Who exactly should we be sponsored by then?

[NFN FC 1,123]

23 minutes ago, JB said:

If we don't want to offend anyone, because it's impossible these days, then we simply shouldn't have a sponsor. Depends how deep you want to dig with a company to find perhaps how they invest their money, or who their shareholders are - there will always be something. 

I'm of the belief that BK8 have done nothing wrong personally. People complaining about objectifying women need to have a think about their purchases over their lifetime. For example, if they wear a fragrance,  they often use male and female models in their TV adverts with very little clothing on. There's one involving a ship with 2 people running around for each other with barely anything on, that's on at the moment. If you wear clothes from a shop that use good looking models in catalogues or TV adverts showing flesh. Another example would be driving a VW car. Remember wartime Germany and the Beetle that the Nazis made? I don't think we need to go into why that's a bad thing. How about driving a Japanese car or advertising a Japanese car after the awful things they did during the war. Hugo Boss - developed uniforms for the SS. Some of these are of course quite "out there" examples, but it shows you can find offense in everything, and if people use the principles they're using for having a go at BK8, I can only assume they don't own very much, or complain to the regulators about most businesses where something "iffy" can be linked to

 

I was wondering when this would get round to Nazis and WWII 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

[TESCO 70]

I only act like I care because I’m not a fan of the logo 🤣

[WD40 720]

29 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

It’s not that I’m worried about. We seem to have an element of our fanbase that militantly has a viewpoint of what our club “must be” and disregard all other viewpoints.

its zealotry and it’s disturbing.

Very ironic from someone who takes up extreme positions to create argument for your own amusement (not anyone else’s, to be clear).

No coup is being organised. It isn’t a democratically elected leadership. There is nothing militant about a few posts on a message board asking for accountability. You’ve been spending too much time on the Mail Online.

The opinion expressed by many on here is the club cannot do whatever the f*ck they want in the pursuit of cash. The club have recognised this as well by the way. 

[Mello Yello 2,289]

Who exactly should we be sponsored by then? 

'Alan Partridge'.......

 

[Jim Smith 2,317]

Looks like the mob have succeeded 

[BroadstairsR 2,159]

An interesting fact, which I gleaned from a quick Google, is that in the season we were last in the Premier League nine of the twenty clubs had shirt sponsors who were betting sites. NCFC was among them.

(Brighton had American Express, btw, whilst King Power with various and nefarious business interests in Thailand sponsored Leicester.)

We cannot therefore fairly single out City for following this route.

The reason must clearly be that these profitable online sites offer the most money. The clubs are committed to pursuing their own best financial interests to the full. It is upto Government to decide whether this advertising has some immoral base.

We would all prefere our club to be sponsored by the likes of Mothercare, but in this day and age it seems that online casinos are the better "bet."

Times may change.

 

Edit: I have just found this alternative link:-

https://www.footyheadlines.com/2018/08/almost-60-of-premier-league-championship-betting-sponsors.html

Edited June 10, 2021 by BroadstairsR

[canarydan23 4,060]

3 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

An interesting fact, which I gleaned from a quick Google, is that in the season we were last in the Premier League nine of the twenty clubs had shirt sponsors who were betting sites. NCFC was among them.

(Brighton had American Express, btw, whilst King Power with various and nefarious business interests in Thailand sponsored Leicester.)

We cannot therefore fairly single out City for following this route.

The reason must clearly be that these profitable online sites offer the most money. The clubs are committed to pursuing their own best financial interests to the full. It is upto Government to decide whether this advertising has some immoral base.

We would all prefere our club to be sponsored by the likes of Mothercare, but in this day and age it seems that online casinos are the better "bet."

Times may change

The problem is, there appears to be gambling companies and gambling companies. BK8 appear to be one of the gambling companies.

I don't think too many people had a big problem with scantily-clad women being used as marketing. For sure, it's not ideal but football is a murky world. But BK8's content was something on another level to the Dafadolls (which appear to have been inactive for half a decade) or grid girls etc. It was designed to humiliate and degrade, presumably to try and attract the types of people on here who see nothing wrong with that to have a little flutter on their website. But I suspect instead it wasn't a flutter that they had on their website.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

Fyffes, change our nickname to The Bananas and go with yellow shorts for the year. 

[BroadstairsR 2,159]

12 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

The problem is, there appears to be gambling companies and gambling companies. BK8 appear to be one of the gambling companies.

