Gambling sponsorship (7 Viewers)

[napolimp]

I can't remember saying who owned them?

It's useless having a discussion if you can't read what's said.

Sky would lose a fortune also.

Seriously? You're saying you weren't insinuating they are owned by Sky? Then why would you write "there's the issue of telling Sky they can't advertise Sky Bet"? Why would Sky care, when the sponsorship deal sky bet have is with the football league?

Shall we wind in the attempted gas lighting.

 

---

[Nick]

Seriously? You're saying you weren't insinuating they are owned by Sky? Then why would you write "there's the issue of telling Sky they can't advertise Sky Bet"? Why would Sky care, when the sponsorship deal sky bet have is with the football league?

Shall we wind in the attempted gas lighting.

Have you got a filter on your TV that gets rid of the heavy sky bet advertising when you watch sky then?

I didn't say anything about ownership, just the advertising all over sky and telling them they won't get that any more.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Have you got a filter on your TV that gets rid of the heavy sky bet advertising when you watch sky then?

I didn't say anything about ownership, just the advertising all over sky and telling them they won't get that any more.

So find a different sponsor. The Championship is as good as most European top flights, they won’t have a problem.

 

[napolimp]

Have you got a filter on your TV that gets rid of the heavy sky bet advertising when you watch sky then?

I didn't say anything about ownership, just the advertising all over sky and telling them they won't get that any more.

???

What are you saying - that Sky Bet are the only company to exist who could possibly have a sponsorship deal with the football league, or purchase advertising space on Sky?

 

[Nick]

???

What are you saying - that Sky Bet are the only company to exist who could possibly have a sponsorship deal with the football league, or purchase advertising space on Sky?

Well no hence I used the word others.

Sky would lose millions / billions if they had to limit advertising when football is on.

I'm not on about sky commentators saying the league name. I mentioned that being on shirts and at club level.

 

[napolimp]

Well no hence I used the word others.

Sky would lose millions / billions if they had to limit advertising when football is on.

I'm not on about sky commentators saying the league name. I mentioned that being on shirts and at club level.

Who said anything about limiting advertising when football is on?

 

[Nick]

Who said anything about limiting advertising when football is on?

Why get it removed from club shirts to leave it non stop shouting at you with real time odds before, during and after games?

Read what has been typed. Once you grasp this you can talk about what a discussion is.

 

[SBAndy]

Why get it removed from club shirts to leave it non stop shouting at you with real time odds before, during and after games?

Read what has been typed. Once you grasp this you can talk about what a discussion is.

Equally though networks were told they could no longer run smoking adverts, certain fast food ads, etc. The networks themselves are in no place to determine what can or cannot be aired in advertising space - that is directed to them by the regulator. Just because Sky won’t like the fact they won’t get advertising income from a number of betting companies, doesn’t mean it won’t happen. Hell, think about things like F1 which used to be largely propped up by tobacco companies.

 

[SBAndy]

For the record, not really fussed by gambling sponsors but I’d guess that it’s because it isn’t something that directly affects me. If they were banned tomorrow I wouldn’t be bothered. But if it’s going to happen, it needs to be co-ordinated across all forms of advertising linked to the game.

 

[napolimp]

Why get it removed from club shirts to leave it non stop shouting at you with real time odds before, during and after games?

Read what has been typed. Once you grasp this you can talk about what a discussion is.

Why do you think advertising only comes in the form of gambling companies?

Don't worry, I have no problem in reading everything that's been typed, I just find it difficult to interpret nonsense.

 

[Nick]

Why do you think advertising only comes in the form of gambling companies?

Don't worry, I have no problem in reading everything that's been typed, I just find it difficult to interpret nonsense.

Where have I said it ONLY comes in the form of gambling companies?

Try reading and understanding before replying.

 

[napolimp]

Where have I said it ONLY comes in the form of gambling companies?

Try reading and understanding before replying.

You have said Sky would "lose millions/billions" if advertising was limited when football was on. But why would it be limited? They can air as much advertisement as they want, even if gambling companies can't advertise.

The only way it would affect them is if they couldn't find businesses to advertise whilst the football was on, but why would this be the case? They already have a lucrative deal with screwfix who are not a gambling company. And there's only so much advertising space anyway, so they would just need to replace the gambling companies with other advertisers.

