Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

Wednesday have turned down...

...a payday lender as a sponsor for next season, even though it they were offering a 25% increase on the going rate.

Fair play to them and it's good to see a club take a principled approach but how would you feel if the same (unnamed) lender came knocking on our door offering to up the Andrews deal, which might mean the difference between us signing a player or not?
«134

Comments

  • Options
    Personally doesn't bother me who the sponsor is. If it benefits the club at a time when we need the money, I'd take it.

    Its not as if we're talking about a terrorist organization or something that impedes people's human rights.
  • Options
    *doffs cap
  • Options
    Depends what sort of money we're talking?

    How much is the Andrews deal for?
  • Options
    edited May 2013
    Beggers can't be choosers.

  • Options
    I totally agree with Bournemouth .. I have lost a lot of respect for both Hull and Blackpool for their choice of sponsor
  • Options
    edited May 2013
    I'm with Bournemouth.

    Credit to The Owls on this one.

    As for "what if it was us" I would hope that a club that prides itself on its family and community image would take a similarly principled moral stand.
  • Options
    I'd have no problems whatsoever with a payday lender sponsoring us if they offered the best deal.
  • Options

    I totally agree with Bournemouth .. I have lost a lot of respect for both Hull and Blackpool for their choice of sponsor



    Seriously? You can honestly say it bothers you that much that you've lost respect for them? Who cares. I'm sure Hull fans won't when they play in the premier league next season.
  • Options
    I tend to agree with the Wendys and BA on this one. I'd rather we steered clear of this type of organisation, although I don't remember much of an outcry (I might be wrong), when Blackpool went with wonga.

    These businesses provide a service that has its' place. The problem is that they drag in a number of vulnerable people in society who aren't able to use them in the way which makes them worthwhile (paying back any small loan as soon as possible - within days if at all possible).

    Just a personal point of view on this one.
  • Options
    No doubt in the small print the club would have to pay back the money with an interest rate of about a zillion percent. Crafty Bastards
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    I think we've turned companies down in the past, but that might have been in the Prem days when we could be a bit more fussy. Someone might remember more details than me - but think it was an online betting company we said no to.
  • Options
    I would prefer a company like Andrews which is local, run by fans, actually makes things and employs local people.

    But betting companies and pay-day loans companies are not illegal and if they are willing to pay more then so be it.

    I would worry about the links to the community trust though and how appropriate a betting or pay-day loan company would be for that.

    Bring back Aeroflot I say.

  • Options

    I totally agree with Bournemouth .. I have lost a lot of respect for both Hull and Blackpool for their choice of sponsor



    Seriously? You can honestly say it bothers you that much that you've lost respect for them? Who cares. I'm sure Hull fans won't when they play in the premier league next season.
    Seriously? .. I care if that is OK with you. Blackpool and Hull are poor areas and gullible people may take the point of view: 'my beloved clubs thinks that these usurious pawnbrokers and money lenders are good people, I think it might be OK to sell them my telly or to borrow a few quid until pay day'. Judas and his silver come to mind
  • Options
    Having a payday lender is no worse than having a bank as a sponsor!
  • Options
    Bournemouth

    Where do you draw the line? Several clubs have sponsors who are betting or casino companies, which can ruin some peoples lives, do you disapprove of them?
  • Options
    On a shop window near Grove Park station is emblazoned 'Borrow £200 for £50'. I bet loads of people think that you can buy £200 for £50, because a lot of folk are that mathematically limited!
    I think the small print says you have to pay back the money in a month or six weeks...at a stupid rate of interest, but not enough people would figure that out.
    I recently asked 10 fifteen year olds to tell me a quarter of 28. One boy said 7, one said 14, about five said it was 'too hard', and the rest gave random guesses ranging from 12 to 19.
    The payday loan companies trade on those with a loose grasp of number and exploit them to the hilt...so massive respect to blimmin Sheffield Wednesday for refusing the sponsorship.
  • Options
    Like the tobacco ban on sponsorship in sport
  • Options
    seth plum said:

    On a shop window near Grove Park station is emblazoned 'Borrow £200 for £50'. I bet loads of people think that you can buy £200 for £50, because a lot of folk are that mathematically limited!
    I think the small print says you have to pay back the money in a month or six weeks...at a stupid rate of interest, but not enough people would figure that out.
    I recently asked 10 fifteen year olds to tell me a quarter of 28. One boy said 7, one said 14, about five said it was 'too hard', and the rest gave random guesses ranging from 12 to 19.
    The payday loan companies trade on those with a loose grasp of number and exploit them to the hilt...so massive respect to blimmin Sheffield Wednesday for refusing the sponsorship.

    So because some people are thick as shit nobody should be allowed to sell anything to them?

  • Options
    edited May 2013

    ...Fair play to them and it's good to see a club take a principled approach but how would you feel if the same (unnamed) lender came knocking on our door offering to up the Andrews deal, which might mean the difference between us signing a player or not?

    Bearing in mind virtually none of 'us' haveany idea who is financing the club, where the money is coming from, or how legit it may be, I can't see how we can be principled in any way when it comes to things like this !

