Kfcinlancashire Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 Wonder what fine or sanction anyone else would get for not promoting the league's main sponsor. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillinger Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 47 minutes ago, Kfcinlancashire said: Wonder what fine or sanction anyone else would get for not promoting the league's main sponsor. Exactly. Had to laugh this morning when I saw they were "in discussion with league chiefs" about it. If we did that the discussion would be a very short "Hello Billy, heres your fine and heres your points deduction, goodbye" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graeme S Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 What is the issue here?Why would they not promote them?Presumably they will be accept the prize money on offer? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaker71 Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 3 minutes ago, Graeme S said: What is the issue here? They think they can do whatever they want. 3 minutes ago, Graeme S said: Why would they not promote them? See above, plus they're absolute vermin 3 minutes ago, Graeme S said: Presumably they will be accept the prize money on offer? They'd take money from anywhere including the pope, because theyve spent money they do not have. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kfcinlancashire Posted August 1, 2021 Author Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 25 minutes ago, Graeme S said: What is the issue here?Why would they not promote them?Presumably they will be accept the prize money on offer? They will want to take the money but the league sponsor is a direct competitor to one of their major financial backers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdevoy Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 How come they are still allowed to refuse to do meeja interviews with the BBC? Their fans went on a covid spreading spree when they won the league but none of their top management condemned it. It seems only UEFA are big enough to put them back in their box. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killiepies Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 It’s peanuts that’s been offered to have there name on every teams shirt plus in the background of any interviews.No fan of Sevco but why should they advertise something that they think is not paying a fair price and is a rival of one of there backers.Imagine if Greggs wanted to put there name on our shirts for a lot less than what Brownings are paying 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funky monkey Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 10 minutes ago, Killiepies said: It’s peanuts that’s been offered to have there name on every teams shirt plus in the background of any interviews.No fan of Sevco but why should they advertise something that they think is not paying a fair price and is a rival of one of there backers.Imagine if Greggs wanted to put there name on our shirts for a lot less than what Brownings are paying If the deal is £8M, then it is peanuts. Some agreement with Sevco on this one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 18 minutes ago, funky monkey said: If the deal is £8M, then it is peanuts. Some agreement with Sevco on this one. Trumpeted as largest deal in the league's history. Then you read the fine print, and it's the largest in the SPFL's history. The SPFL have had two sponsors, Ladbrokes, and these shysters. 1.6 mil p/a according to the story in the record. To run to 25/26. Bell's sponsored the SFL for 6 mil in 94, for 4 years. Any bankers out there do a fag packet calculation on what that converts to today? Turns out they were looking at renewing at 10 mil, for the next 4, then we started pissing about with breaking away with the SPL. Quote United Distillers has pulled its Bell’s whisky brand out of the sponsorship of the Scottish Football League because it feels that football north of the border is in disarray. UD signed a four-year deal with the League in 1994, worth 6m, which covered all 40 participating clubs but it has decided not to renew this sponsorship at the end of the season. All four divisions of the league are currently known as the Bell’s League Championship. The decision follows news last month that the league’s Premier Division clubs intend to break away to form a separate body, which will negotiate its own sponsorship and TV deals. UD UK marketing director Andy Neal says: “Major organisations such as our own, with clear strategies, cannot – and will not – commit millions of pounds to projects which do not have similar consistency in direction. We feel we must make everyone aware that we are unable to commit to a renewal of involvement.” Until the split came, UD was believed to have been in talks with the League about a further four-year sponsorship for 10m. https://www.marketingweek.com/ud-axes-bells-sponsorship-of-scottish-football-league/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorro Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 (edited) 5 hours ago, Killiepies said: It’s peanuts that’s been offered to have there name on every teams shirt plus in the background of any interviews.No fan of Sevco but why should they advertise something that they think is not paying a fair price and is a rival of one of there backers.Imagine if Greggs wanted to put there name on our shirts for a lot less than what Brownings are paying Where were their objections when Ladbrokes sponsored the league and they had 32 Red on their shirts then? Smaller deal, competing betting companies. The only difference now is it’s in competition with one of the directors companies. Looks like he’s putting his personal interests before that of the club. Edited August 1, 2021 by Zorro 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdevoy Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 2 hours ago, Killiepies said: It’s peanuts that’s been offered to have there name on every teams shirt plus in the background of any interviews.No fan of Sevco but why should they advertise something that they think is not paying a fair price and is a rival of one of there backers.Imagine if Greggs wanted to put there name on our shirts for a lot less than what Brownings are paying Becaus that's the deal the league they are playing in have agreed. As far as I can see in legal terms they dont have a leg to stand on. All they have got is that they are just bigger than anybody else and feel entitled to do what they like. