New Kits 21/22

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
ksrclaret
Posts: 6804
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
Been Liked: 2488 times
Has Liked: 760 times

Re: New Kits 21/22

Post by ksrclaret » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:00 pm

The reasons for rejecting gambling sponsorships and ads are valid ones. I subscribe to the idea myself and will not entertain buying something that advertises gambling. I don’t think anyone needs telling that they tend to pay the most though, that’s been obvious for a while.

Not sure where the chatter of having no sponsorship at all has come from though. Weird.

Les Lawrence
Posts: 374
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
Been Liked: 99 times
Has Liked: 86 times

Re: New Kits 21/22

Post by Les Lawrence » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:07 pm

Don't like the shirt sponsor,don't buy a shirt.We don't sell that many anyway.Football is business,go for highest bidder and make most money.Stop ******* complaining

Bordeauxclaret
Posts: 10272
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
Been Liked: 3327 times
Has Liked: 1938 times

Re: New Kits 21/22

Post by Bordeauxclaret » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:10 pm

dandeclaret wrote:
Mon Jul 19, 2021 4:54 pm
    The single tweet also only stated that “they would review it as part of the overall commercial strategy”….. they’ve done that. At no point did they say they were going to have no more gambling ads, or anything remotely close to that.
    Yes. Strange that some seemed to get so giddy.

    Les Lawrence
    Posts: 374
    Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
    Been Liked: 99 times
    Has Liked: 86 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Les Lawrence » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:15 pm

    Probably the ones moaning,are the ones who say we don't earn enough in sponsor deals.Look at me I won't buy a new Burnley shirt cos it's got a betting firm on it Bore off

    martin_p
    Posts: 10367
    Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
    Been Liked: 3764 times
    Has Liked: 696 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by martin_p » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:16 pm

    ksrclaret wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:00 pm
    The reasons for rejecting gambling sponsorships and ads are valid ones. I subscribe to the idea myself and will not entertain buying something that advertises gambling. I don’t think anyone needs telling that they tend to pay the most though, that’s been obvious for a while.

    Not sure where the chatter of having no sponsorship at all has come from though. Weird.
    Presumably you don’t subscribe to Sky then?

    ksrclaret
    Posts: 6804
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
    Been Liked: 2488 times
    Has Liked: 760 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by ksrclaret » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:19 pm

    martin_p wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:16 pm
    Presumably you don’t subscribe to Sky then?
    You presume correctly there.

    I do have to admit though, if you were to keep going and list loads of things, there might be something in there that I buy that indirectly has something to do with gambling. I try my best to avoid it, but nobody is perfect. Gotcha!

    DCWat
    Posts: 9292
    Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:04 am
    Been Liked: 4131 times
    Has Liked: 3597 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by DCWat » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:20 pm

    I can understand there being disappointment at a gambling company being chosen, it wasn’t going to be anything else though, was it?

    Pace, perhaps more than most would prefer alternative sponsorship. At the end of the day though, we’re already trying to compete with one hand tied behind our back, there’s be no business sense in tying the other hand too, especially so soon after the takeover.

    There won’t have been an alternative that was viable for us financially. Time to accept that fact and see what the next deal is in a years time.
    This user liked this post: ŽižkovClaret

    martin_p
    Posts: 10367
    Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
    Been Liked: 3764 times
    Has Liked: 696 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by martin_p » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:21 pm

    ksrclaret wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:19 pm
    You presume correctly there.

    I do have to admit though, if you were to keep going and list loads of things, there might be something in there that I buy that indirectly has something to do with gambling. I try my best to avoid it, but nobody is perfect. Gotcha!
    I was genuinely curious, no gotcha. Good on you if you can stick to such a principle (50p says you can’t!).

    ksrclaret
    Posts: 6804
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
    Been Liked: 2488 times
    Has Liked: 760 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by ksrclaret » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:23 pm

    martin_p wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:21 pm
    I was genuinely curious, no gotcha. Good on you if you can stick to such a principle (50p says you can’t!).
    I’ll give you the 50p now then, as it’s everywhere and impossible to avoid. As I said, I try my best, things like not buying a shirt or sky sports, but I don’t let it get in the way of my enjoyment of life. It’s just a personal preference.

