RTE Investigates programme on greyhound racing industry

c.p.w.g.w

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Barry's Tea have issued a statement that they will no longer sponsor greyhound racing.

How much money is that worth to greyhound industry? Will that mean more taxpayer money going into greyhound racing to make up the shortfall

Bannasidhe

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

How much money is that worth to greyhound industry? Will that mean more taxpayer money going into greyhound racing to make up the shortfall

AFAIK they sponsor the prize at a race at Curraheen in Cork, not sure what other involvement they have or total value of overall sponsorship.

As for taxpayer's money that is up to government how much more they want to pump into a dying and disgraced industry. They already have ring-fenced funding.

It does show that public opinion is turning on the industry and sponsors are pulling support.

Bannasidhe

Initially FBD said they would withdraw sponsorship, but then began to equivocate as to whether they would stop completely but today announced on twitter that they are stopping as well.

anewme

Thats’s great news from Barry’s...very slow in reacting (whoever is in their PR team needs a shake) and when Mrs. Doyle aka Pauline McLynn got into the protest, they really had no option.

strandroad

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Barry's Tea have issued a statement that they will no longer sponsor greyhound racing.

I'm delighted to see it. It's a household name, together with Bank of Ireland. Hopefully an example and a warning to others: there's no benefit in supporting the industry. Small local businesses especially with ties might stay on board though.

strandroad

anewme wrote: »

Thats’s great news from Barry’s...very slow in reacting (whoever is in their PR team needs a shake) and when Mrs. Doyle aka Pauline McLynn got into the protest, they really had no option.

Irish mammies are a force to be reckoned with after all. The demographic profile of social media commenters was striking.

Bannasidhe

strandroad wrote: »

I'm delighted to see it. It's a household name, together with Bank of Ireland. Hopefully an example and a warning to others: there's no benefit in supporting the industry. Small local businesses especially with ties might stay on board though.

Latest update on sponsors who have withdrawn:


Mullingar Agri Store
Botanica International
Bank of Ireland
Tracey's Hotel
FBD Insurance
Permanent TSB
Barry's Tea.

I don't know that I agree with that about local stores, they would be more likely to feel the pressure of folks boycotting them than the likes of FBD or Barry's.

Bannasidhe

strandroad wrote: »

Irish mammies are a force to be reckoned with after all. The demographic profile of social media commenters was striking.

I have to say the vast majority of the people I am encountering at protests, involved in boycotting, writing emails etc are Irish Mammies. Not exclusively but around 75%.
It's a demographic it would be foolish to ignore or try and dismiss. Or call extremists.

gozunda

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Latest update on sponsors who have withdrawn:


Mullingar Agri Store
Botanica International
Bank of Ireland
Tracey's Hotel
FBD Insurance
Permanent TSB
Barry's Tea.

I don't know that I agree with that about local stores, they would be more likely to feel the pressure of folks boycotting them than the likes of FBD or Barry's.

Nothing like a bit of mob rule eh? ... and all the Barry Tea drinkers who support greyhound racing or those who are involved in racing etc and do things right?

I believe this type of bullying of companies says it all about these types of campaigns tbh.

batgoat

gozunda wrote: »

Nothing like a bit of mob rule eh? ... and all the Barry Tea drinkers who support greyhound racing or those who are involved in racing etc and do things right?

I believe this type of bullying of companies says it all about these types of campaigns tbh.

You can't bully a company, it's simply a PR disaster for them. Do you think those who boycotted South African products during apartheid were engaging in bullying? Is all boycotting bullying or just when it affects you? So not mob rule, consumers exercising their rights and protesting in a peaceful fashion, admirable really.

gozunda

batgoat wrote: »

You can't bully a company, it's simply a PR disaster for them. Do you think those who boycotted South African products during apartheid were engaging in bullying? Is all boycotting bullying or just when it affects you? So not mob rule, consumers exercising their rights and protesting in a peaceful fashion, admirable really.

Yes you can. See the above. What of all the people who do support the companies sponsorship? In this instance it is mob rule - little better than any other type of bullying. Plenty of consumers not represented by the minority ban brigade - what of their rights? And that's the issue - its un democratic and unrepresentative - it uses threats of boycot and sanction to support a partisan cause. Disgusting really.

