Jump to content
IGNORED

DUNDER - Now announced

chowie

By chowie
in Football Chat

Recommended Posts

lenred

lenred

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Whether you agree with it or not, can people not be a bit more respectful to those who have deep reservations about our club being sponsored by an industry whose reputation and impact on our society is highly questionable?

I entirely understand why people are uncomfortable with it - I know I am. Others will argue that alcohol advertising doesn’t get the same reaction - which is a fair point - but that doesn’t make the concerns any less justified.

As I said in the other thread, I do think you can make a dinstinction between Mr Heineken setting up his brewery in 1864 and a start-up gambling company formed 2 years ago. I would suggest Mr Heineken’s intentions were a little more honest and less cynical. I do think it’s a shame we’re doing a deal with these sort of businesses.

Quite agree CR. It’s a shame some people are being so narcy towards others because of an opinion that they hold. It seems that to many we just have to blindly accept every decision the club makes. And whilst we may have to accept it we can still debate it and disagree with it if that’s how we feel and should be able to do so on here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

 

1 minute ago, lenred said:

Quite agree CR. It’s a shame some people are being so narcy towards others because of an opinion that they hold. It seems that to many we just have to blindly accept every decision the club makes. And whilst we may have to accept it we can still debate it and disagree with it if that’s how we feel. 

 As long as that works both ways, the more irate posts seem to be the ones against the sponsor in my opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BCFC_Dan

BCFC_Dan

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

As I said in the other thread, I do think you can make a dinstinction between Mr Heineken setting up his brewery in 1864 and a start-up gambling company formed 2 years ago. I would suggest Mr Heineken’s intentions were a little more honest and less cynical. I do think it’s a shame we’re doing a deal with these sort of businesses.

Why?

I don't mind what your opinion is on alcohol or gambling companies, you're entitled to it, but I'm interested to know why you think Mr Heineken was trying to do something more noble than simply make a profit and that the people behind Dunder are trying to do something less noble. Believe what you want about the morality of the two activities but at the end of the day both exist to make a profit and that's the end of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lenred

lenred

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, wood_red said:

 

 As long as that works both ways, the more irate posts seem to be the ones against the sponsor in my opinion

Cant speak for others but it certainly does from my perspective. Can’t say I’ve seen people getting irate in their reactions to it though, just disappointment.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Monkeh

Monkeh

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, brady bunch said:

Well I dont have particularly high morals and I bought 5 shirts in total last year for me and my boys, but I simply will not allow myself or my sons to  advertise an online casino - no way.

it won't be on the junior kits you're not aloud to advertise gambling or alcohol on youth kits 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Monkeh

Monkeh

Posted
Posted
Just now, brady bunch said:

thanks Monken, I did not realise that.

all cool again (should have read the full thread before commenting, but then I would not be very OTIB if I did that :laugh:)

not many did, but remember the issues when blackthorn were the sponsor and the community trust ad to be put on the Jr kits 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Natchfever

Natchfever

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Whether you agree with it or not, can people not be a bit more respectful to those who have deep reservations about our club being sponsored by an industry whose reputation and impact on our society is highly questionable?

I entirely understand why people are uncomfortable with it - I know I am. Others will argue that alcohol advertising doesn’t get the same reaction - which is a fair point - but that doesn’t make the concerns any less justified.

As I said in the other thread, I do think you can make a dinstinction between Mr Heineken setting up his brewery in 1864 and a start-up gambling company formed 2 years ago. I would suggest Mr Heineken’s intentions were a little more honest and less cynical. I do think it’s a shame we’re doing a deal with these sort of businesses.

So if Thatchers offered a multi million pound sponsorship deal would people have deep reservations ?

I would suggest alcohol ruins more lives directly and indirectly than gambling does.

If people choose to spend their money boozing and/or gambling thats their choice. If they become addicted it says more about them than the source of their addiction.

The vast majority of people gamble sensibly, just like the vast majority of people drink sensibly drive sensibly and eat sensibly.

If the deal is genuinely so good that a local sponsor gets told to **** off, and the club doesn't mind its fans being called Dunderheads then thats ok by me.

I do though respect others views to the contrary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rob k

Rob k

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, brady bunch said:

Well I dont have particularly high morals and I bought 5 shirts in total last year for me and my boys, but I simply will not allow myself or my sons to  advertise an online casino - no way.

Why not? Online casinos are no different to any gambling sites are they? 

I don’t see the issue with it personally, if you want the best players we can get then these are the deals we have to strike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Merrick's Marvels

Merrick's Marvels

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Olé said:

Most Nordic gaming companies go to Malta because their gaming regulation is "friendlier" and the tax position is good, whereas the Nordic countries themselves have historically been far less supportive, or at least less clear about their long term intentions for online gaming regulations.

Malta is now full of blonde people. That's not to say it's because Malta is a cowboy or unregulated market but the Maltese Gaming Authority (the local regulator) has been much clearer with the gaming companies on what the requirements and laws are, and has been able to host business.

Most gaming companies are in Gibraltar or Malta and that includes the Ladbrokes, William Hill, Betfred, Betfair of this world that everyone has grown up with. I don't know about corruption in government but if you are worried about getting bumped off in Malta, the main risk is getting in a taxi!

Thanks, thought it would be something to do with friendly regulation.

As for the corruption, the Maltese government is implicated in the murder of investigative journalist Daphne Caruanna Galizia, their prime minister up to his neck in allegations of financial impropriety, and the island is a magnet for mobsters and the filthy rich, no doubt attracted by all sorts of "friendly regulation".    

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TBW

TBW

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

John Lansdown - the gift that keeps on giving.

I'm sure the money will more than make up for the company name being similar to a very outdated word for a stupid person.

Not like we've got C-word blazed across the front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xiled

Xiled

Posted
Posted

I guess we really don't make much profit from replica kit sales.

I haven't bought a current one for many years but the thought of walking around in a shirt with the word "Dunder" emblazoned across it doesn't appeal.

The club have hopefully balanced up the loss on merchandising against the sponsorship income.  Adult shirt sales for 2018/19 could be pretty low....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Major Isewater

Major Isewater

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Just wondering if there was moral outrage in the 1970s when tobacco sponsorship was prevalent at just about every sporting occasion.

Not too much because the dangers of smoking were just starting to be understood.

Most people smoked back then anyway so it wasn't so much an enticement to do something that they weren't already doing but to change or strengthen the choice .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChippenhamRed

ChippenhamRed

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, BCFC_Dan said:

Why?

I don't mind what your opinion is on alcohol or gambling companies, you're entitled to it, but I'm interested to know why you think Mr Heineken was trying to do something more noble than simply make a profit and that the people behind Dunder are trying to do something less noble. Believe what you want about the morality of the two activities but at the end of the day both exist to make a profit and that's the end of it.

I realise we're into subtleties here, but for me the difference is Mr Heineken was using his own skills to sell a unique product - his own specific beer - that benefits both the buyer and the seller.  The seller gets money, the buyer gets a drink.  Meanwhile Dunder entered a congested market place, offering nothing particularly unique, clearly to cash in on the lucrative gambling industry where the buyer is more likely to end up with nothing at all.  They are not offering a unique skill, they are just tempting people to part with cash.  It just feels a lot grubbier to me.    I understand and appreciate that others might not make that distinction.

To put it another way; in my eyes seeing people sat in a bookies is a lot more depressing than seeing people sat in a beer garden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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