    Les Lawrence
    Posts: 374
    Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
    Been Liked: 99 times
    Has Liked: 86 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Les Lawrence » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:23 pm

    We could have got the black pudding shop in the market to sponsor us,and made no money.But we could have all wore the shirt with pride, knowing we weren't advertising a nasty evil betting company

    martin_p
    Posts: 10367
    Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
    Been Liked: 3764 times
    Has Liked: 696 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by martin_p » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:24 pm

    ksrclaret wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:23 pm
    I’ll give you the 50p now then, as it’s everywhere and impossible to avoid. As I said, I try my best, things like not buying a shirt or sky sports, but I don’t let it get in the way of my enjoyment of life. It’s just a personal preference.
    Yes, and you just took my bet so you definitely lose! ;)

    Sausage
    Posts: 1051
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:48 am
    Been Liked: 637 times
    Has Liked: 441 times
    Location: London

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Sausage » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:34 pm

    I'm firmly with JDRobbo on this one and I applaud him for consistently putting his head above the parapet on this subject despite being sniped at every time. Why? Because advertising works. It's obvious that it works; if it didn't, betting companies wouldn't spent eye-watering amounts on it. And it's not the punters with known self-restraint they're after, they're after new blood, new gamblers, young gamblers, gamblers who don't yet know whether they're going to be addicted or not. You can argue the opposite all you want, but if kids aren't susceptible to gambling ads then why is it banned on under 18s shirts?

    This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.

    Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
    These 5 users liked this post: ksrclaret Lancasterclaret Claret simonclaret elwaclaret

    ClaretTony
    Posts: 67422
    Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
    Been Liked: 32237 times
    Has Liked: 5252 times
    Location: Burnley
    Contact:

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by ClaretTony » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:38 pm

    Les Lawrence wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:15 pm
    Probably the ones moaning,are the ones who say we don't earn enough in sponsor deals.Look at me I won't buy a new Burnley shirt cos it's got a betting firm on it Bore off
    Rather than insulting people who have a different opinion to yourself you might just accept that others do have differing views.
    This user liked this post: BertiesBeehole

    Grumps
    Posts: 4145
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
    Been Liked: 954 times
    Has Liked: 359 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Grumps » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:40 pm

    Sausage wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:34 pm
    I'm firmly with JDRobbo on this one and I applaud him for consistently putting his head above the parapet on this subject despite being sniped at every time. Why? Because advertising works. It's obvious that it works; if it didn't, betting companies wouldn't spent eye-watering amounts on it. And it's not the punters with known self-restraint they're after, they're after new blood, new gamblers, young gamblers, gamblers who don't yet know whether they're going to be addicted or not. You can argue the opposite all you want, but if kids aren't susceptible to gambling ads then why is it banned on under 18s shirts?

    This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.

    Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
    You're perfectly entitled to your opinion, and I'd never ask anyone to stop having an opinion.

    But yet again, you're against it, but cannot put any alternative sponsors forward. Probably because they're weren't any. So the club either give up on 7 million quid, or go with something a few people object to. The loss of a few hundred quid for those not buying a shirt is a big enough hit to take.

    ClaretTony
    Posts: 67422
    Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
    Been Liked: 32237 times
    Has Liked: 5252 times
    Location: Burnley
    Contact:

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by ClaretTony » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:40 pm

    Sausage wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:34 pm
    I'm firmly with JDRobbo on this one and I applaud him for consistently putting his head above the parapet on this subject despite being sniped at every time. Why? Because advertising works. It's obvious that it works; if it didn't, betting companies wouldn't spent eye-watering amounts on it. And it's not the punters with known self-restraint they're after, they're after new blood, new gamblers, young gamblers, gamblers who don't yet know whether they're going to be addicted or not. You can argue the opposite all you want, but if kids aren't susceptible to gambling ads then why is it banned on under 18s shirts?

    This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.

    Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
    I’m with you on this one Sausage. I’ve said many times that gambling ads don’t affect me because I don’t gamble but I’ve seen the devastating effects it has had on some people and their families.