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

Yes you can. See the above. What of all the people who do support the companies sponsorship? In this instance it is mob rule - little better than any other type of bullying. Plenty of consumers not represented by the minority ban brigade - what of their rights? And that's the issue - its un democratic and unrepresentative - it uses threats of boycot and sanction to support a partisan cause. Disgusting really.

They could petition the companies to continue sponsoring if that way included, works both ways.

batgoat

gozunda wrote: »

Yes you can. See the above. What of all the people who do support the companies sponsorship? In this instance it is mob rule - little better than any other type of bullying. Plenty of consumers not represented by the minority ban brigade - what of their rights? And that's the issue - its un democratic and unrepresentative - it uses threats of boycot and sanction to support a partisan cause. Disgusting really.

No you cannot bully a company, you can simply choose to not buy their product because of things they sponsor or views they represent. Do you think the apartheid Africa boycotts were bullying? The right to peacefully protest is integral to a democratic society. It would appear that you're more annoyed that boycotting was effective. But definitely not bullying.

Bannasidhe

DubInMeath wrote: »

They could petition the companies to continue sponsoring if that way included, works both ways.

And continue to buy their products. It's not like Barry's Tea disappeared off the shelves. Quite the opposite. There was lashings of Barry's Tea being left on the shelves so greyhound supporters could have stocked up enough to see them through to next year in one shop.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I have to say the vast majority of the people I am encountering at protests, involved in boycotting, writing emails etc are Irish Mammies. Not exclusively but around 75%.
It's a demographic it would be foolish to ignore or try and dismiss. Or call extremists.

The amount paid by sponsors every year would only total €500,000 max.

gozunda

DubInMeath wrote: »

They could petition the companies to continue sponsoring if that way included, works both ways.

Why the need to? It should be the companies decision not governance by threat of sanctions

So let's say it turns in to a war of attrition - one side pitted against the other - and companies in the middle? Or what happens when companies stand up for their rights and refuse to be intimidated - will it turn to violence and attacks as seen in the UK?

Perhaps the majority of people have a bit more integrity than target companies acting within their rights and not gave to side with those screaming loudest even where they are in a minority?

Bannasidhe

Deleted User wrote: »

The amount paid by sponsors every year would only total €500,000 max.

But the negative publicity they are now getting is priceless.

If all the combined sponsors are giving so little they are even more likely to say 'sod this', it's not worth the awful PR.

batgoat

gozunda wrote: »

Why the need to? It should be the companies decision not governance by threat of sanctions

So let's say it turns in to a war of attrition - one side pitted against the other - and companies in the middle? Or what happens when companies stand up for their rights and refuse to be intimidated - will it turn to violence and attacks as seen in the UK?

Perhaps the majority of people have a bit more integrity than target companies acting within their rights and not side with those screaming loudest even where they are in a minority?

But perfectly democratic and not bullying. Do you view people to have a right to protest? You're outraged because people are exercising their rights.

gozunda

batgoat wrote: »

But perfectly democratic and not bullying. Do you view people to have a right to protest? You're outraged because people are exercising their rights.

Absolutely nothing democratic about it. Where's the voting? I see none tbh. So wrong - this is not protest - it is the forcing of companies to bow to the wishes of a minority because of tactics and threatened sanctions.

A legitimate example of protest is going on a March and advocating for legislative change not a mob hammering on the door.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And continue to buy their products. It's not like Barry's Tea disappeared off the shelves. Quite the opposite. There was lashings of Barry's Tea being left on the shelves so greyhound supporters could have stocked up enough to see them through to next year in one shop.

That's because it's muck, at least in my opinion, even convinced an ex girlfriend from Cork that Lyons was better :-)

batgoat

gozunda wrote: »

Absolutely nothing democratic about it. Where's the voting? I see none tbh. So wrong - his is not protest - it is the forcing of companies to bow to the wishes of a minority because of tactics and threatened sanctions.

A legitimate example of protest is going on a March and advocating for legislative change not the mob hammering on the door.

A boycott of products is a form of protest and has been used for decades. You are choosing to redefine what constitutes a protest. Protest has never required you to vote on something, we vote on constitutional issues or electing members of the Dail/Seanad. Boycotting Barry's tea, not so much.

Famous boycotts include the Montgomery Bus Boycott(that was in support of Rosa Parks), The 1936 Olympics due to fascism, BP due to Oil Spill Scandal. So do you think they were all anti democratic forms of intimidation?

