New Kits 21/22
Re: New Kits 21/22
The reasons for rejecting gambling sponsorships and ads are valid ones. I subscribe to the idea myself and will not entertain buying something that advertises gambling. I don’t think anyone needs telling that they tend to pay the most though, that’s been obvious for a while.
Not sure where the chatter of having no sponsorship at all has come from though. Weird.
Not sure where the chatter of having no sponsorship at all has come from though. Weird.
-
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
- Been Liked: 99 times
- Has Liked: 86 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Don't like the shirt sponsor,don't buy a shirt.We don't sell that many anyway.Football is business,go for highest bidder and make most money.Stop ******* complaining
-
- Posts: 10321
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
- Been Liked: 3340 times
- Has Liked: 1959 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Yes. Strange that some seemed to get so giddy.dandeclaret wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 4:54 pmThe single tweet also only stated that “they would review it as part of the overall commercial strategy”….. they’ve done that. At no point did they say they were going to have no more gambling ads, or anything remotely close to that.
-
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
- Been Liked: 99 times
- Has Liked: 86 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Probably the ones moaning,are the ones who say we don't earn enough in sponsor deals.Look at me I won't buy a new Burnley shirt cos it's got a betting firm on it Bore off
Re: New Kits 21/22
Presumably you don’t subscribe to Sky then?ksrclaret wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:00 pmThe reasons for rejecting gambling sponsorships and ads are valid ones. I subscribe to the idea myself and will not entertain buying something that advertises gambling. I don’t think anyone needs telling that they tend to pay the most though, that’s been obvious for a while.
Not sure where the chatter of having no sponsorship at all has come from though. Weird.
Re: New Kits 21/22
You presume correctly there.
I do have to admit though, if you were to keep going and list loads of things, there might be something in there that I buy that indirectly has something to do with gambling. I try my best to avoid it, but nobody is perfect. Gotcha!
Re: New Kits 21/22
I can understand there being disappointment at a gambling company being chosen, it wasn’t going to be anything else though, was it?
Pace, perhaps more than most would prefer alternative sponsorship. At the end of the day though, we’re already trying to compete with one hand tied behind our back, there’s be no business sense in tying the other hand too, especially so soon after the takeover.
There won’t have been an alternative that was viable for us financially. Time to accept that fact and see what the next deal is in a years time.
Pace, perhaps more than most would prefer alternative sponsorship. At the end of the day though, we’re already trying to compete with one hand tied behind our back, there’s be no business sense in tying the other hand too, especially so soon after the takeover.
There won’t have been an alternative that was viable for us financially. Time to accept that fact and see what the next deal is in a years time.
This user liked this post: ŽižkovClaret
Re: New Kits 21/22
I was genuinely curious, no gotcha. Good on you if you can stick to such a principle (50p says you can’t!).ksrclaret wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:19 pmYou presume correctly there.
I do have to admit though, if you were to keep going and list loads of things, there might be something in there that I buy that indirectly has something to do with gambling. I try my best to avoid it, but nobody is perfect. Gotcha!
Re: New Kits 21/22
I’ll give you the 50p now then, as it’s everywhere and impossible to avoid. As I said, I try my best, things like not buying a shirt or sky sports, but I don’t let it get in the way of my enjoyment of life. It’s just a personal preference.
-
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
- Been Liked: 99 times
- Has Liked: 86 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
We could have got the black pudding shop in the market to sponsor us,and made no money.But we could have all wore the shirt with pride, knowing we weren't advertising a nasty evil betting company
Re: New Kits 21/22
Yes, and you just took my bet so you definitely lose!
-
- Posts: 1053
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:48 am
- Been Liked: 639 times
- Has Liked: 441 times
- Location: London
Re: New Kits 21/22
I'm firmly with JDRobbo on this one and I applaud him for consistently putting his head above the parapet on this subject despite being sniped at every time. Why? Because advertising works. It's obvious that it works; if it didn't, betting companies wouldn't spent eye-watering amounts on it. And it's not the punters with known self-restraint they're after, they're after new blood, new gamblers, young gamblers, gamblers who don't yet know whether they're going to be addicted or not. You can argue the opposite all you want, but if kids aren't susceptible to gambling ads then why is it banned on under 18s shirts?