    Les Lawrence
    Posts: 374
    Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
    Been Liked: 99 times
    Has Liked: 86 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Les Lawrence » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:43 pm

    So you won't be buying one.Do you have a pint at half time,nice big carlsberg advert in Liverpool programme Targeting the young drinkers,shame on Burnley tc

    Sausage
    Posts: 1051
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:48 am
    Been Liked: 637 times
    Has Liked: 441 times
    Location: London

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Sausage » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:47 pm

    Grumps wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:40 pm
    You're perfectly entitled to your opinion, and I'd never ask anyone to stop having an opinion.

    But yet again, you're against it, but cannot put any alternative sponsors forward. Probably because they're weren't any. So the club either give up on 7 million quid, or go with something a few people object to. The loss of a few hundred quid for those not buying a shirt is a big enough hit to take.
    It's a ridiculous question. You have literally no idea whether there were any alternative sponsors negotiating with the club before the deal was struck with SpreadEx. There might have been a company out there offering £6 million. But you assume that the alternative to SpreadEx's money is no money at all.

    But if you want an alternative sponsor plucked out of thin air with no knowledge of whether they were interested, how about Ford for £8 million? No?Perhaps we could have tempted Pfizer for £80 trillion?
    This user liked this post: ksrclaret

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:48 pm

    Sausage wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:34 pm
    I'm firmly with JDRobbo on this one and I applaud him for consistently putting his head above the parapet on this subject despite being sniped at every time. Why? Because advertising works. It's obvious that it works; if it didn't, betting companies wouldn't spent eye-watering amounts on it. And it's not the punters with known self-restraint they're after, they're after new blood, new gamblers, young gamblers, gamblers who don't yet know whether they're going to be addicted or not. You can argue the opposite all you want, but if kids aren't susceptible to gambling ads then why is it banned on under 18s shirts?

    This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.

    Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
    this speaks for me too

    I haven't put a penny into the football industry for nearly two decades now, never subscribed to Sky/BT either, never bought a shirt and received my last one as a present circa 40 years ago - no sponsor.

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:49 pm

    Grumps wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:40 pm
    You're perfectly entitled to your opinion, and I'd never ask anyone to stop having an opinion.

    But yet again, you're against it, but cannot put any alternative sponsors forward. Probably because they're weren't any. So the club either give up on 7 million quid, or go with something a few people object to. The loss of a few hundred quid for those not buying a shirt is a big enough hit to take.
    Is £7m what we are getting? - I have not seen any figures as yet

    Boss Hogg
    Posts: 3293
    Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:34 am
    Been Liked: 846 times
    Has Liked: 1089 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Boss Hogg » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:49 pm

    Les Lawrence wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:23 pm
    We could have got the black pudding shop in the market to sponsor us,and made no money.But we could have all wore the shirt with pride, knowing we weren't advertising a nasty evil betting company
    Black Puddings are evil IMO. I’d prefer to have a bet than eat a black pudding.

    ksrclaret
    Posts: 6804
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
    Been Liked: 2488 times
    Has Liked: 760 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by ksrclaret » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:51 pm

    I think Sausage has just completely and utterly owned the argument here. Brilliant couple of posts.

    Les Lawrence
    Posts: 374
    Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
    Been Liked: 99 times
    Has Liked: 86 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Les Lawrence » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:53 pm

    Yep let's take a 6 million deal instead of the 7 but we can all feel happy .You'll be the one moaning when the extra money could have paid a players wages to keep us up

    Grumps
    Posts: 4145
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
    Been Liked: 954 times
    Has Liked: 359 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Grumps » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:53 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:49 pm
    Is £7m what we are getting? - I have not seen any figures as yet
    In the press at lunchtime saying it equalled what lovebet paid,and quoted that figure

    Grumps
    Posts: 4145
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
    Been Liked: 954 times
    Has Liked: 359 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Grumps » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:55 pm

    Sausage wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:47 pm
    It's a ridiculous question. You have literally no idea whether there were any alternative sponsors negotiating with the club before the deal was struck with SpreadEx. There might have been a company out there offering £6 million. But you assume that the alternative to SpreadEx's money is no money at all.

    But if you want an alternative sponsor plucked out of thin air with no knowledge of whether they were interested, how about Ford for £8 million? No?Perhaps we could have tempted Pfizer for £80 trillion?
    I wouldn't want Ford.... They advertise how fast their cars can go from 0 to 60..... And we all know speed kills.

    claretandy
    Posts: 4751
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
    Been Liked: 953 times
    Has Liked: 238 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by claretandy » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:57 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:49 pm
    Is £7m what we are getting? - I have not seen any figures as yet
    It's reported being a similar level to lovebet.

