Outrage over Sponsorship deal

Dempsey

Whats with all the mock outrage over lending companies as sponsors? No issues with having a bookies on the shirt though :rolleyes:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-22707261

Surely the politician should be lobbying government for tighter controls intend of trying to cut off a revenue stream for a local business.

I remember Newcastle having similar issues, its daft really.

gimmick

Dempsey wrote: »

Whats with all the mock outrage over lending companies as sponsors? No issues with having a bookies on the shirt though :rolleyes:

Big difference between a bookie and a glorified money lender. Bookies are not on TV during the day making their service sound foolproof and sound. Everyone knows there is a risk in gambling.

These money companies are disgusting. Their rates are penal, and they are the types who harass looking for their repayment. You might say "tough titty, you got yourself into it" - but many of the people who need to use these are at the end of their tether to keep things ticking over.

LuckyLloyd

Bookmakers offer an entertainment service; predatory lending companies operate a business based on taking advantage of those in financial distress.

It's so very, very far from being the same thing.

Dempsey

gimmick wrote: »

Big difference between a bookie and a glorified money lender. Bookies are not on TV during the day making their service sound foolproof and sound. Everyone knows there is a risk in gambling.

These money companies are disgusting. Their rates are penal, and they are the types who harass looking for their repayment. You might say "tough titty, you got yourself into it" - but many of the people who need to use these are at the end of their tether to keep things ticking over.

So everyone understands there's a risk in gambling, never mind the addiction aspect, but some are easily fooled when it comes to taking out loans? I think the recession made everyone aware of the risks associated with easy credit!

The politician should be lobbying government for tighter regulation not telling legit businesses who they can and cant work with

gimmick

Dempsey wrote: »

So everyone understands their a risk in gambling, never mind the addiction aspect, but some are easily fooled when it comes to taking out loans? I think the recession made everyone aware of the risks associated with easy credit!

Again, there is a difference, certainly in my mind. Easy credit can be used for something as mundane as paying the mortgage this month, or clothing your kids for the up coming school year. They charge these people horrendous interest rates. They prey on the desperate. Yet they dress themselves up as lovely worldly companies, helping you to make a better life.

Gladly, I know the risks involved in going to one of these. Even more gladly though I have never faced any desperation when it comes to real financial issues.

eagle eye

There is no comparison between bookies and these horrible people.

I know somebody who was in a very bad way financially and got a loan from one of these crowds. Everything went belly up on him and he then started getting horrible letters, regular phone calls from unknown numbers and people calling to his house every week. The man went very close to ending it all and everybody around him believes they were the cause of him going to the brink.

They should be banned from advertising like they do imo. Any football club that takes on one of these as a sponsor really just doesn't give a toss about anything but money imo and I think people should make themselves heard about how much they are against it.

LuckyLloyd

Dempsey wrote: »

So everyone understands their a risk in gambling, never mind the addiction aspect, but some are easily fooled when it comes to taking out loans? I think the recession made everyone aware of the risks associated with easy credit!

Bookmaker:

Place X and if a particular scenario pans out be paid Y

Predatory Lender:

Call today and solve all your finacial woes with a quickly approved cash loan!*

























*Please note astronomic interest rate of repayment and stiff penalties for missing same. Also note that this product is probably an extraordinarily bad choice for you, our prime target of this advertisement.

Dempsey

eagle eye wrote: »

There is no comparison between bookies and these horrible people.

I know somebody who was in a very bad way financially and got a loan from one of these crowds. Everything went belly up on him and he then started getting horrible letters, regular phone calls from unknown numbers and people calling to his house every week. The man went very close to ending it all and everybody around him believes they were the cause of him going to the brink.

They should be banned from advertising like they do imo. Any football club that takes on one of these as a sponsor really just doesn't give a toss about anything but money imo and I think people should make themselves heard about how much they are against it.

Not much in the difference in gambling money you dont have and getting a loan you cant repay/havent thought through imo

gimmick

I am no fan of bookies either. Lets not pretend they are whiter than white. But these money lending companies are just beneath contempt.

