I'm not buying the shirt because the template is ****ing terrible, I said even before it was leaked that this template wouldn't work for us because with the incomplete stripes it would either be too amber for my liking, or we'd have had amber shorts.
As far as the sponsor goes, I'm not going to wear anything bearing their name on principle. As well as the previously mentioned issue of them almost certainly knowing they're selling stolen goods, the nature of their business is to prey on the vulnerable, no in fact further than that, to prey on the most desperate people in society. There's nothing snobby about thinking the vulnerable shouldn't be preyed on like that and not wanting to support a company that does that.
Compare them to Wonga.com and say Wonga are worse because of their interest rates all you want. You're making a few key mistakes with that though:
The rates aren't the unethical part of it. The rates need to be high for them to make profits because by the very nature of the loans they're more likely to be defaulted than those from respectable lenders, and due to the size of the loans being made it's not worth them pursuing every case where there's a default. Even if they succeed it is likely to be difficult to actually get the money back.
The overheads are also far higher relative to the size of the loan. Someone arranges a mortgage for you and in the space of about half an hour they've made the bank several thousand pounds a year for however long your mortgage is. I think when I got mine the projected figures were that I would pay back around double what I borrowed over the 25 years. It takes just as long to arrange that as it does to arrange a 5 year loan for £15k, and equally the same time is taken to arrange a payday loan. If you've got someone borrowing £200 for a week and it takes half an hour, the interest rate needs to be about 115% just to pay the wages of the person arranging the loan if you pay them minimum wage. Given the requirements for loans to be regulated I don't think you're going to find many of the people responsible for arranging them earning minimum wage.
The moral issue with these loans is that they're preying on desperation, and in the vast majority of cases the people going for these loans aren't educated enough to understand that far from helping them as is claimed they just make them worse. And I don't necessarily mean they're thick, the fact they're in a position where they're considering one of these loans in the first place shows that (we're talking majority of cases remember) they've not been sufficiently educated about money and debt issues during their life. It's unfortunately the way in this country that we accept debts are a way of life, but don't educate people as standard about how to determine whether a debt is a good debt or a bad debt and so we create the situatioons where these firms can thrive.
If you borrow £20 off your mate and then the next week buy him a pint as a thank you when you repay him nobody says it's extortionate. On the basis of £2.80 a pint if you take the same "interest rate" over a year you'd owe your mate £18,000 by the end of the year. Not an awful lot of difference other than the perception that buying your mate a pint is a fair thing to do.
But the biggest mistake you've made is to suggest that Wonga.com are worse than our sponsors for charging those rates. Our sponsors also offer the same kind of loans, although perhaps worryingly for anyone using them their website has a guide to them which doesn't mention the rate they charge, generally that's a sign that your prices/rates aren't competitive.
With regards the plastic fan claims, it's more the way of plastic fans to try to prove their faux loyalty is real by blindly supporting the club and their sponsors by buying every piece of crap bit of merchandise they produce than it is for them to boycott products which they feel detract from the club's image and/or responsibility to the community.
This sponsorship deal has come about because our sponsors see Hull as a deprived area full of financially desperate people who are potential customers for them to exploit and are looking to use the club's status to make themselves seem more respectable than they really are.
I bet they couldn't believe their luck, here they are trying to grow their payday loans business and they get to associate themselves with a club that's just gone through a cash flow crisis, and which following a takeover is owned by a successful businessman and where the most high profile director is a man who's business sense is highly respected by everyone who follows the club (I think even Percy has said his issues are to do with football decisions he took rather than general business acumen, and he hates AP).
It's really disappointing that the owners/MM decided to accept the deal to allow the firm to trade on their respectability and that of AP, who I suspect doesn't have any involvement now he's basically DoF but who's status amongst fans will be associated with the acceptance of our sponsors as a company we can morally trade with. Frankly I think it's a betrayal by the club to the fans who haven't been given the financial foundations to know to avoid them.
:
