table, or could have been achieved, or how much we are even getting from this deal.

For all we know this betting company may have only offered £200k more than say, an electronics manufacturer, and we've just taken the highest offer out of principle. Doesn't mean we're suddenly going to be rich beyond our wildest dreams. 

I don’t think you have to be a genius to work out that it’s going to be a significant deal for the club to have an existing sponsor step aside. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, CyderInACan said:

Really? SL made his fortune off the back of the stocks and shares industry. The ruination of many a gambler. 

The reality is probably that JL - as Chief Exec etc - is the man responsible for this. 

 

Do they have a health warning when you gamble in a casino or on line? I ask because i never do it. All I know is the advertising preys on the vulnerable. Conversely, most of what H&L do is ISA's, Bonds, Gilts and, yes, some shares all of which do indeed carry a risk but as far as I know H&L do not get involved in shorting stock or forward currency contracts and if they did there would be strict checks and balances. Moreover, when you buy a stock or even a safe government bond there are several health warnings prior to hitting the buy button; its not as if its a swash buckling purchase like casino type gambling. Moreover, gambling on line or anywhere for that matter is extremely risky with a usual 50% chance of losing and thats probably the very best you will get. On the other hand, since you are expertly guided and the information and research for investing is always there for you on H&L the risk is nothing like gambling.

In short the comparison is not a good one.

9 hours ago, Red_Wizard said:

Haven't read all the replies on here. Definitely seems though we're throwing away that local club image, and going for a more larger corporate image, like most of the big clubs. Wouldn't surprise if we next sold the naming rights to Ashton Gate. 

 

9 hours ago, RumRed said:

Lansdown made his money in betting!  The financial markets are just the same as putting money on ‘Maggie May’ in the 3.30 at Kempton.  People just make out it’s cleverer and more classy.  

 

Everybody bets the moment they walk out of the door each morning; whether its closing that sale or failing, whether its making it home or getting hit by a bus and dying we all of us gamble every single day. But, per my remarks above, the sort of investments H&L make and offer is light years away from gambling. I think you probably know that already to be fair.

Gambling destroys poor families; its a scourge the length and breadth of this land since previous governments have gradually opened it up. I am still flabergasted the likes of Wonga were ever allowed; the go to loan sharks when the gambling gets out of hand. Personal bankruptcies, in the poorer neighbourhoods across the country, are at an all time high and long will it continue because the genie has been let out of the bottle and more and more football shirts and more and more billboards and more and more tv adverts depict gambling as cool and smart when in reality it is bloody stupid.

Fingers crossed for tomorrow.. it will not be gambling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

I’m not sure it’s about getting high and mighty, certainly not for me at least. I think it’s more a case of regret that it does appear necessary for the club to get its hands dirty with, frankly, grubby foreign betting companies, in order to compete financially with our rivals. It’s another symptom of our beloved game increasingly being driven solely by money and a simultaneous weakening of a club’s connection with its own supporters.

Some will say it doesn’t matter what’s on the shirt, which is true in some ways, but Chinese text that we can’t understand is unquestionably at odds with the concept of a shirt representing our club, our region and it’s fans.

You might be right that we can’t have it both ways. But rather than lap it up and say “take the money!”, my instinctive reaction is regret and relutance.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you about the wider game and what it’s become. But we are where we are and clubs are largely needing to adapt or suffer. Those who cling to the ‘good old days’ are the ones left behind.

No industry is the same as it was 10, 20, 30 years ago. 

We keep talking about how all these other clubs are getting their day in the sun and we’re not - spurning high profile commercial opportunities certainly isn’t going to get us any closer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, BigAlToby&Liam said:

At last. Something I agree with. 

I couldn’t care less about a shirt sponsor. Means absolutely nothing to me and mine apart from a further step away from being a football club and one closer to a commercial enterprise. That’s probably now a necessary evil and the way of the world.

What really makes me even madder than I am already are those bloody games. As a father of 5 most of them are on them to a greater or lesser extent.

Harmless fun? Or introducing an addiction at an early age? As @BRISTOL86 says “packs” are an example of how that works.

You buy the game and the kids start playing it. How long before they ask “can I buy a pack?”

They love it when I say no....

And cleverly engineered so as to bypass legislation, so that you exchange your money for ‘points’ which have a measurable value, then exchanging the points for these packs, or ‘loot boxes’ as they’re known in other games, which don’t, meaning it’s not ‘technically’ gambling, even though it obviously is.

I believe some countries are actively already looking at changes in legislation to outlaw it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting take @havanatopia - where does the line blur between a Wonga - offering credit to those already down a hole of addiction, or a Wetherspoons doing exactly the same but with cheap booze instead of easy cash?