I have similar issues with these Cash 4 Your Gold kiosks which are dotted everywhere nowadays.

eagle eye

Dempsey wrote: »

Not much in the difference in gambling money you dont have and getting a loan you cant repay/havent thought through imo

That wasn't the case when he got the loan, he was over extended but believed he could make it work out. The banks wouldn't help him and he ended up getting a loan from one of these crowds. It was a stupid move on his part but people make mistakes. He missed a few payments and ended up in very bad shape because of it but the way he was treated by them sent him over the edge. This is what you are dealing with when you get in trouble with a crowd like this.

How can you gamble money you don't have? You need to get a loan somewhere if you don't have it.

LuckyLloyd

gimmick wrote: »

I am no fan of bookies either. Lets not pretend they are whiter than white. But these money lending companies are just beneath contempt.

I have similar issues with these Cash 4 Your Gold kiosks which are dotted everywhere nowadays.

There is definitely gambling addiction in society, just as there is alchohol addiction, fast food addiction and nicotine addiction - all of which are legal and potentially lethal.

Like alchohol or fast food manafacturers, bookmakers advertise the fun, entertaining side of their service and spend a comparatively tiny time discussing the negative potential consequences of abusing that service.

Okay.

However, to place a bet you need money; you need to be over 18 and with rare exceptions what you see is very much what you get - i.e. when you complete the transaction the terms of what will happen are very clear and upfront.

With these sorts of lending businesses, you are targeted if you DON'T have money (or at the very least have far less money than you require) and when you engage in the transaction the consequences of what can happen are often hidden or obscured by various complexities of language and understanding.

For me, one depends and requires human misery as a starting point. Bookmakers and Public Houses will make some money from those with addiction problems, but in the main they will be offering a straightforward entertainment service to people who can afford it and handle it responsibly.

Chucky the tree

eagle eye wrote: »

There is no comparison between bookies and these horrible people.

I know somebody who was in a very bad way financially and got a loan from one of these crowds. Everything went belly up on him and he then started getting horrible letters, regular phone calls from unknown numbers and people calling to his house every week. The man went very close to ending it all and everybody around him believes they were the cause of him going to the brink..

No offence, but what did he expect? "Ah sure grand, don't worry - no need to pay the money back."

Fratton Fred

eagle eye wrote: »

There is no comparison between bookies and these horrible people.

I know somebody who was in a very bad way financially and got a loan from one of these crowds. Everything went belly up on him and he then started getting horrible letters, regular phone calls from unknown numbers and people calling to his house every week. The man went very close to ending it all and everybody around him believes they were the cause of him going to the brink.

They should be banned from advertising like they do imo. Any football club that takes on one of these as a sponsor really just doesn't give a toss about anything but money imo and I think people should make themselves heard about how much they are against it.

when was the last time a bookies turned someone away because they were putting the family's last few quid on the 3:30 at Haydock?

RoryMac

gimmick wrote: »

Big difference between a bookie and a glorified money lender. Bookies are not on TV during the day making their service sound foolproof and sound. Everyone knows there is a risk in gambling.

These money companies are disgusting. Their rates are penal, and they are the types who harass looking for their repayment. You might say "tough titty, you got yourself into it" - but many of the people who need to use these are at the end of their tether to keep things ticking over.

Can you send me a link to a bookies ad that shows someone losing money?

There may be a line between bookies and money lenders but it's a fairly thin one.

gimmick

RoryMac wrote: »

Can you send me a link to a bookies ad that shows someone losing money?

There may be a line between bookies and money lenders but it's a fairly thin one.

It doesn't go all the way, the ad which has the ManU Everton 4-4 dubbed over it shows your man who had back Utd to win losing his winnings and he cashed out at 4-3. It showed that he could have lost.

RoryMac

gimmick wrote: »

It doesn't go all the way, the ad which has the ManU Everton 4-4 dubbed over it shows your man who had back Utd to win losing his winnings and he cashed out at 4-3. It showed that he could have lost.

So it shows him winning??

Super-Rush

Was anything ever said when Blackpool were sponsored by Wonga?

gimmick

RoryMac wrote: »

So it shows him winning??

It showed that he could lose.

Do the money ads show that hired goons could call to your door, and you could be reciving threatening letters and phone calls? No, they show everyone being happy and delighted with life with their risk free (as long as you adhere to their crazy penal guidelines) option.

As I have said, I am no fan of bookies either. But the fact is bookies are far safer than moneylenders.

RoryMac

gimmick wrote: »

It showed that he could lose.