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skygod Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 “SHIRT SLEEVES Rule G46: If so determined by the Board, the shirts of all Players in League Matches and Play-Off matches shall carry the League logo and/or, the name/logo(s) of the title or other sponsor of the League, on one or both sleeves, as specified from time to time by the board. The RIGHT sleeve on each shirt of all Players in a League Match and Play-Off Match must carry the logo designated by the League or League sponsor.” 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorro Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 Isn’t this just clever marketing to promote their “no one likes us, we don’t care/ if you’re not with us, you’re against us” brand image, to ra peepul? There’s literally no down side for them in this. Douglas Park will see a boost in sales of bright Orange focus ST mobility cars and Cinch will be boycotted. If the SPFL punish them, it proves they have it in for them, the wagons circle tighter and the horde spend more money on rangers tat to demonstrate their defiance. If the SPFL don’t punish them it’s because they’re too big to punish - no surrender to the SPFL etc. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted August 1, 2021 Report Share Posted August 1, 2021 I thought those f**kers would be sponsored by a fireworks company? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasboag Posted August 2, 2021 Report Share Posted August 2, 2021 6 hours ago, Zorro said: Isn’t this just clever marketing to promote their “no one likes us, we don’t care/ if you’re not with us, you’re against us” brand image, to ra peepul? There’s literally no down side for them in this. Douglas Park will see a boost in sales of bright Orange focus ST mobility cars and Cinch will be boycotted. If the SPFL punish them, it proves they have it in for them, the wagons circle tighter and the horde spend more money on rangers tat to demonstrate their defiance. If the SPFL don’t punish them it’s because they’re too big to punish - no surrender to the SPFL etc. You're absolutely on the money. They are just a sock-puppet army of hate. I'd like to know just how many individual companies make up the Sevco "collective". I'm convinced their entire organisation is now a modern-day mafia. So many companies set up doing different despicable things that nothing is provable and no-one is officially accountable. All of the media releases come form different companies to the football club so they can do the 'different company' argument as long as they need to. Add the colts in so they can meet Euro quotas and have a fecking insurance policy league membership for when they go bust next time. All this, and the enablers at the SFA and SPFL and Scottish football really is a laughing stock, and deservedly so. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfc_superteam Posted August 2, 2021 Report Share Posted August 2, 2021 Whilst I have no sympathy for Rangers I do think Doncaster and co are inept. They cannot negotiate any kind of deal or sell the SPFL brand. The Sky deal is a joke. Sky don't actually want Scottish football. They just want it so that they can schedule games so it doesn't interfere with its epl slots. Hence why they didnt use all their allocated games last season. If you look they have 3 games this weekend on because there is no English football on. Once the epl starts up you'll be lucky to get one. It should be in the contract that a minimum of 2 games be shown on a weekend at prime time. Tough negotiation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skygod Posted August 2, 2021 Report Share Posted August 2, 2021 (edited) 33 minutes ago, kfc_superteam said: Whilst I have no sympathy for Rangers I do think Doncaster and co are inept. They cannot negotiate any kind of deal or sell the SPFL brand. The Sky deal is a joke. Sky don't actually want Scottish football. They just want it so that they can schedule games so it doesn't interfere with its epl slots. Hence why they didnt use all their allocated games last season. If you look they have 3 games this weekend on because there is no English football on. Once the epl starts up you'll be lucky to get one. It should be in the contract that a minimum of 2 games be shown on a weekend at prime time. Tough negotiation. The product needs to be a lot better for the SPFL to have any negotiating strength. I’ve watched a few videos recently from different periods and the standard has really deteriorated. You only have to look at the quality of players who were involved and there is little comparison. We shop now in the fourth and fifth levels of English football and don’t pay transfer fees. You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear and you can’t force broadcasters to pay top dollar for matches nobody wants to watch. There isn’t the excitement of a competitive league while the OF duopoly, which has often been a monopoly in recent