The things you are saying don't make any sense.

 

[Nick]

You have said Sky would "lose millions/billions" if advertising was limited when football was on. But why would it be limited? They can air as much advertisement as they want, even if gambling companies can't advertise. The only way it would affect them is if they couldn't find businesses to advertise whilst the football was on, but why would this be the case? They already have a lucrative deal with screwfix who are not a gambling company. And there's only so much advertising space anyway, so they would just need to replace the gambling companies with other advertisers. The things you are saying don't make any sense.

Because the gambling companies are paying much more when it comes to the football market. Yes, I am sure there will be other advertisers but are they going to pay as much?

I said if "gambling advertisement" was limited. I have never said when football is on it's exclusive to betting companies.

 

[napolimp]

Because the gambling companies are paying much more when it comes to the football market. Yes, I am sure there will be other advertisers but are they going to pay as much?

I said if "gambling advertisement" was limited. I have never said when football is on it's exclusive to betting companies.

I don't know if they will pay as much, I don't work in the world of TV advertising, and I am pretty confident that you don't know either.

Sky would lose millions / billions if they had to LIMIT ADVERTISING when football is on.

More gaslighting.

 

[Nick]

I don't know if they will pay as much, I don't work in the world of TV advertising, and I am pretty confident that you don't know either.



More gaslighting.

Advertising in general, yep I know they do.

It isn't gaslighting, You try to patronise about what a discussion is but struggle to follow a basic one.

 

[ccfctommy]

But if you watch football on TV you have betting ads before the game and then both teams wearing betting companies on their shirts with betting advertising going around the outside of the pitch.

I can't imagine how difficult that is for people that struggle with gambling addictions and it needs to be legislated.

I remember a midweek home game.last season. I counted at least five different gambling adverts on the advertising hoardings. What chance do those people have?

 

[Hobo]

I dont gamble, never have. But I imagine the type of Sky Bet ad in breaks in live football coverage is more likely to encourage people with a gambling problem than having Boyle Sports on a shirt.

But the gambling industry haven't self regulated and have took the piss taking advantage of vulnerable people. They mnake loads of money via unethical practices. Sorry but the some people gamble responsibly isnt a strong enough argument. So serves the industry right if it gets hammered through legislation. It is not like they haven't had the chance to get there own house in order.

 

[napolimp]

Advertising in general, yep I know they do.

It isn't gaslighting, You try to patronise about what a discussion is but struggle to follow a basic one.

How do you know?

Well, you state that you said "if gambling advertisement was limited", yet if you scroll back to comment #40 it can clearly be seen that you said "if they had to limit advertising when football was on". Literally the definition of gaslighting.

 

[Barnsley]

The government have blood on their hands, with the way they allowed gambling sites to absolutely bombard the TV during the first lockdown, gambling debt related suicide skyrocketed. even through the day you couldn’t watch anything without seeing, a spins and two bingo advertisements. Late night TV is still has bad now, The government are allowing these vultures to pray on peoples boredom.

 

[Grendel]

How do you know?

Well, you state that you said "if gambling advertisement was limited", yet if you scroll back to comment #40 it can clearly be seen that you said "if they had to limit advertising when football was on". Literally the definition of gaslighting.

the revenue is around £200 million a year on sky sports channels it’s the biggest market at peak sports times

 

[WillenhallSkyBlues]

Anyone remember a few weeks when the club launched the ‘boylesports’ merchandise range consisting of a bottle opener, coaster and a cushion. Small cov badge but big massive boylesports logo.

 

[Grendel]

The government have blood on their hands, with the way they allowed gambling sites to absolutely bombard the TV during the first lockdown, gambling debt related suicide skyrocketed. even through the day you couldn’t watch anything without seeing, a spins and two bingo advertisements. Late night TV is still has bad now, The government are allowing these vultures to pray on peoples boredom.

grow up

 

[Nick]

How do you know?

Well, you state that you said "if gambling advertisement was limited", yet if you scroll back to comment #40 it can clearly be seen that you said "if they had to limit advertising when football was on". Literally the definition of gaslighting.

In a thread about gambling, I didn't realise I had to break it down and speak slowly like I was speaking to a child.

How do I know that betting companies pay more for advertising in the football markets?

 

[Old Warwickshire lad]

Look at the profit gambling companies make, there is only one winner. And it ain’t the punter.