Do the money ads show that hired goons could call to your door, and you could be reciving threatening letters and phone calls? No, they show everyone being happy and delighted with life with their risk free (as long as you adhere to their crazy penal guidelines) option.

As I have said, I am no fan of bookies either. But the fact is bookies are far safer than moneylenders.

yes he could have lost but didn't, reinforcing that you the viewer can be smart enough to make this a sure fire thing.

No money lenders don't show that side of their 'business' in the ads the same way the bookies ads won't show families being evicted because someone has put the mortgage money on a 'sure thing' or banks and credit card companies won't show their goons coming around to take their money back or your car.

I'm not defending money lenders in any way but if we overlook the murky side of other companies why a different rule for them?

Kirby

RoryMac wrote: »

yes he could have lost but didn't, reinforcing that you the viewer can be smart enough to make this a sure fire thing.

No money lenders don't show that side of their 'business' in the ads the same way the bookies ads won't show families being evicted because someone has put the mortgage money on a 'sure thing' or banks and credit card companies won't show their goons coming around to take their money back or your car.

I'm not defending money lenders in any way but if we overlook the murky side of other companies why a different rule for them?

What ever happened to personal responsibility? Seriously now. Nobody forces these "desperate" people to bet money they don't have or use money lending services. Its a choice. And people have to deal with the consequences of their choices.

You want a bookie to show in their ad a family losing their home because of debt? How is that anything to do with the Bookie. The family did that. Nobody forced them to bet what they didn't have.

It would be the same as demanding a car manufacturer show its car being wrapped around a pole. Just because some eejit doesn't know how to drive doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the car.

There is a growing culture of people blaming everything under the sun for their own choices. "These services and products shouldn't be allowed to advertise because I might be tempted to use them!" Give me a break.

RoryMac

Kirby wrote: »

What ever happened to personal responsibility? Seriously now. Nobody forces these "desperate" people to bet money they don't have or use money lending services. Its a choice. And people have to deal with the consequences of their choices.

You want a bookie to show in their ad a family losing their home because of debt? How is that anything to do with the Bookie. The family did that. Nobody forced them to bet what they didn't have.

It would be the same as demanding a car manufacturer show its car being wrapped around a pole. Just because some eejit doesn't know how to drive doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the car.

There is a growing culture of people blaming everything under the sun for their own choices. "These services and products shouldn't be allowed to advertise because I might be tempted to use them!" Give me a break.

I'm not suggesting any of the above, my point was outlining the hypocrisy in people complaining about money lenders sponsoring teams but having no issue with bookies or banks etc

greendom

Both industries have unpleasant sides to them. The poker/roulette machines (where betting shops are making most of thei money these days). can swallow £100 every 15 seconds.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/27/roulette-machines-crack-cocaine-gambling

Like Wonga and its ilk they are a legitimate business but like them they make a lot of money by exploiting the poor and desperate...

these roulette machines have attracted new interest this year after research showed there was a far higher number of the terminals in poor areas of high unemployment than on richer high streets.

DazMarz

You do not get loans of money of bookies. That is a huge difference right there. They might take money off you for gambling, but they most certainly do not loan you money and then send the hired goons after you if/when you don't repay.

Those loan companies should be outlawed. The interest rates can be as high as 2000%, ffs. How is that even remotely legal?!?!

Bookies might not have a conscience as they do not care where the money came from that you are using to gamble with, but at the same time they do not lend people money at extortionate rates.

I don't mind teams being sponsored by gambling or gaming companies; sports of all descriptions and betting have gone hand-in-hand since time immemorial. Yes, it is insidious and can be lethally dangerous to people of a certain disposition (see the An Post office manager who gambled away over €1,000,000). But those loan companies take advantage of the truly desperate and for that they deserve to be brought to book.

How there hasn't been legislation or something to cap the rate of interest for legal lenders is beyond me. Charging interest bordering on 2000% is so wrong on so many levels.

Moneymaker

As a Newcastle fan it's going to be hard to watch our games next season with Wonga plastered all over our colours.

Despicable company, I despise them and all the other companies they've spawned. Newcastle will be getting none of my money as long as they are affiliated with the likes of them.

Fr Tod Umptious

Moneymaker wrote: »

As a Newcastle fan it's going to be hard to watch our games next season with Wonga plastered all over our colours.

Despicable company, I despise them and all the other companies they've spawned. Newcastle will be getting none of my money as long as they are affiliated with the likes of them.

