The Fish 10779 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 The whole thing is a load of bollocks. It's a shitty brand to be associated with, but as many have said most brands have dirty secrets when you scratch the surface. The difference here is you don't have to scratch the surface and it's understandably not gone down well in many quarters. Reports reckon the deal is worth £24m over four years, or six million a season, which is fuck all for a shirt deal nowadays, let alone a shirt plus stadium naming rights package. Dekka reckons it's the most lucrative deal the club have ever signed, but the club signed a £25m five year deal with NR. As always, confusion and division rule under MA. I heard £8m a season, which would make it £32m. But either way, £24m over 4yrs is more lucrative than £25m over 5yrs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj 17 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Was that Monkey's Fist that I just saw getting interviewed on SSN outside Eldon Square about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 (edited) I heard £8m a season, which would make it £32m. But either way, £24m over 4yrs is more lucrative than £25m over 5yrs... Not in real terms it isn't. Comparing it with a deal the club struck ten years ago has to be done in the context of the market and the value of PL shirt deals went up by 25% this season alone. £8m a year is what Villa get, and that didn't include buying the naming rights to Villa Park. Spurs are getting something like £15m a year from shirt sponsorship, and that didn't include buying the naming rights to WHL. If the reports are correct (and thats a big if) it's not a bad deal for a shirt deal but if , as the club are telling us, it also includes buying the naming rights to SJP it's shit. Edited October 9, 2012 by Your Name Here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6682 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 No, I despise "respectable" companies just as much - I think the way Tesco for example have destroyed thousands of shops is terrible but I just find companies whose whole ethos is to kick people while they're down to be that little bit worse. Begs the question of who would you have considered acceptable? I get the whole 'Corporate Social Responsibility' thing and as I've already stated, I wouldn't choose to engage their services but the reporting of their astronomical APR is somewhat unfair. They offer a product that isn't designed to be repaid over the period of a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTF 7280 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 There is man. If you're 50 and you're getting dressed up in your special match costume like what the men on the pitch wear, that's weird. If you've got it you should wear it to the match IMO. Away and home matches alike it's part of the atmosphere. Seeing a sea of black and white in the home crowd should have a positive effect on our players and cement to the oppostion that they're playing on hostile territory. You're weird for thinking it's anything but normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Transfer 0 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I'm just glad we're not sponsored by one of those fucking PPI claimback companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 This might seem colloquial and probably racist but I don't care about slave labour in the third world compared with companies who actually target and exploit people in the North East as a matter of course. At least your open about your hypocrisy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TicTacWoe 0 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 I don't think this would be causing quite as much outrage if it had been a less hateable owner who oversaw the decision. Personally not hugely fussed about it and would be much more disappointed with a lack of investment in the squad come January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10779 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 McNally tweeting loads about this, completely ignoring Invest in Africa or any other dodgy sponsor. I asked him to name any ethical sponsor in football and he said that Barce were sponsored by UNICEF. I thought Barce were giving the shirt-space as a form of charitable donation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobinRobin 11158 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 I thought Barce were giving the shirt-space as a form of charitable donation? That's what I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYD 0 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 I don't understand all the fuss about this deal, its a loan company . So what ? You know the interest rates and shouldn't complain if you use them. How come no one moans when we are sponsored by a firm advertising alcohol. Alcohol has cause more hardship, illness, marriage break ups, violence, crime and death than any loan company ever will. But it's fine to advertise alcohol on the shirt. The PC correct tossers make me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10779 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 I don't understand all the fuss about this deal, its a loan company . So what ? You know the interest rates and shouldn't complain if you use them. How come no one moans when we are sponsored by a firm advertising alcohol. Alcohol has cause more hardship, illness, marriage break ups, violence, crime and death than any loan company ever will. But it's fine to advertise alcohol on the shirt. The PC correct tossers make me sick. The fuck has this got to do with being politically correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYD 0 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 The fuck has this got to do with being politically correct? Please don't swear, there's a good lad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaythesouthernmag 0 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 They are a "pay day lender" and should only be used as such, so paying an extra £25 for borrowing a ton for week isn't going to bankrupt you. If someone is stupid enough to borrow a couple of grand to buy their kids a PlayStation3 and a big tv for christmas or a family holiday when they blatantly can't afford it then they deserve what they get The club has got what was the best deal, wonga gets the publicity it wants and SJP is officially back. Don't see the problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10779 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Please don't swear, there's a good lad. Please don't randomly toss in buzz-words that you clearly don't understand, there's a fine fellow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 McNally tweeting loads about this, completely ignoring Invest in Africa or any other dodgy sponsor. I asked him to name any ethical sponsor in football and he said that Barce were sponsored by UNICEF. I thought Barce were giving the shirt-space as a form of charitable donation? what a fat stupid knacker he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6682 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 what a fat stupid knacker he is. Agreed. Outrageous that he's questioning morality with some of the stuff he writes about Rangers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTF 7280 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 The dodgy dealings of Wonga are on front street unlike the majority of companies where they're swept behind a glossy PR campaign. What I don't understand is why MPs would be critical of Newcastle Utd for being affiliated with a company when that compay is operating legally under UK law? Surely if they had a problem with it they'd be looking to curb the operation of the company - and if they already are and haven't been successful then should be taking it higher than throwaway comments. Lucky LeazesMag is not around to see this: The Muslim Council of Britain hopes Newcastle respect the wishes of any Muslim players who ask to wear the shirt without the sponsor's name. Under Sharia law giving or receiving interest is forbidden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 19980 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 The dodgy dealings of Wonga are on front street unlike the majority of companies where they're swept behind a glossy PR campaign. What I don't understand is why MPs would be critical of Newcastle Utd for being affiliated with a company when that compay is operating legally under UK law? Surely if they had a problem with it they'd be looking to curb the operation of the company - and if they already are and haven't been successful then should be taking it higher than throwaway comments. Lucky LeazesMag is not around to see this: Yet they are ok for the Mulsim brothers to wear football shirts advertising alcohol? I listened to the radio last night and it was a fucking joke the way the seem so blind at other sponsors failings, yet quick to pick up on Wonga's immoral workings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene_Clark 12 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 It's all a smokescreen of righteous indignation & pointless, posturing hot air; Blackpool & hearts have Muslim players, they wear the shirts. Wonga may be legal usurers of questionable ethics, who undoubtedly profiteer from those in straitened circumstances, but it is hard to sympathise with anyone who borrows from a company who are upfront about their simply astronomical interest rates. Tough on poverty; tough on the causes of poverty would be a better idea all round. Within days the media circus will have moved on to something else. Cynical i know, but you get used to it with Newcastle United..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7009 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 The papers are having a field day. Where were they when Blackpool were sponsored by wonga? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 19980 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 The papers are having a field day. Where were they when Blackpool were sponsored by wonga? Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21847 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 The difference is no one really gives a shit about Blackpool or Hearts. We're a big club that the media, and country, care about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4721 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Wheres martin Samuel to tell us no ones bothered about us this time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 McNally tweeting loads about this, completely ignoring Invest in Africa or any other dodgy sponsor. I asked him to name any ethical sponsor in football and he said that Barce were sponsored by UNICEF. I thought Barce were giving the shirt-space as a form of charitable donation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now