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

Look at the profit gambling companies make, there is only one winner. And it ain’t the punter.

Any winning account is limited or put through extensive verification checks to get your money. They only want the addicts

 

[napolimp]

the revenue is around £200 million a year on sky sports channels it’s the biggest market at peak sports times

Big money. Is that exclusively from the gambling companies, or the entire advertising revenue? I know the majority of the advertisers are gambling companies mind.

 

[alexccfc99]

I like a flutter, I put an acca on every Saturday and have a dabble in the Casino before home games. Luckily I can moderate my gambling, but fully understand other can't, being bombarded with Gambling adverts and promises of 'boosted odds' and 'free bets' can surely only act as a trigger for those in that boat.

A blanket ban on gambling advertisements would be a great step forward

However I fully understand why CCFC were quick to jump into bed with Boylesports, there can't be companies in many other industries who were offering the money they were to be on the shirts, I'd imagine CCFC had to dance with the devil to help to be competitive at Championship level

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I like a flutter, I put an acca on every Saturday and have a dabble in the Casino before home games. Luckily I can moderate my gambling, but fully understand other can't, being bombarded with Gambling adverts and promises of 'boosted odds' and 'free bets' can surely only act as a trigger for those in that boat.

A blanket ban on gambling advertisements would be a great step forward

However I fully understand why CCFC were quick to jump into bed with Boylesports, there can't be companies in many other industries who were offering the money they were to be on the shirts, I'd imagine CCFC had to dance with the devil to help to be competitive at Championship level

I get they’d have offered more money, and the club needs all it can get. Doesn’t change that it was disappointing to see though.

 

[napolimp]

In a thread about gambling, I didn't realise I had to break it down and speak slowly like I was speaking to a child.

How do I know that betting companies pay more for advertising in the football markets?

You're saying you stated it in a different thread, which is completely separate from the discussion occurring in this thread? Is it fair to expect people to trawl through thousands of your posts before replying to you?

It's nice to see you've resorted to insults, that's the mark of someone who's articulately won an argument.

 

[Grendel]

Big money. Is that exclusively from the gambling companies, or the entire advertising revenue? I know the majority of the advertisers are gambling companies mind.

Gambling companies - at big events advertisers bid for the main spots - the big gambling companies pay far more to dominate the slots

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Anyways having said that, seeing BoyleSports on our shirt hasnt made me get a Boylesports account. If anything they've stopped doing stuff for us when in the first season they would send Cov fans £10.00 free bets and stuff (I think)

nor me but tbh makes the shirt look shit.

 

[alexccfc99]

I get they’d have offered more money, and the club needs all it can get. Doesn’t change that it was disappointing to see though.

I'd happily have Boylesports off the shirts tomorrow if it wouldn't cost us a shed load of money (I couldn't even guess the figure in which they trumped Allsop and Allsop to be on the shirts)

1) For obvious reasons

2) I think the 'This is betting' strap-line on all our shirts looks unbelievably tacky - A massive damper on some beautiful shirts made by Hummel last season and this season

 

[Nick]

You're saying you stated it in a different thread, which is completely separate from the discussion occurring in this thread? Is it fair to expect people to trawl through thousands of your posts before replying to you?

It's nice to see you've resorted to insults, that's the mark of someone who's articulately won an argument.

What? No, this thread is about gambling. Why would I expect you to go through other threads?

You have started trying to patronise about what a discussion is and people researching but then gone on to show you don't have a clue? I expect people to be able to have a discussion themselves before trying to patronise others about them.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Gambling companies - at big events advertisers bid for the main spots - the big gambling companies pay far more to dominate the slots

Well then the question comes does the sport want to rake in more from an addiction than something less predatory. The same goes for Wonga, Carling, Magners, Tennents etc.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I'd happily have Boylesports off the shirts tomorrow if it wouldn't cost us a shed load of money (I couldn't even guess the figure in which they trumped Allsop and Allsop to be on the shirts)

1) For obvious reasons

2) I think the 'This is betting' strap-line on all our shirts looks unbelievably tacky - A massive damper on some beautiful shirts made by Hummel last season and this season

I got the free shirt included with last year’s season ticket but haven’t bought anything with that sponsor on and won’t till it changes. Interestingly the wife says it’s not on junior shirts which says everything