Well done all involved in this shirt sponsor! It's a wonderful gesture, I give to Children with cancer every month via my mobile, it's an amazing charity
Promotion winning kit too. jump from 3rd division to 1st division in consecutive years. Not in that kit though.Oh yes it’s happening bowyers taken us on a journey to the promised land.
I hope when they do release it, it looks better than the Sunderland efforts.
Their kits look like someone has just placed an iron on patch over the old sponsor.
That's what happened for the play off final. I was talking to a Mackem who had the "new shirt" on and it was just the old one with a strip stitched over the sponsor. Looked really chuddy but as it was only anounced a matter of dys before the game it was the best anyone could do at such short notice
I'm 100% not knocking Charlton, but I can't see it has much, if anything to do with Charlton. The betting companies have absolutely bombarded us with ads around and during sporting events. The government were going to put a stop to it, so the companies voluntarily did so themselves, as it shows them in a better light.
I presume Betdaq have paid Charlton but will have the charity showing in place of their company name. Good news, but pretty much enforced on them. I'm happy to be corrected if anyone knows different.
Don't get me wrong anything that promotes a charity like this is a good thing but isn't this a pretty cynical ploy by a betting company to change the conversation away from how much damage they do to peoples lives? Does the charity gain anything financially directly from Betdaq apart from the exposure? Before anyone shouts I'm not criticising Charlton in any way I doubt they had much to do with this and are happy to help promote the charity and still get their sponsorship. Really dislike these betting companies and how they promote themselves.
I'm 100% not knocking Charlton, but I can't see it has much, if anything to do with Charlton. The betting companies have absolutely bombarded us with ads around and during sporting events. The government were going to put a stop to it, so the companies voluntarily did so themselves, as it shows them in a better light.
I presume Betdaq have paid Charlton but will have the charity showing in place of their company name. Good news, but pretty much enforced on them. I'm happy to be corrected if anyone knows different.
Don't get me wrong anything that promotes a charity like this is a good thing but isn't this a pretty cynical ploy by a betting company to change the conversation away from how much damage they do to peoples lives? Does the charity gain anything financially directly from Betdaq apart from the exposure? Before anyone shouts I'm not criticising Charlton in any way I doubt they had much to do with this and are happy to help promote the charity and still get their sponsorship. Really dislike these betting companies and how they promote themselves.
It would appear that the betting companies have agreed to withdraw their adverts from sporting events, add breaks, tie ins etc.
If you have agreed to give it away, then there is no better PR than giving it to a charity that deals with Children with terminal illness'.
This has almost nothing to do with Charlton. The rights to the shirt sponsorship have been sold to the highest bidder and the money is the same regardless, so it’s nothing to do with the club really (although I assume the relevant contract allows the club a degree of sign off/veto).
”Well done the betting pariahs?” Maybe. But only in a jumping before you’re pushed context.
Either way, more attention to a worthy cause can only be a good thing. So well done to someone I guess, in the circumstances.
CAFC get no credit for something they had nothing to do with. All they had to do was say "Thanks BATDAQ!" How hard was that? What were they going to do, say "No?"
I will give credit where it is due.... Thanks BATDAQ!
CAFC get no credit for something they had nothing to do with. All they had to do was say "Thanks BATDAQ!" How hard was that? What were they going to do, say "No?"
I will give credit where it is due.... Thanks BATDAQ!
Bloody batting companies. Dont get me started on bloody Gunn & Moore
So it’s Thursday morning... I’m ready for that picture of Lyle Taylor’s armpit. Chop chop media team! :-)
You are going to have to wait - Hummel thought we had ordered Cushion covers so the people in the club shop are currently unpicking the stitching. Should be available for the players to wear 4th game of the season and for supporters to buy in November.
Going all Sherlock Holmes 🕵️♀️ here, but I’m deducing that if the kit is “in the clubs possession” since Monday and we have a friendly curtain lifter against Welling on Saturday then we could reasonably expect the new kit to be launched today or tomorrow. Or am I being unduly naive/sensible (delete as appropriate). Or are we just wearing old kit on Saturday?
Going all Sherlock Holmes 🕵️♀️ here, but I’m deducing that if the kit is “in the clubs possession” since Monday and we have a friendly curtain lifter against Welling on Saturday then we could reasonably expect the new kit to be launched today or tomorrow. Or am I being unduly naive/sensible (delete as appropriate). Or are we just wearing old kit on Saturday?
As Welling play in red expect to see the away kit on Saturday
Comments
The Kappa logo is like the Macron stuff - way too big on the sleeves.
Their kits look like someone has just placed an iron on patch over the old sponsor.
If you have agreed to give it away, then there is no better PR than giving it to a charity that deals with Children with terminal illness'.
Why?
This has almost nothing to do with Charlton. The rights to the shirt sponsorship have been sold to the highest bidder and the money is the same regardless, so it’s nothing to do with the club really (although I assume the relevant contract allows the club a degree of sign off/veto).
”Well done the betting pariahs?” Maybe. But only in a jumping before you’re pushed context.
Either way, more attention to a worthy cause can only be a good thing. So well done to someone I guess, in the circumstances.
Daft question...