But 'Northern Rock' were fine, a company that handed out money hans over fist to people who could not afford it and left the British tax payer carrying the can

UnitedIrishman

RoryMac wrote: »

Can you send me a link to a bookies ad that shows someone losing money?

There may be a line between bookies and money lenders but it's a fairly thin one.

To be fair, you can't lose what you don't have in a bookies. If you go to one of these money lending companies, you can be in a hole to the tune of a 1000 times over what you loaned from them. There is a major difference.

There is also the fact you could come out of a bookies better off than when you went in. There is absolutely no chance of that with Wonga or the likes.

Anyways, that's getting away from the point slightly.

DM_7

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But 'Northern Rock' were fine, a company that handed out money hans over fist to people who could not afford it and left the British tax payer carrying the can

Northern Rock didn't need a bail out because people couldn't afford repayments. They needed a bail out because the Bank couldn't raise enough money to pay back loans the bank took out.

Gbear

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But 'Northern Rock' were fine, a company that handed out money hans over fist

:pac:

grenache

Dempsey wrote: »

Whats with all the mock outrage over lending companies as sponsors? No issues with having a bookies on the shirt though :rolleyes:.

Bit of a difference between having a loan shark and a bookies as your sponsor.

S28382

Football is fast becoming the greedy mans sport. Loan shark companies now getting involved in sponsorship is madness. It mental that its allowed to happen cigarette companies cant advertise or sponsor because of very good reasons and loan shark companies should be banned from doing so also.

gimmick

Just looking at the Wonga website as I have feck all else to be doing. I actually find the wording of all of this quite threatening tbh

Failure to stick to your side of the deal

The only way costs will mount beyond our initial calculation is if you don’t keep your promise. In other words, if you ask us to change your chosen repayment date or don’t ensure enough funds are available for automatic collection. If our early morning collection attempt is declined by your bank - because you haven't ensured enough funds are available - we will do our best to contact you. We always seek to understand any problems and resolve the situation that day but, if we still haven't received full repayment by 5pm, you will incur a £20 missed payment fee towards the cost of a failed collection.

If we cannot collect the money you owe us from 5am on the day you have chosen to repay we will make further attempts to collect the money you owe us either in one payment or several payments from your card or any other debit card you have given us details of, on a continuing basis until the amount you owe us is repaid. Our professional collections team will also contact you to discuss the situation. If your circumstances have changed significantly, they will do their best to offer a solution and come to an arrangement that helps you get back on your feet, which is always our goal.

We don't believe in hitting you with multiple charges, like many traditional lenders will, but interest will continue to accrue on your balance for up to 60 days if we can't reach a fair agreement in the meantime. And if you don't work with us and we can't recover the money over a reasonable period, your account may be passed to an external partner.

Continued failure to repay a loan will also mean credit reference agencies (CRAs) will record the outstanding debt. This information may be supplied to other organisations by CRAs and fraud protection agencies to perform similar checks and to trace your whereabouts and recover debts that you owe. Records remain on file for six years after they are closed, whether settled by you or defaulted. Finally, your Wonga trust rating will be affected and you probably won't be able to borrow from us again if you were to need our service in the future.

None of these things are worth risking if you have doubts over whether you will be able to repay a loan comfortably. If that's the case, please don't apply in the first place. We use award winning technology and all the public data we can get our hands on to make the best lending decisions possible, but we also urge you to consider the serious nature of the commitment before applying.

Fratton Fred

UnitedIrishman wrote: »

To be fair, you can't lose what you don't have in a bookies. If you go to one of these money lending companies, you can be in a hole to the tune of a 1000 times over what you loaned from them. There is a major difference.

There is also the fact you could come out of a bookies better off than when you went in. There is absolutely no chance of that with Wonga or the likes.

Anyways, that's getting away from the point slightly.

if people didn't blow their wages in the bookies or the pub, there'd be no need for pay day loans.

eagle eye

Fratton Fred wrote: »

if people didn't blow their wages in the bookies or the pub, there'd be no need for pay day loans.

Thats a fair enough comment but its not 100% because a lot of people that get stuck for cash are those who lose their job and have a family and a mortgage or are trying to make a business survive and these companies give them a loan when they shouldn't.

Anyways I for one will not watch a Newcastle game while they are sponsored by this crowd.

