New Sponsor BC.GAME

[ClaphamFox]

1 hour ago, Col city fan said:

I think that’s true. There will be loads of people who blindly buy the shirts without even knowing who the sponsor is.

Football fans of course represent the wider public ie there will be a proportion who are stupid.

There is so much hypocrisy in the world and, especially in football fanism. The same people who publically have stated they detest gambling will buy the shirt, simply because they want to. The moral compass will vanish when they want it to.

I suspect you may be overestimating the number of people who fit in this category. If the new shirt sells well, it probably won't be because large numbers of people who publicly state they 'detest gambling' suddenly lose their moral compass; it will be because most people who buy the shirt probably won't actually give a shit either way about gambling. There's a difference between hypocrisy and complete indifference.  

Edited 12 July by ClaphamFox

[ramboacdc]

1 minute ago, ClaphamFox said:

I suspect you may be overestimating the number of people who fit in this category. If the new shirt sells well, it probably won't be because large numbers of people who publicly state they 'detest gambling' suddenly lose their moral compass; it will be because most people who buy the shirt probably won't actually give a shit either way about gambling. There's a difference between hypocrisy and complete indifference.  

And down to people who just buy a new shirt every year just out of habit. 

[Guest Col city fan]

1 hour ago, ClaphamFox said:

I suspect you may be overestimating the number of people who fit in this category. If the new shirt sells well, it probably won't be because large numbers of people who publicly state they 'detest gambling' suddenly lose their moral compass; it will be because most people who buy the shirt probably won't actually give a shit either way about gambling. There's a difference between hypocrisy and complete indifference.  

Yeah I think that’s a fair point 

[blue army 1988]

On 10/07/2024 at 17:10, TheLittleBigMan said:

Bring back Walkers Crisps. 

What and have an obesity crisis!?

[sylofox]

I read on news now an article last night (but can't find it now) this deal is worth 40m.

 

Have Man c been selling tips or what.

[PhillippaT]

18 hours ago, blue army 1988 said:

What and have an obesity crisis!?

You'll have to tear my Walkers MAX Punchy Paprika crisps out of my cold, dead hands   Wrong colour for LCFC, though, and I hate cheese & onion, so...

[sylofox]

On 11/07/2024 at 23:00, Rob1742 said:

 

 

Yes I understand after his much publicised gambling addition that he would be against the sponsorship, but his problems were years ago and not caused by shirt sponsorship. If I was him I’d look at what actually caused his issue rather than pointing to something that didn’t cause it.

 

I do think this is more about protecting the addict. If you are or once was I can see how hard it could be.

 

Is it nanny state.  I never remember none smokers cueing up for Rothmans, Marlboro or Benson & Hedges after watching a F1 race.

 

Yes I've just given up smoking and know how hard it is as I've tried before. But this time I really wanted to quit and I have. As with all addictions it's mostly in your head and your own hands to sort it.

 

As already said you really have to want to stop to stand a chance.

[SpacedX]

2 minutes ago, sylofox said:

Is it nanny state.  I never remember none smokers cueing up for Rothmans, Marlboro or Benson & Hedges after watching a F1 race.

You have no idea how it influenced the market preferences of racegoers or viewers though. Tobacco companies did, which is why they spent so much on it. 

 

Tobacco advertising in motorsports was hugely lucrative for companies such as Philip Morris, British American and Altadis - precisely why it accounted for approximately $200m each year in F1 deals alone.  The rationale was, as with any advertising, that Motorsports, especially events like Formula 1, NASCAR, Moto GP and other high-profile races, attract a large audience both in person and through television broadcasts. By sponsoring these events, tobacco companies could ensure their brand names and logos were prominently displayed on cars, driver suits, and other promotional materials, thus reaching a wide audience. In terms of Target Audience, historically market research showed that motorsports traditionally appealed to a demographic that overlapped with the target market for tobacco products - typically a younger, more adventurous, and risk-taking mentality. By associating their brands with motorsports, tobacco companies aimed to establish a connection with this audience and increase brand loyalty among them. Associated with this, in terms of image and lifestyle branding, tobacco companies used associate their brands with excitement, speed, and a glamorous lifestyle. By aligning themselves with successful racing teams and popular drivers, they sought to create a perception of their products as being linked with high performance and success. And it worked. 

 

People identify with these images. I smoked Marlboro red as a teen because I thought they were the most rock n' roll cigarettes out there and therefore in my mind, I looked cool. I also liked the distinctive taste. The removal of branding from cigarette packs in 2017 in spite of industry efforts has resulted in a sustained fall in sales. Standardised packaging remove the messages that allow consumers to identify with and differentiate between types of cigarette that are essential in the processes brand identification works through. This is precisely why in an attempt to counter flagging sales. Philip Morris rolled out a reusable Marlboro red container complete with logo under the pretence of keeping the product fresher. 

 

The costs of problem gambling for individuals, their families, and for wider society, are significant which is why it should be similarly purged from football despite the best efforts of some MPs and associated lobbying to prevent this. At the end of the 2025-2026 season it will be banned from Premier League shirt fronts, but not sleeves or LED advertising and it will still continue to saturate match day TV advertising - an omission that GambleAware has previously called a “missed opportunity”. The charity has also called for smoking-style health warnings on gambling products, warning punters of the potential risks. This is not a "Nanny state" in operation, it's simply, like tobacco, recognition of the detrimental effect on society that should no longer be promoted.