This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.
Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.
Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
These 5 users liked this post: ksrclaret Lancasterclaret Claret simonclaret elwaclaret
-
- Posts: 67868
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32527 times
- Has Liked: 5276 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: New Kits 21/22
Rather than insulting people who have a different opinion to yourself you might just accept that others do have differing views.Les Lawrence wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:15 pmProbably the ones moaning,are the ones who say we don't earn enough in sponsor deals.Look at me I won't buy a new Burnley shirt cos it's got a betting firm on it Bore off
This user liked this post: BertiesBeehole
Re: New Kits 21/22
You're perfectly entitled to your opinion, and I'd never ask anyone to stop having an opinion.Sausage wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:34 pmI'm firmly with JDRobbo on this one and I applaud him for consistently putting his head above the parapet on this subject despite being sniped at every time. Why? Because advertising works. It's obvious that it works; if it didn't, betting companies wouldn't spent eye-watering amounts on it. And it's not the punters with known self-restraint they're after, they're after new blood, new gamblers, young gamblers, gamblers who don't yet know whether they're going to be addicted or not. You can argue the opposite all you want, but if kids aren't susceptible to gambling ads then why is it banned on under 18s shirts?
This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.
Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
But yet again, you're against it, but cannot put any alternative sponsors forward. Probably because they're weren't any. So the club either give up on 7 million quid, or go with something a few people object to. The loss of a few hundred quid for those not buying a shirt is a big enough hit to take.
-
- Posts: 67868
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32527 times
- Has Liked: 5276 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: New Kits 21/22
I’m with you on this one Sausage. I’ve said many times that gambling ads don’t affect me because I don’t gamble but I’ve seen the devastating effects it has had on some people and their families.Sausage wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:34 pmI'm firmly with JDRobbo on this one and I applaud him for consistently putting his head above the parapet on this subject despite being sniped at every time. Why? Because advertising works. It's obvious that it works; if it didn't, betting companies wouldn't spent eye-watering amounts on it. And it's not the punters with known self-restraint they're after, they're after new blood, new gamblers, young gamblers, gamblers who don't yet know whether they're going to be addicted or not. You can argue the opposite all you want, but if kids aren't susceptible to gambling ads then why is it banned on under 18s shirts?
This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.
Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
-
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
- Been Liked: 99 times
- Has Liked: 86 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
So you won't be buying one.Do you have a pint at half time,nice big carlsberg advert in Liverpool programme Targeting the young drinkers,shame on Burnley tc
-
- Posts: 1053
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:48 am
- Been Liked: 639 times
- Has Liked: 441 times
- Location: London
Re: New Kits 21/22
It's a ridiculous question. You have literally no idea whether there were any alternative sponsors negotiating with the club before the deal was struck with SpreadEx. There might have been a company out there offering £6 million. But you assume that the alternative to SpreadEx's money is no money at all.Grumps wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:40 pmYou're perfectly entitled to your opinion, and I'd never ask anyone to stop having an opinion.
But yet again, you're against it, but cannot put any alternative sponsors forward. Probably because they're weren't any. So the club either give up on 7 million quid, or go with something a few people object to. The loss of a few hundred quid for those not buying a shirt is a big enough hit to take.
But if you want an alternative sponsor plucked out of thin air with no knowledge of whether they were interested, how about Ford for £8 million? No?Perhaps we could have tempted Pfizer for £80 trillion?
This user liked this post: ksrclaret
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
this speaks for me tooSausage wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:34 pmI'm firmly with JDRobbo on this one and I applaud him for consistently putting his head above the parapet on this subject despite being sniped at every time. Why? Because advertising works. It's obvious that it works; if it didn't, betting companies wouldn't spent eye-watering amounts on it. And it's not the punters with known self-restraint they're after, they're after new blood, new gamblers, young gamblers, gamblers who don't yet know whether they're going to be addicted or not. You can argue the opposite all you want, but if kids aren't susceptible to gambling ads then why is it banned on under 18s shirts?