    Les Lawrence
    Posts: 374
    Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
    Been Liked: 99 times
    Has Liked: 86 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Les Lawrence » Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:58 pm

    If Burnley had Ford on their shirts,I would rush to buy one straight away.

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:11 pm

    Grumps wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:53 pm
    In the press at lunchtime saying it equalled what lovebet paid,and quoted that figure
    which press? still not seen it - not saying it wasn't there just not found it yet
    claretandy wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:57 pm
    It's reported being a similar level to lovebet.
    Is that the the reduced £7.25m as of last summer (pandemic impact saw to the reduction from £7.5m previous season, the total deal included sleeve sponsorship as well) or what LoveBet ended up paying last season? which was substantially less - all could be applied to the statement with very different income outcomes for the club.

    FWIW from what I have seen previously the sleeve sponsor element is worth around an eighth to quarter of the shirt front value (depending on the club and whether it was matched to front of shirt sponsor)

    claretandy
    Posts: 4751
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
    Been Liked: 953 times
    Has Liked: 238 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by claretandy » Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:15 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:11 pm
    which press? still not seen it - not saying it wasn't there just not found it yet



    Is that the the reduced £7.25m as of last summer (pandemic impact saw to the reduction from £7.5m previous season, the total deal included sleeve sponsorship as well) or what LoveBet ended up paying last season? which was substantially less - all could be applied to the statement with very different income outcomes for the club.

    FWIW from what I have seen previously the sleeve sponsor element is worth around an eighth to quarter of the shirt front value (depending on the club and whether it was matched to front of shirt sponsor)
    Lancs Live.

    ŽižkovClaret
    Posts: 6956
    Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
    Been Liked: 2143 times
    Has Liked: 3060 times
    Location: Praha
    Contact:

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by ŽižkovClaret » Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:20 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:11 pm
    which press? still not seen it - not saying it wasn't there just not found it yet



    Is that the the reduced £7.25m as of last summer (pandemic impact saw to the reduction from £7.5m previous season, the total deal included sleeve sponsorship as well) or what LoveBet ended up paying last season? which was substantially less - all could be applied to the statement with very different income outcomes for the club.

    FWIW from what I have seen previously the sleeve sponsor element is worth around an eighth to quarter of the shirt front value (depending on the club and whether it was matched to front of shirt sponsor)
    I saw a report that the shirt sleeve and main shirt sponsorships as a combo have matched the amount lost by the Lovebet deal

    randomclaret2
    Posts: 6880
    Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
    Been Liked: 2742 times
    Has Liked: 4314 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by randomclaret2 » Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:25 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:48 pm
    this speaks for me too

    I haven't put a penny into the football industry for nearly two decades now, never subscribed to Sky/BT either, never bought a shirt and received my last one as a present circa 40 years ago - no sponsor.
    Have you not been to a match for 20 years CP ?

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:28 pm

    claretandy wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:15 pm
    Lancs Live.
    Ok - so it is Spread Ex plus Astro Pay that brings the overall total to similar (not the same) value - no indication what proportion is being paid for shirt front or sleeve - Were we not told that the LoveBet deal was reduced last season to cover the Pandemic (or more likely a rebate for the pause on the 2019/20 season) I distinctly remember a thread discussing it

    "Financial details have not been announced but it is understood that the shirt sponsor deal, combined with new sleeve sponsor AstroPay, is of similar value to what previous sponsors Love Bet were paying per year, income in the region £7.5million."