[trooky]

I had no idea who BC Game was before all this publicity from high profile players about them being a shirt sponsor.

 

 

[PhillippaT]

3 hours ago, trooky said:

I had no idea who BC Game was before all this publicity from high profile players about them being a shirt sponsor.

 

 

And nothing was gained by it, either 

[marbles]

14 minutes ago, PhillippaT said:

And nothing was gained by it, either 

No publicity is bad publicity.

[steveherbe]

Southampton have now joined in the betting firm sponsorship bandwagon.

Southampton announce Rollbit as new front-of-shirt sponsor

[Gamble92]

On 13/07/2024 at 10:43, trooky said:

I had no idea who BC Game was before all this publicity from high profile players about them being a shirt sponsor.

 

 

Barbara Streisand effect

[SemperEadem]

 

[Daggers]

On 13/07/2024 at 09:20, sylofox said:

I do think this is more about protecting the addict. If you are or once was I can see how hard it could be.

 

Is it nanny state.  I never remember none smokers cueing up for Rothmans, Marlboro or Benson & Hedges after watching a F1 race.

 

Yes I've just given up smoking and know how hard it is as I've tried before. But this time I really wanted to quit and I have. As with all addictions it's mostly in your head and your own hands to sort it.

 

As already said you really have to want to stop to stand a chance.

Why do you think tobacco companies poured billions into sports sponsorship and millions to lawyers to prevent sponsorship bans?

[Gamble92]

23 minutes ago, SemperEadem said:

 

Not excusing the clubs in any way because I think it's shit, but this is the other 14 clubs looking for any way to give themselves more of a chance of competing because of the PSR rules. Really need to change them. 

[dooflip]

7 minutes ago, Gamble92 said:

Not excusing the clubs in any way because I think it's shit, but this is the other 14 clubs looking for any way to give themselves more of a chance of competing because of the PSR rules. Really need to change them. 

This is bang on.

There’s no way we would have gone this route if we weren’t f*****d, and we are more so than most of the other 13.

“Desperate men do desperate things” and all that.

 

For the record, I won’t be buying a shirt. Because it’s an awful shirt. Adidas logo is too big and not a trefoil, sponsor looks awful - kp all day.

[Arkie Bennett]

1 hour ago, SemperEadem said:

 

Ah, '88, it was a good year.

[Gamble92]

1 hour ago, Arkie Bennett said:

Ah, '88, it was a good year.

Yeah I'd be more worried about everyone having bj on the front rather than the Crypto aspect 

[Larry_LCFC]

Really don't see the issue with a gambling company acting as a sponsor. If somebody finds the need to gamble because they read a betting company on a football shirt, then they are going to bet regardless of what triggers it. Blaming a sponsor really is clutching at straws trying to justify their behaviour. Exactly the problem with today's nanny state society, nobody takes responsibility for their own actions - always looking to shift the blame.

[st albans fox]

8 hours ago, Arkie Bennett said:

Ah, '88, it was a good year.

Shame they didn’t pick 69

[goose2010]

8 hours ago, Larry_LCFC said:

Really don't see the issue with a gambling company acting as a sponsor. If somebody finds the need to gamble because they read a betting company on a football shirt, then they are going to bet regardless of what triggers it. Blaming a sponsor really is clutching at straws trying to justify their behaviour. Exactly the problem with today's nanny state society, nobody takes responsibility for their own actions - always looking to shift the blame.

Oh dear. 

[moore_94]

 

[zealot]

Won't be buying a shirt this year. Really fed up with the whole Prem. Quicker the new gov bring in independent regulator to sort out things like this the better...

[Ric Flair]

On 23/07/2024 at 23:34, Larry_LCFC said:

Really don't see the issue with a gambling company acting as a sponsor. If somebody finds the need to gamble because they read a betting company on a football shirt, then they are going to bet regardless of what triggers it. Blaming a sponsor really is clutching at straws trying to justify their behaviour. Exactly the problem with today's nanny state society, nobody takes responsibility for their own actions - always looking to shift the blame.

Look at it another way. Why on earth would a perceived gambling sponsor be willing to pay tens of millions of pounds to be on the front of a football clubs shirts? They aren't doing it out the goodness of their own hearts. This is an industry where there have been parliament papers written that confirm upwards of 60% of the industry revenue is generated from just 5% of gamblers seen as problem (compulsive) gamblers.

 

So when the industry is earning billions from addicts, why on earth would they of their own free will stop coining that in? It has to be controlled elsewhere. These companies need to be dealt with more harshly for their tactics they use on honing in on that gravy train. I've experienced it, the stuff they do is no different to a drug dealer manipulating their hopeless clients, except one is illegal and the other are given pretty much free reign to devastate lives.

 

I have absolutely no interest in seeing gambling banned by the way, just because a small % of gamblers have rhe ability to ruin their lives and their families around them doesn't mean that the rest of the recreational gamblers shouldn't be allowed to enjoy it as a past time but quite simply controls have to be put in place to stop preying on the small % that generate the majority of the revenue. That could be done, and it should.