This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.
Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
I haven't put a penny into the football industry for nearly two decades now, never subscribed to Sky/BT either, never bought a shirt and received my last one as a present circa 40 years ago - no sponsor.
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Is £7m what we are getting? - I have not seen any figures as yetGrumps wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:40 pmYou're perfectly entitled to your opinion, and I'd never ask anyone to stop having an opinion.
But yet again, you're against it, but cannot put any alternative sponsors forward. Probably because they're weren't any. So the club either give up on 7 million quid, or go with something a few people object to. The loss of a few hundred quid for those not buying a shirt is a big enough hit to take.
Re: New Kits 21/22
Black Puddings are evil IMO. I’d prefer to have a bet than eat a black pudding.Les Lawrence wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:23 pmWe could have got the black pudding shop in the market to sponsor us,and made no money.But we could have all wore the shirt with pride, knowing we weren't advertising a nasty evil betting company
Re: New Kits 21/22
I think Sausage has just completely and utterly owned the argument here. Brilliant couple of posts.
-
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
- Been Liked: 99 times
- Has Liked: 86 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Yep let's take a 6 million deal instead of the 7 but we can all feel happy .You'll be the one moaning when the extra money could have paid a players wages to keep us up
Re: New Kits 21/22
In the press at lunchtime saying it equalled what lovebet paid,and quoted that figureChester Perry wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:49 pmIs £7m what we are getting? - I have not seen any figures as yet
Re: New Kits 21/22
I wouldn't want Ford.... They advertise how fast their cars can go from 0 to 60..... And we all know speed kills.Sausage wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:47 pmIt's a ridiculous question. You have literally no idea whether there were any alternative sponsors negotiating with the club before the deal was struck with SpreadEx. There might have been a company out there offering £6 million. But you assume that the alternative to SpreadEx's money is no money at all.
But if you want an alternative sponsor plucked out of thin air with no knowledge of whether they were interested, how about Ford for £8 million? No?Perhaps we could have tempted Pfizer for £80 trillion?
-
- Posts: 4751
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
- Been Liked: 953 times
- Has Liked: 238 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
It's reported being a similar level to lovebet.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:49 pmIs £7m what we are getting? - I have not seen any figures as yet
-
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
- Been Liked: 99 times
- Has Liked: 86 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
If Burnley had Ford on their shirts,I would rush to buy one straight away.
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
which press? still not seen it - not saying it wasn't there just not found it yet
Is that the the reduced £7.25m as of last summer (pandemic impact saw to the reduction from £7.5m previous season, the total deal included sleeve sponsorship as well) or what LoveBet ended up paying last season? which was substantially less - all could be applied to the statement with very different income outcomes for the club.
FWIW from what I have seen previously the sleeve sponsor element is worth around an eighth to quarter of the shirt front value (depending on the club and whether it was matched to front of shirt sponsor)
-
- Posts: 4751
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
- Been Liked: 953 times
- Has Liked: 238 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Lancs Live.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:11 pmwhich press? still not seen it - not saying it wasn't there just not found it yet
Is that the the reduced £7.25m as of last summer (pandemic impact saw to the reduction from £7.5m previous season, the total deal included sleeve sponsorship as well) or what LoveBet ended up paying last season? which was substantially less - all could be applied to the statement with very different income outcomes for the club.
FWIW from what I have seen previously the sleeve sponsor element is worth around an eighth to quarter of the shirt front value (depending on the club and whether it was matched to front of shirt sponsor)
-
- Posts: 7061
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
- Been Liked: 2173 times
- Has Liked: 3108 times
- Location: Praha
- Contact:
Re: New Kits 21/22
I saw a report that the shirt sleeve and main shirt sponsorships as a combo have matched the amount lost by the Lovebet dealChester Perry wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:11 pmwhich press? still not seen it - not saying it wasn't there just not found it yet
Is that the the reduced £7.25m as of last summer (pandemic impact saw to the reduction from £7.5m previous season, the total deal included sleeve sponsorship as well) or what LoveBet ended up paying last season? which was substantially less - all could be applied to the statement with very different income outcomes for the club.