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:29 pm

    randomclaret2 wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:25 pm
    Have you not been to a match for 20 years CP ?
    that is correct

    Les Lawrence
    Posts: 374
    Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:01 am
    Been Liked: 99 times
    Has Liked: 86 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Les Lawrence » Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:29 pm

    Bet he went the Orient game and the 6 nil home defeat by Hereford,though 😆

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:32 pm

    Les Lawrence wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:29 pm
    Bet he went the Orient game and the 6 nil home defeat by Hereford,though 😆
    Orient yes - Hereford, Crewe etc no, though I may have just completely erased them from my memory thankfully
    Last edited by Chester Perry on Mon Jul 19, 2021 7:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

    randomclaret2
    Posts: 6880
    Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
    Been Liked: 2742 times
    Has Liked: 4314 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by randomclaret2 » Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:34 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:29 pm
    that is correct
    Fair play CP 👍

    Vegas Claret
    Posts: 30273
    Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
    Been Liked: 10916 times
    Has Liked: 5594 times
    Location: clue is in the title

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Vegas Claret » Mon Jul 19, 2021 7:21 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:28 pm
    Ok - so it is Spread Ex plus Astro Pay that brings the overall total to similar (not the same) value - no indication what proportion is being paid for shirt front or sleeve - Were we not told that the LoveBet deal was reduced last season to cover the Pandemic (or more likely a rebate for the pause on the 2019/20 season) I distinctly remember a thread discussing it

    "Financial details have not been announced but it is understood that the shirt sponsor deal, combined with new sleeve sponsor AstroPay, is of similar value to what previous sponsors Love Bet were paying per year, income in the region £7.5million."
    Attachments
    Screenshot 2021-07-19 11.20.52 AM.png
    Screenshot 2021-07-19 11.20.52 AM.png (94.4 KiB) Viewed 2440 times

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 7:35 pm

    Vegas Claret wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 7:21 pm
    yeah I was quoting his article - still not seen anything to contradict the understanding that the LoveBet deal was reduced from the start of last season, it depends on how big the ball park is as to how close it is to the original LoveBet deal

    If the club have managed to get circa £7m for the two deals combined it is a reasonable return - they have still lost money over budget for the 3 year LoveBet deal and this does nothing but add to the shortfall of last season. More tellingly, It is also not in line with the rhetoric of growing commercial sponsorship income that the new board came in apparently believing was relatively straight forward from the way they presented it.

    CrosspoolClarets
    Posts: 5227
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
    Been Liked: 1623 times
    Has Liked: 397 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by CrosspoolClarets » Mon Jul 19, 2021 7:49 pm

    Sausage wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:34 pm
    I'm firmly with JDRobbo on this one and I applaud him for consistently putting his head above the parapet on this subject despite being sniped at every time. Why? Because advertising works. It's obvious that it works; if it didn't, betting companies wouldn't spent eye-watering amounts on it. And it's not the punters with known self-restraint they're after, they're after new blood, new gamblers, young gamblers, gamblers who don't yet know whether they're going to be addicted or not. You can argue the opposite all you want, but if kids aren't susceptible to gambling ads then why is it banned on under 18s shirts?

    This all has the same whiff of bullsh!t that the tobacco industry trotted out 20-odd years ago, that their advertising was aimed at securing market share and existing customer loyalty rather than getting new people to take up smoking.

    Yeah, I know, I can bore off. Yep, I'm woke. Whatever. If you want to be a walking billboard for an industry that causes depression, family break-ups and suicide, fill yer f*****g boots.
    Good comment.

    I completely get why most people don’t give a toss, but a few of us have lost people we know to suicide over gambling addiction, and others have worked in mental health, so from that perspective, no money is enough to justify it.

    The whole football industry is amoral, let’s be honest about this, it isn’t just BFC, who generally are pretty good. I wouldn’t use this to hammer the new board, I’m just disappointed and won’t be partaking.

    ŽižkovClaret
    Posts: 6956
    Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
    Been Liked: 2143 times
    Has Liked: 3060 times
    Location: Praha
    Contact:

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by ŽižkovClaret » Mon Jul 19, 2021 7:56 pm

    Compared to recent sponsors, i think the logo looks pretty smart. will be interesting to see how it looks on the shirt.

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 8:00 pm

    ŽižkovClaret wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 7:56 pm
    Compared to recent sponsors, i think the logo looks pretty smart. will be interesting to see how it looks on the shirt.
    I have been wondering if they would use the red - it is in the press release against a claret background though it might look more effective in monochrome

    https://www.burnleyfootballclub.com/con ... r-spreadex

    overall it will look better on the shirt than the last two sponsors

    Newcastleclaret93
    Posts: 11039
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:29 pm
    Been Liked: 1559 times
    Has Liked: 359 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Newcastleclaret93 » Mon Jul 19, 2021 8:06 pm

    It’s not something that particularly bothers me the sponsors but I can appreciate the views of fans that don’t agree with them.