years, persists. Watching two bad teams trying to avoid relegation isn’t an edifying sight. But nobody is brave enough to create the climate for a genuinely competitive league. The likes of Doncaster have had their chance, have failed miserably and should be jettisoned. Edited August 2, 2021 by skygod 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LH31 Posted August 2, 2021 Report Share Posted August 2, 2021 29 minutes ago, kfc_superteam said: Whilst I have no sympathy for Rangers I do think Doncaster and co are inept. They cannot negotiate any kind of deal or sell the SPFL brand. The Sky deal is a joke. Sky don't actually want Scottish football. They just want it so that they can schedule games so it doesn't interfere with its epl slots. Hence why they didnt use all their allocated games last season. If you look they have 3 games this weekend on because there is no English football on. Once the epl starts up you'll be lucky to get one. It should be in the contract that a minimum of 2 games be shown on a weekend at prime time. Tough negotiation. BTs coverage of the football was far superior 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorro Posted August 2, 2021 Report Share Posted August 2, 2021 26 minutes ago, skygod said: The product needs to be a lot better for the SPFL to have any negotiating strength. I’ve watched a few videos recently from different periods and the standard has really deteriorated. You only have to look at the quality of players who were involved and there is little comparison. We shop now in the fourth and fifth levels of English football and don’t pay transfer fees. You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear and you can’t force broadcasters to pay top dollar for matches nobody wants to watch. There isn’t the excitement of a competitive league while the OF duopoly, which has often been a monopoly in recent years, persists. Watching two bad teams trying to avoid relegation isn’t an edifying sight. But nobody is brave enough to create the climate for a genuinely competitive league. The likes of Doncaster have had their chance, have failed miserably and should be jettisoned. The SPFL should just cut out the middle man and operate their own channel, showing games at every level. Live broadcasting could be outsourced to keep costs low. Subscriptions from Scottish fans alone would make it a viable option and advertising revenues could be shared by the clubs rather than syphoned off by Sky to help pay for their overpriced English premiership deal. It’s not in Sky’s interests to talk up the Scottish game and that’s why the coverage is so downbeat. It gives them the upper hand at contract negative time. Most clubs already generate some media content, but would most likely have to up their game. But a 15-30 minute slot for each club, a couple of times a week shouldn’t be beyond their capabilities. Re-runs of “classic matches” and Scotland games could also be broadcast by a new Scottish football channel. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Posted August 2, 2021 Report Share Posted August 2, 2021 From the team line up graphic. We've got them on the shirt But not on the text on the side on the infographic Perhaps just an oversight 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cammy2012 Posted August 4, 2021 Report Share Posted August 4, 2021 Time to kick Sevco out of Scotland. That's what they want so give it to them. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaker71 Posted August 4, 2021 Report Share Posted August 4, 2021 3 minutes ago, cammy2012 said: Time to kick Sevco out of Scotland. That's what they want so give it to them. Long long overdue for both cheeks 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasboag Posted August 4, 2021 Report Share Posted August 4, 2021 2 hours ago, Beaker71 said: Long long overdue for both cheeks I hate them both - but Sevco are another level. If they alone were kicked out of the league, then Celtic would be nothing more than 'big opponent annoying'. In my experience both sets of fans are as annoying in and around RP, and bams are the same for any team - but Sevco's are confrontationally aggressive wherever they go - I don't find Celtic fans to be the same; its just a large volume of loud arseholes that largely keep to themselves. Would love to literally kick Sevco and their "who are yah" attitude out of Scotland as that's what they always go on about. The country would be better for it overall in many ways. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayD Posted August 4, 2021 Report Share Posted August 4, 2021 Don't the member clubs get a say on any potential sponsorship? Some kind of review so that any objections can be raised/discussed prior to acceptance of the deal? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big sexy Posted August 4, 2021 Report Share Posted August 4, 2021 2 hours ago, dasboag said: I hate them both - but Sevco are another level. If they alone were kicked out of the league, then Celtic would be nothing more than 'big opponent annoying'. In my experience both sets of fans are as annoying in and around RP, and bams are the same for any team - but Sevco's are confrontationally aggressive wherever they go - I don't find Celtic fans to be the same; its just a large volume of loud arseholes that largely keep to themselves. Would love to literally kick Sevco and their "who are yah" attitude out of Scotland as that's what they always go on about. The country would be better for it overall in many ways. U must have forgot the game at rugby park when there was celtic fans running around the pitch and after the game asking anyone and everyone for a square go .im afraid there both as bad as each other and want both them gone 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.