FWIW from what I have seen previously the sleeve sponsor element is worth around an eighth to quarter of the shirt front value (depending on the club and whether it was matched to front of shirt sponsor)
-
- Posts: 6904
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
- Been Liked: 2758 times
- Has Liked: 4325 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Have you not been to a match for 20 years CP ?Chester Perry wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:48 pmthis speaks for me too
I haven't put a penny into the football industry for nearly two decades now, never subscribed to Sky/BT either, never bought a shirt and received my last one as a present circa 40 years ago - no sponsor.
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Ok - so it is Spread Ex plus Astro Pay that brings the overall total to similar (not the same) value - no indication what proportion is being paid for shirt front or sleeve - Were we not told that the LoveBet deal was reduced last season to cover the Pandemic (or more likely a rebate for the pause on the 2019/20 season) I distinctly remember a thread discussing it
"Financial details have not been announced but it is understood that the shirt sponsor deal, combined with new sleeve sponsor AstroPay, is of similar value to what previous sponsors Love Bet were paying per year, income in the region £7.5million."
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
that is correct
-
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
- Been Liked: 99 times
- Has Liked: 86 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Bet he went the Orient game and the 6 nil home defeat by Hereford,though
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Orient yes - Hereford, Crewe etc no, though I may have just completely erased them from my memory thankfullyLes Lawrence wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:29 pmBet he went the Orient game and the 6 nil home defeat by Hereford,though
Last edited by Chester Perry on Mon Jul 19, 2021 7:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 6904
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
- Been Liked: 2758 times
- Has Liked: 4325 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Fair play CP
-
- Posts: 30695
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11049 times
- Has Liked: 5658 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: New Kits 21/22
Chester Perry wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:28 pmOk - so it is Spread Ex plus Astro Pay that brings the overall total to similar (not the same) value - no indication what proportion is being paid for shirt front or sleeve - Were we not told that the LoveBet deal was reduced last season to cover the Pandemic (or more likely a rebate for the pause on the 2019/20 season) I distinctly remember a thread discussing it
"Financial details have not been announced but it is understood that the shirt sponsor deal, combined with new sleeve sponsor AstroPay, is of similar value to what previous sponsors Love Bet were paying per year, income in the region £7.5million."
- Attachments
-
- Screenshot 2021-07-19 11.20.52 AM.png (94.4 KiB) Viewed 2474 times
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
yeah I was quoting his article - still not seen anything to contradict the understanding that the LoveBet deal was reduced from the start of last season, it depends on how big the ball park is as to how close it is to the original LoveBet deal
If the club have managed to get circa £7m for the two deals combined it is a reasonable return - they have still lost money over budget for the 3 year LoveBet deal and this does nothing but add to the shortfall of last season. More tellingly, It is also not in line with the rhetoric of growing commercial sponsorship income that the new board came in apparently believing was relatively straight forward from the way they presented it.
-
- Posts: 5355
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1647 times
- Has Liked: 402 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Good comment.Sausage wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:34 pmI'm firmly with JDRobbo on this one and I applaud him for consistently putting his head above the parapet on this subject despite being sniped at every time. Why? Because advertising works. It's obvious that it works; if it didn't, betting companies wouldn't spent eye-watering amounts on it. And it's not the punters with known self-restraint they're after, they're after new blood, new gamblers, young gamblers, gamblers who don't yet know whether they're going to be addicted or not. You can argue the opposite all you want, but if kids aren't susceptible to gambling ads then why is it banned on under 18s shirts?
This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.
Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
I completely get why most people don’t give a toss, but a few of us have lost people we know to suicide over gambling addiction, and others have worked in mental health, so from that perspective, no money is enough to justify it.
The whole football industry is amoral, let’s be honest about this, it isn’t just BFC, who generally are pretty good. I wouldn’t use this to hammer the new board, I’m just disappointed and won’t be partaking.