    I used to work in a bookies and the money people through at the bookies (slots in particular) was absolutely crazy.

    Let’s hope Pace sticks to his word and changes it out next season. Must have been too late to do it this year

    CombatClaret
    Posts: 4381
    Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
    Been Liked: 1825 times
    Has Liked: 929 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by CombatClaret » Mon Jul 19, 2021 8:52 pm

    Deeply put off by this sponsor. Not just another bookie.
    Offering leveraged products meaning you can lose multiple times your initial stake.

    Also the close marketing of sports betting and stock trading. Tastes too much like Football Index for my liking even if they are separate offerings, should not be the same platform/broker.

    DCWat
    Posts: 9292
    Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:04 am
    Been Liked: 4131 times
    Has Liked: 3597 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by DCWat » Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:12 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:29 pm
    that is correct
    That surprises me CP, I’d assumed you to be a matchday attendee. Is your only view of Burnley on the pitch from MOTD / Press or do you free stream?

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:37 pm

    DCWat wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:12 pm
    That surprises me CP, I’d assumed you to be a matchday attendee. Is your only view of Burnley on the pitch from MOTD / Press or do you free stream?
    I have said a few times that I haven't put any money into football for a long time

    stream most games, before that used to listen to them on the radio
    This user liked this post: DCWat

    Peter Loo
    Posts: 1343
    Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:16 pm
    Been Liked: 135 times
    Has Liked: 97 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Peter Loo » Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:42 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:37 pm
    I have said a few times that I haven't put any money into football for a long time

    stream most games, before that used to listen to them on the radio
    If you don’t mind me asking CP was there a reliable site that gave decent a lot stream or did you have to keep switching.

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:46 pm

    Peter Loo wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:42 pm
    If you don’t mind me asking CP was there a reliable site that gave decent a lot stream or did you have to keep switching.
    sites tend to be good for a few weeks then get cracked down on - I suspect with the new season we will be looking for new ones again as their will be a another crack down

    I have had more success with sites streaming the NBC rather than Sky/BT coverage

    Rileybobs
    Posts: 16681
    Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
    Been Liked: 6891 times
    Has Liked: 1471 times
    Location: Leeds

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Rileybobs » Mon Jul 19, 2021 10:10 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:37 pm
    I have said a few times that I haven't put any money into football for a long time

    stream most games, before that used to listen to them on the radio
    Refusing to put any money into football whilst illegally streaming the games seems like a rather shaky moral stance :lol:

    IanMcL
    Posts: 30122
    Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:27 pm
    Been Liked: 6340 times
    Has Liked: 8651 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by IanMcL » Mon Jul 19, 2021 10:21 pm

    I am pleased the club have a new sponsor or 2 and that we will have significant income and no Chinese lettering on the shirt.

    I will not be using the company's services, however, thank them for their support for my club.

    Chester Perry
    Posts: 19167
    Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
    Been Liked: 3114 times
    Has Liked: 481 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 19, 2021 10:26 pm

    Rileybobs wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 10:10 pm
    Refusing to put any money into football whilst illegally streaming the games seems like a rather shaky moral stance :lol:
    it does doesn't it - my wife keeps pointing it out to me, I used to refuse to do it, but then the greedy six upped their campaign for an even greater share and I just thought sod you.

    I remember when all the 92 had the same equal share, that ended 38 years ago, not long after the sharing of gate monies ceased, since then it has been an increasingly fast downhill slide, that is unlikely to be reversed to any great extent, even by a regulator. Particularly as both FIFA and UEFA are hell bent on generating more money and hugely reliant on the established mega clubs in doing so.

    Peter Loo
    Posts: 1343
    Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:16 pm
    Been Liked: 135 times
    Has Liked: 97 times

    Re: New Kits 21/22

    Post by Peter Loo » Mon Jul 19, 2021 10:26 pm

    Chester Perry wrote:
    Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:46 pm
    sites tend to be good for a few weeks then get cracked down on - I suspect with the new season we will be looking for new ones again as their will be a another crack down

    I have had more success with sites streaming the NBC rather than Sky/BT coverage
    Thanks CP nothing changed then on the streaming front that’s why I stopped doing it.

    Post Reply