I fully intend to make my feelings on this known to Newcastle United and the Premier League. They are dragging their image into the gutter by allowing this company to sponsor a Premier League team.

I've always liked Newcastle fc but I'll find it hard to get over this. I'd love if they got relegated right now.

Dempsey

grenache wrote: »

Bit of a difference between having a loan shark and a bookies as your sponsor.

Both legitimate companies in the UK, arguing over which can be worse for you if used badly is a waste of time really. That MP only was using the opportunity to further her career.

As I said, if she had a real issue with these companies, why not lobby government for tighter regulations? Why wait until another local business receives sponsorship from them? Its mock outrage.

Dempsey

eagle eye wrote: »

Thats a fair enough comment but its not 100% because a lot of people that get stuck for cash are those who lose their job and have a family and a mortgage or are trying to make a business survive and these companies give them a loan when they shouldn't.

Anyways I for one will not watch a Newcastle game while they are sponsored by this crowd.

I fully intend to make my feelings on this known to Newcastle United and the Premier League. They are dragging their image into the gutter by allowing this company to sponsor a Premier League team.

I've always liked Newcastle fc but I'll find it hard to get over this. I'd love if they got relegated right now.

I'd be seriously questioning business acumen if anyone is using one of those companies to keep a business afloat. The reason the rates are so high is that they are willing to take such risks with loans to people. I'm not defending them but thinking they are like the local credit union or bank is the biggest mistake you could make.

Fratton Fred

Dempsey wrote: »

I'd be seriously questioning business acumen if anyone is using one of those companies to keep a business afloat. The reason the rates are so high is that they are willing to take such risks with loans to people. I'm not defending them but thinking they are like the local credit union or bank is the biggest mistake you could make.

And they are over a short period of time, so the apr calculation looks mental.

That_Guy

eagle eye wrote: »

I fully intend to make my feelings on this known to Newcastle United and the Premier League. They are dragging their image into the gutter by allowing this company to sponsor a Premier League team.

Good luck getting a response from Newcastle pal. It'll fall on deaf ears.

I've always liked Newcastle fc but I'll find it hard to get over this. I'd love if they got relegated right now.

Get a grip FFS.

Darkglasses

I would have no problem with Wonga/QuickQuid styles of lending were illegalized. I think they probably should be.

However, as they are perfectly ok in the eyes of the law, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to advertise.

iMuse

Bolton pulled out of the deal http://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/article/shirt-sponsor-announcement-5.6.13-856249.aspx

retalivity

Has there been any sort of reaction from newcastle fans similar to that of bolton fans which caused them to pull out of the deal?

bohsman

Fratton Fred wrote: »

when was the last time a bookies turned someone away because they were putting the family's last few quid on the 3:30 at Haydock?

If you tell them you have a problem they will stop you from betting. More so online than in the shops but I would be fairly certain bookie shop assistants would not be allowed to turn a blind eye if a punter told them that they had an addiction.

TherapyBoy

retalivity wrote: »

Has there been any sort of reaction from newcastle fans similar to that of bolton fans which caused them to pull out of the deal?

There was a reaction initially when the Wonga thing was announced but it has died down since. Lots of Newcastle fans weren't happy about the sponsorship deal but the club management weren't listening, or were happy to ignore the backlash until it faded. I wrote to the club, signed my name to online petitions etc but I haven't seen any reaction or comment from the club yet. I won't be buying anything from the club shop this year.

When the news of the deal was announced, I saw a report that if someone borrowed £40 from Wonga to buy a Newcastle shirt on the first day of the month, they'd have to pay £75 on the last day of the month to clear the loan.

TaosHum

TherapyBoy wrote: »

There was a reaction initially when the Wonga thing was announced but it has died down since. Lots of Newcastle fans weren't happy about the sponsorship deal but the club management weren't listening, or were happy to ignore the backlash until it faded. I wrote to the club, signed my name to online petitions etc but I haven't seen any reaction or comment from the club yet. I won't be buying anything from the club shop this year.

When the news of the deal was announced, I saw a report that if someone borrowed £40 from Wonga to buy a Newcastle shirt on the first day of the month, they'd have to pay £75 on the last day of the month to clear the loan.

I think re-naming the stadium St James' Park as part of the sponsorship agreement quelled some of the anger.

Was smart PR by Wonga.