-
- Posts: 7061
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
- Been Liked: 2173 times
- Has Liked: 3108 times
- Location: Praha
- Contact:
Re: New Kits 21/22
Compared to recent sponsors, i think the logo looks pretty smart. will be interesting to see how it looks on the shirt.
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
I have been wondering if they would use the red - it is in the press release against a claret background though it might look more effective in monochromeŽižkovClaret wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 7:56 pmCompared to recent sponsors, i think the logo looks pretty smart. will be interesting to see how it looks on the shirt.
https://www.burnleyfootballclub.com/con ... r-spreadex
overall it will look better on the shirt than the last two sponsors
-
- Posts: 11120
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:29 pm
- Been Liked: 1573 times
- Has Liked: 360 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
It’s not something that particularly bothers me the sponsors but I can appreciate the views of fans that don’t agree with them.
I used to work in a bookies and the money people through at the bookies (slots in particular) was absolutely crazy.
Let’s hope Pace sticks to his word and changes it out next season. Must have been too late to do it this year
I used to work in a bookies and the money people through at the bookies (slots in particular) was absolutely crazy.
Let’s hope Pace sticks to his word and changes it out next season. Must have been too late to do it this year
-
- Posts: 4388
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
- Been Liked: 1826 times
- Has Liked: 930 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
Deeply put off by this sponsor. Not just another bookie.
Offering leveraged products meaning you can lose multiple times your initial stake.
Also the close marketing of sports betting and stock trading. Tastes too much like Football Index for my liking even if they are separate offerings, should not be the same platform/broker.
Offering leveraged products meaning you can lose multiple times your initial stake.
Also the close marketing of sports betting and stock trading. Tastes too much like Football Index for my liking even if they are separate offerings, should not be the same platform/broker.
Re: New Kits 21/22
That surprises me CP, I’d assumed you to be a matchday attendee. Is your only view of Burnley on the pitch from MOTD / Press or do you free stream?
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
I have said a few times that I haven't put any money into football for a long time
stream most games, before that used to listen to them on the radio
This user liked this post: DCWat
Re: New Kits 21/22
If you don’t mind me asking CP was there a reliable site that gave decent a lot stream or did you have to keep switching.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:37 pmI have said a few times that I haven't put any money into football for a long time
stream most games, before that used to listen to them on the radio
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
sites tend to be good for a few weeks then get cracked down on - I suspect with the new season we will be looking for new ones again as their will be a another crack down
I have had more success with sites streaming the NBC rather than Sky/BT coverage
-
- Posts: 16885
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
- Been Liked: 6958 times
- Has Liked: 1483 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: New Kits 21/22
Refusing to put any money into football whilst illegally streaming the games seems like a rather shaky moral stanceChester Perry wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:37 pmI have said a few times that I haven't put any money into football for a long time
stream most games, before that used to listen to them on the radio
Re: New Kits 21/22
I am pleased the club have a new sponsor or 2 and that we will have significant income and no Chinese lettering on the shirt.
I will not be using the company's services, however, thank them for their support for my club.
I will not be using the company's services, however, thank them for their support for my club.
-
- Posts: 19393
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: New Kits 21/22
it does doesn't it - my wife keeps pointing it out to me, I used to refuse to do it, but then the greedy six upped their campaign for an even greater share and I just thought sod you.
I remember when all the 92 had the same equal share, that ended 38 years ago, not long after the sharing of gate monies ceased, since then it has been an increasingly fast downhill slide, that is unlikely to be reversed to any great extent, even by a regulator. Particularly as both FIFA and UEFA are hell bent on generating more money and hugely reliant on the established mega clubs in doing so.
Re: New Kits 21/22
Thanks CP nothing changed then on the streaming front that’s why I stopped doing it.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:46 pmsites tend to be good for a few weeks then get cracked down on - I suspect with the new season we will be looking for new ones again as their will be a another crack down
I have had more success with sites streaming the NBC rather than Sky/BT coverage