I don't think too many people had a big problem with scantily-clad women being used as marketing. For sure, it's not ideal but football is a murky world. But BK8's content was something on another level to the Dafadolls (which appear to have been inactive for half a decade) or grid girls etc. It was designed to humiliate and degrade, presumably to try and attract the types of people on here who see nothing wrong with that to have a little flutter on their website. But I suspect instead it wasn't a flutter that they had on their website.

Perhaps you are right, but I haven't really bothered to follow the BK8 issue, I just never managed be be awoke enough for it. It just gets a bit tiresome, especially after a dozen or so articles about Harry and Meghan have to be avoided.

BK8 have expressed regret so I suppose what's done is done and it has to be left there. They did manage to get an enormous amount of publicity (both local and national and even in backwaters like Ipswich) so I suppose they achieved their ultimate goal.

We just have to hope that our association with them is short-lived and that Simply Supplements, or the like, are able to fill the financial gap left by such a dis-association. 

Edited June 10, 2021 by BroadstairsR

[Foxy2600 301]

16 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Fyffes, change our nickname to The Bananas and go with yellow shorts for the year. 

Oooh! I'll need to go into the attic and see if I can find my inflatable banana. Lets offend everyone! 😜

[Mello Yello 2,289]

6 minutes ago, Foxy2600 said:

Oooh! I'll need to go into the attic and see if I can find my inflatable banana. Lets offend everyone! 😜

That banana's got the Golden Boot.....

[Midlands Yellow 3,974]

Surrey Chapel. 

 

[CDMullins 436]

21 hours ago, Canary73 said:

I'd turn this around and say we forego sponsorship and do something to put something back into the community so the Samaritans, Mind, EACH, Cancer Research - perhaps on different shirts is the way forward. I'm sure there are plenty of local charities. Pay them the direct proceeds from shirts and raffles etc.  

Honestly this makes me laugh so much.

Like we can afford to forego £5 Million and compete.

Some of the utter dross I've read over the last couple of days - Jesus wept.

Cancel culture, the winner.

[kirku 1,332]

2 hours ago, JB said:

And why is that? 

Because it's a pathetically infantile viewpoint lacking any coherent thought, if you must ask.

[The Real Buh 3,432]

Bold prediction, whoever they choose won’t be anywhere near meeting the revenue/morality balance.

When we get relegated by a margin that could have been solved by £5m investment we know who to blame I guess.

[kirku 1,332]

2 hours ago, The Real Buh said:

Where does it end? The club should stand firm or this cult behaviour will pervade into every aspect of the club.

Gibberish, as usual

[Coneys Knee 952]

How about another of the fan bonds like we did to pay for the training ground? 
 

NCFC - sponsored by its fans! Rubbish idea?

[Son Ova Gunn 165]

3 minutes ago, Coneys Knee said:

How about another of the fan bonds like we did to pay for the training ground? 
 

NCFC - sponsored by its fans! Rubbish idea?

Pretty sure that wouldn’t work as some fans will have problems with the club being associated with other fans, what if one of the fans who buys a bond has partaken in a dodgy meat eating event or done some glamour modelling, we would have to cancel it and start all over again

Edited June 10, 2021 by Son Ova Gunn

[kirku 1,332]

8 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Bold prediction, whoever they choose won’t be anywhere near meeting the revenue/morality balance.

When we get relegated by a margin that could have been solved by £5m investment we know who to blame I guess.

This doesn't stand up to even the most basic level of scrutiny (fitting, given the topic).

£5m is what BK8 paid, the incoming sponsor is not going to be paying nothing - so there's not going to be a £5m deficit.

It may be less than what BK8 were willing to pay, it's likely that it will be, but the difference is likely to be a few million at most.

Our season will not be defined by a lack of ~£2m.

Edited June 10, 2021 by kirku

[The Real Buh 3,432]

1 minute ago, kirku said:

This doesn't stand up to even the most basic level of scrutiny (fitting, given the topic).

£5m is what BK8 paid, the incoming sponsor is not going to be paying nothing - so there's not going to be a £5m deficit.

It may be less than what BK8 were willing to pay, it's likely that it will be, but the difference is likely to be a few million at most.

Our season will not be defined by a lack of ~£2m.

How about breach of contract? 

[Son Ova Gunn 165]

3 minutes ago, kirku said:

This doesn't stand up to even the most basic level of scrutiny (fitting, given the topic).