  • Options

    I totally agree with Bournemouth .. I have lost a lot of respect for both Hull and Blackpool for their choice of sponsor



    Seriously? You can honestly say it bothers you that much that you've lost respect for them? Who cares. I'm sure Hull fans won't when they play in the premier league next season.
    Seriously? .. I care if that is OK with you. Blackpool and Hull are poor areas and gullible people may take the point of view: 'my beloved clubs thinks that these usurious pawnbrokers and money lenders are good people, I think it might be OK to sell them my telly or to borrow a few quid until pay day'. Judas and his silver come to mind


    Yes it's ok with me, but i still find it bizarre that a Charlton fan really cares about who sponsors Hull and blackpool. As Henry said they're not illegal. Their terms are laid out so if someone wants to use them, that's their problem. I'd guess that quite a few people in this country are in debt from gambling but no one seems to be bothered about betting companies sponsoring teams or events?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    edited May 2013

    ...Fair play to them and it's good to see a club take a principled approach but how would you feel if the same (unnamed) lender came knocking on our door offering to up the Andrews deal, which might mean the difference between us signing a player or not?

    Bearing in mind virtually none of 'us' haveany idea who is financing the club, where the money is coming from, or how legit it may be, I can't see how we can be principled in any way when it comes to things like this !

    Not sure what that has to do with people having principles. Richard Murray said that he'd only sell the club to someone that was right for Charlton, so I'd have to trust what he'd said to be fairly true.
  • Options
    edited May 2013

    ...Fair play to them and it's good to see a club take a principled approach but how would you feel if the same (unnamed) lender came knocking on our door offering to up the Andrews deal, which might mean the difference between us signing a player or not?

    Bearing in mind virtually none of 'us' haveany idea who is financing the club, where the money is coming from, or how legit it may be, I can't see how we can be principled in any way when it comes to things like this !

    The lack of accountability re our financing concerns many and has been, arguably, a major contributor in assisting the successful launch of the Supporters' Trust.





  • Options
    I think every company needs to be assessed on its own merits. I am normally very relaxed about this sort of thing but I would rather not have sponsorship from a company that preys on the weak and uses clever PR to sell something that many of their customers will not, truly, understand.

    I have a lot of experience with people that have dealt with companies that offer financial solutions to those that need help and more often than not the company make a lot of money and the people they are professing to help end up far worse off - just look at the PPI compensation. I, and many others, knew that the front end loaded sale of insurance products that, in many cases, were not necessary was wrong. I also have spoken to people that 'sold' those contracts and they openly admit that they knew their clients didn't need it and didn't really understand what they were paying for, but the commission was so high that they didn't care.

    Many of these companies employ sales people that are more interested in making commission than helping the clients. For this reason I would prefer that our club is not associated with these kind of institutions. That is just my view, but I would, genuinely, not wear a football shirt that advertised a company that I don't approve of. I don't suppose the sale of a replica shirt (or two) will bother the club to much.

    However, I think the suggestion that Hull won't care because they're in the Premier League is a little dramatic. I seriously doubt that the difference between a loan company sponsoring a club and another company doing so is hardly going to make enough difference to change the outcome of a season to much. I know Bournemouth was using the 'sign another player' to get the discussion going, but I think the chances are that we are talking about a few grand a year more, not a few hundred thousand.

    For the record though, I would rather have a few hundred thousand a year less if it came to it.

    I know not everyone will agree with me, but that's my view.
  • Options
    In an ideal world, we'd have "Demelza House" on our shirts ( didn't Villa have a local hospice on theirs a few seasons ago?) but while income is King, that's merely a pipe dream....
  • Options
    It's not wonga's fault people are stupid. I know plenty who have used them before and they will probably use them again. The clue is in the name 'short term loan'

  • Options

    In an ideal world, we'd have "Demelza House" on our shirts ( didn't Villa have a local hospice on theirs a few seasons ago?) but while income is King, that's merely a pipe dream....

    Sheff Weds had something like this for a couple of years.

  • Options
    If one of these companies offered me a 25% salary increase to work for them I would have no hesitation in turning them down and I hope the club would do likewise.
  • Options
    So, Wednesday are a club with morowls.
    Fair play to them but times are hard and any form of sponsorship is better than none.
  • Options
    edited May 2013

    I would prefer a company like Andrews which is local, run by fans, actually makes things and employs local people.

    But betting companies and pay-day loans companies are not illegal and if they are willing to pay more then so be it.

    I would worry about the links to the community trust though and how appropriate a betting or pay-day loan company would be for that.

    Bring back Aeroflot I say.

    I agree with Henry on this, if its legal then I have no problem with it. Of course, the club need to look at the effect it has on the image of the club, or brand as it is becoming known and in our circumstances it may be that the brand values that Charlton espouse and the values of these legal loan sharks are not compatible.

  • Options
    No problem at all with these sponsors.
    No different to a casino, bookmakers, alcohol company, bank , clothes retailer , supermarket etc.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!