Bannasidhe

DubInMeath wrote: »

That's because it's muck, at least in my opinion, even convinced an ex girlfriend from Cork that Lyons was better :-)

I don't even like tea. Any tea. Never buy it. Anyone who wants tea in my house needs to bring their own. I do have a wide selection of different kinds of coffee...

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

Why the need to? It should be the companies decision not governance by threat of sanctions

So let's say it turns in to a war of attrition - one side pitted against the other - and companies in the middle? Or what happens when companies stand up for their rights and refuse to be intimidated - will it turn to violence and attacks as seen in the UK?

Perhaps the majority of people have a bit more integrity than target companies acting within their rights and not gave to side with those screaming loudest even where they are in a minority?

Actually I'd say that the majority of people have decided that they are against greyhound racing. Just back in the office today and among the four of us who go to lunch when I'm in the office, one in particular likes a flutter, even he said that he'll never go/bet on them again.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I don't even like tea. Any tea. Never buy it. Anyone who wants tea in my house needs to bring their own. I do have a wide selection of different kinds of coffee...

Hate coffee, the wife loves it. Worked in Bewleys as security years ago, thought I would never get the smell out of my clothes.

Anyway, I don't think there was much danger of them losing much home grown business, but they might have lost online business in countries like the U.S. where dog racing is illegal in most states.

whisky_galore

gozunda wrote: »

Absolutely nothing democratic about it. Where's the voting? I see none tbh. So wrong - this is not protest - it is the forcing of companies to bow to the wishes of a minority because of tactics and threatened sanctions.

A legitimate example of protest is going on a March and advocating for legislative change not a mob hammering on the door.

Is there anything illegal about it? How many deaths and injuries?

Bad press is the only thing big business understands. I wouldn't be boo hooing too much over a bunch of well paid suits.

Bannasidhe

DubInMeath wrote: »

Hate coffee, the wife loves it. Worked in Bewleys as security years ago, thought I would never get the smell out of my clothes.

Anyway, I don't think there was much danger of them losing much home grown business, but they might have lost online business in countries like the U.S. where diog racing is illegal in most states.

They were absolutely losing the Cork Mammy market aka The Notorious Undemocratic Mob like bai

Bewley's coffee is muck.

gozunda

batgoat wrote: »

A boycott of products is a form of protest and has been used for decades. You are choosing to redefine what constitutes a protest. Famous boycotts include the Montgomery Bus Boycott(that was in support of Rosa Parks), The 1936 Olympics due to fascism, BP due to Oil Spill Scandal. So do you think they were all anti democratic forms of intimidation?

You are conflating legitimate protest with the targeting of companies in support of a partisan cause.

This wasn't a boycot btw - it was a threat of sanctions if the company did not do with what small number of activists wanted and ignores other peoples opinions or beliefs on this issue.

The examples given are not comparable tbh - greyhound racing remains legal - it is neither pollution, facism or racism.

It is evident that some may wish to crush all legal greyhound based activities - and btw that has openly been declared in this thread. What is evident - there is nothing democratic in the means being used.

Something that is democratic is based on the idea that everyone should have equal rights and should be involved in making important decisions. This is not.

batgoat

Bannasidhe wrote: »

They were absolutely losing the Cork Mammy market aka The Notorious Undemocratic Mob like bai

Yep thinking similar, my mother wouldn't have touched it again if they didn't drop sponsorship. And she's not one who would ordinarily boycott a product.

gozunda wrote: »

You are conflating legitimate protest with the targeting of companies in support of a partisan cause.

This wasn't a boycot btw - it was a threat of sanctions if the company did not do with what small number of activists wanted and ignores other peoples opinions or beliefs on this issue.

The examples given are not comparable tbh - greyhound racing remains legal - it is neither pollution, facism or racism.

It is evident that some may wish to crush all legal greyhound based activities - and btw that has openly been declared in this thread. What is evident - there is nothing democratic in the means being used.

Ten minutes ago you said boycotting isn't a legitimate form of protest, make up your mind. Crappy things can be legal and people have every right to boycott companies that sponsor them. It's a democratic right. So your anti democratic claims are nonsense.

whisky_galore

gozunda wrote: »

greyhound racing remains legal

For now.

Bull baiting was legal here once, now it isn't.
Times change.

anewme

The whole thing about sponsorships is that it should tie in with and promote a company's values.

A good sponsorship will do that whereas a bad one will cost business.

You can try and ride it out, but in this case, the sentiment was picking up, not blowing over and in my ooinion quite rightly so.