£5m is what BK8 paid, the incoming sponsor is not going to be paying nothing - so there's not going to be a £5m deficit.

It may be less than what BK8 were willing to pay, it's likely that it will be, but the difference is likely to be a few million at most.

Our season will not be defined by a lack of ~£2m.

Bold statement to make considering the last season was defined in a significant way by the signing of a player for initially less than 2 million. 

[BroadstairsR 2,159]

24 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

How about breach of contract? 

The statement said by "mutual consent." That could mean many things, but it would seem that BK8 have come out of it all much bettter than NCFC.

Had anybody heard of them before this debacle?

City's stance might attract a 'wholesome' sponsor who would relish being connected with such a virtuous institution.

You never know.

Weetabix, where are you?

"Let's be 'aving you."

I note the binners are having a field day. The club owned by the suspected ticket touting crook Evans for so many years, and who have now succumbed to being taken over by venture capitalists suddenly have a fan base who are above reproach..

Edited June 10, 2021 by BroadstairsR

[kirku 1,332]

3 minutes ago, Son Ova Gunn said:

Bold statement to make considering the last season was defined in a significant way by the signing of a player for initially less than 2 million. 

Placheta was about £3m.

How about the loan fees and wages we paid for Fahrmann, Amadou, Duda, & Roberts last time out? 

£2m is a punt, and the model means we take quite a few punts. Some come off, in Emi's case (who probably ended up costing around £5-6m) spectacularly, some do not. 

Our season will not be defined by a lack of ~£2m.

[BroadstairsR 2,159]

1 minute ago, kirku said:

Placheta was about £3m.

How about the loan fees and wages we paid for Fahrmann, Amadou, Duda, & Roberts last time out? 

£2m is a punt, and the model means we take quite a few punts. Some come off, in Emi's case (who probably ended up costing around £5-6m) spectacularly, some do not. 

Our season will not be defined by a lack of ~£2m.

Probably not, but we do tend to get a bit excited when the likes of Madisson reaches an add-on milestone and we get maybe an extra million or so if he is selected for England, for example.

In Delialand every penny counts.

[Mello Yello 2,289]

Banham Zoo......We could have a parade of wild animals at half time.....and maybe chuck a real snake into the snake pit......

[yellowrider120 762]

19 hours ago, Wrathofthefarkely said:

Well it can't be jarrolds. They have female lingerie models. 

Thats objectification according to the self appointed morality police. 

So any company who use models of any sort can't sponsor us. 

Can't be alcohol, gambling. 

Can't be food as people get eating disorders. 

Can't be any company with historical links to slavery or literally anything else negative ever. 

Can't be a meat company because vegetarians. 

Can't be a vegetarian food company because vegans. 

Can't be anything that has ever been linked to religion. 

Can't be any company with links to poor wages or conditions, which rules out every single Eastern clothing and tech company ever. 

Can't be any company linked to oil, gas, global warming. 

No company with links to dodgy money or people. 

Can't be any company who employ, or are linked, to anyone who has ever made a dodgy social media post. 

Erm...... 

Perhaps let's not have a sponsor, as the self appointed woke morality police will attack every company ever. 

I'd also suggest vetting of fans, and only allow those of a high level of morality, as defined by the committee, to support the club. 

 

 

You're not wrong there! 

 

[First Wazzock 902]

Someone with Puppy dogs, Butterflies and Rainbows, all in pastel shades

[Essjayess 307]

23 hours ago, Canary73 said:

I'd turn this around and say we forego sponsorship and do something to put something back into the community so the Samaritans, Mind, EACH, Cancer Research - perhaps on different shirts is the way forward. I'm sure there are plenty of local charities. Pay them the direct proceeds from shirts and raffles etc.  

If it means ruling out gambling then even most of the so called good organisations, like many charities, have to be ruled out to as  many use lottery style gambling tickets. Just where to find a  sponsor who is acceptable to the vast majority of us fans is down to the commercial dept...this time around they got to get it right of course.

[Harry53 209]

23 hours ago, Wings of a Sparrow said:

How about the Church of England, there can’t be any arguments with that surely. They’ve got plenty of money too...

Carrow Road is my church, we’ve already got a hymn, we can have 11 disciples, Farke is our God.

it’s a match made in heaven and open to limitless puns.

At least we can see our god !!

[Herman 9,754]

Schlongs-R-Us. Tena for Men. 

Or realistically a green energy company, trade union. Something on the moral high ground.