Not knocking your viewpoint, I just see a very different reaction to gambling and drinking where I’d hazard a guess that alcohol addiction has ruined many more lives, and contributed to considerably more fatalities, than gambling addiction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, RonWalker said:

If you sign a deal you sign a deal. Like I said, sure there’s nothing untoward, just that the statement on the OS is probably bollocks. Again. I’ve said why I can’t understand that LS would willingly stand aside and give up the kind of exposure they got last season. Not that it needs explaining!

It was just a hunch anyway, but no great surprise what @frenchred said either.

Might be a shame there’s no more local sponsor etc, but maybe they’d step aside because there’s two new training grounds, allegedly an arena, and according to the post yesterday now a multi story car park, all in the works. And they are a local building company described as the club’s principal construction partner in that statement. I’m sure they’ve extracted as much value as possible out of stepping aside, but if they end up with all those building projects as well as the unexpected cup run/gif value out of the shirt sponsorship last season, I don’t think we need to feel too sorry for Lancer Scott!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Maggersno1Fan said:

Exactly 

not really it was on the old website that was run by the football league which we are no longer apart of  that deal and run ours independently , so it would be difficult to access the info there, you plum 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BRISTOL86 said:

I don’t think you have to be a genius to work out that it’s going to be a significant deal for the club to have an existing sponsor step aside. 

Absolutely. The new sponsor has to cover the ROI that was expected by sponsoring City and some. 

So that’s paying 2 years of sponsorship to Lancer Scott (if they paid upfront), plus expected ROI which could be 2 or 3 times that cost, and then their own sponsorship on top.

Going to be an absolute whack. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Interesting take @havanatopia - where does the line blur between a Wonga - offering credit to those already down a hole of addiction, or a Wetherspoons doing exactly the same but with cheap booze instead of easy cash?

Not knocking your viewpoint, I just see a very different reaction to gambling and drinking where I’d hazard a guess that alcohol addiction has ruined many more lives, and contributed to considerably more fatalities, than gambling addiction. 

We are not talking about fatal habits we are talking about losing all of your personal net worth. I suppose that can happen with drinking directly and as a cause but gambling destroys livelihoods this is what I am opining while drinking is a whole other topic. :) 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my understanding of FFP, every extra pound of actual revenue allows SL to invest more of his wealth in some way. So the value of the new deal in effect has a multiplied effect on total investment, incremental gains become bigger - but morally I personally feel conflicted with betting and it's prominence in football. No easy answer to this I think

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Interesting take @havanatopia - where does the line blur between a Wonga - offering credit to those already down a hole of addiction, or a Wetherspoons doing exactly the same but with cheap booze instead of easy cash?

Not knocking your viewpoint, I just see a very different reaction to gambling and drinking where I’d hazard a guess that alcohol addiction has ruined many more lives, and contributed to considerably more fatalities, than gambling addiction. 

Absolutely and if we go down this route of social responsibilities, I guess these same posters are boycotting:

1) The World Cup and any FIFA activity - thousands evicted in Brazil and dead in Qatar.

2) Nestle products like Kit-kats, felix cat food, Nescafé or Haagen Daas - historical child labour 

3) Shell petrol stations - genocide in Africa for oil land.

4) HSBC - money laundering in drug trade 

5) H and M, Gap, Adidas, Primark and many more - slave labour.

Just to name a few examples of everyday world issues we turn a blind eye to, often for the sake of money.

But I just have a feeling if Carling or HSBC sponsored us, there would be no problem.

Except for with the same people that criticise everything the club does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Absolutely and if we go down this route of social responsibilities, I guess these same posters are boycotting:

1) The World Cup and any FIFA activity - thousands evicted in Brazil and dead in Qatar.

2) Nestle products like Kit-kats, felix cat food, Nescafé or Haagen Daas - historical child labour 

3) Shell petrol stations - genocide in Africa for oil land.

4) HSBC - money laundering in drug trade 

5) H and M, Gap, Adidas, Primark and many more - slave labour.

Just to name a few examples of everyday world issues we turn a blind eye to, often for the sake of money.

But I just have a feeling if Carling or HSBC sponsored us, there would be no problem.

Except for with the same people that criticise everything the club does.

it ill disappear if we get off to a good start, 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Absolutely and if we go down this route of social responsibilities, I guess these same posters are boycotting:

1) The World Cup and any FIFA activity - thousands evicted in Brazil and dead in Qatar.

2) Nestle products like Kit-kats, felix cat food, Nescafé or Haagen Daas - historical child labour 

3) Shell petrol stations - genocide in Africa for oil land.

4) HSBC - money laundering in drug trade 

5) H and M, Gap, Adidas, Primark and many more - slave labour.

Just to name a few examples of everyday world issues we turn a blind eye to, often for the sake of money.

But I just have a feeling if Carling or HSBC sponsored us, there would be no problem.

Except for with the same people that criticise everything the club does.

Pretty much. Not to make light of anyone with serious addiction but gambling very much seems to be the new ‘everyone else’s fault but mine’ vogue in the media. 

How long before the adverts are for ‘did you bet your house on black and it was somebody else’s fault?!’ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...