[Archived] Should Dunny Have Come Home?

[American]

Circle? So fans get their money from David Dunn?

[Rainmaker]

Circle? So fans get their money from David Dunn?

Eventually, yes

Fans get their money from their employers which get their money from customers (like DD) who get their money from their employers that get their money from their customers (like the fans). This is the short route, but it is in teality much much longer

[Eddie]

And where do the fans get their money?

That "money trail" goes in a pretty big circle....

Not going to agree with that I'm afraid. Firstly, the fans are always key to sports and finances. Secondly, the trickle down effect from rich to poor when looking at it even on an individual sense is usually so small it isn't even worth looking at. David Dunn's contribution to the local economy (unless you are thinking of things like morale) is minimal; the contribution of the local population to David Dunn's finances is huge.

[T4E]

******Googlism for: david dunn

david dunn is seemingly unable to be hurt

Sadly a reference to Bruce Willis' character in the film "Unbreakable", not David Dunn the footballer.

If only.

[American]

Eddie and I agree - I'm looking for the ice starting to come up from the ground!!

[Rainmaker]

Not going to agree with that I'm afraid. Firstly, the fans are always key to sports and finances. Secondly, the trickle down effect from rich to poor when looking at it even on an individual sense is usually so small it isn't even worth looking at. David Dunn's contribution to the local economy (unless you are thinking of things like morale) is minimal; the contribution of the local population to David Dunn's finances is huge.

I think you've misunderstood me. I'm not playing down the fans contribution.

What I'm trying to illustrate is that Sky-money is Sky-money, not fan-money. I'm saying that arguing that the Sky money is fan money becouse sky sells to fans is a fallacious argument. Cause if you look at where the money comes from, i.e. follow the money trail, you'll end up going in a circle.

Anyways, this is way off topic

Edited July 8, 2006 by Rainmaker

[Eddie]

I think you've misunderstood me. I'm not playing down the fans contribution.

What I'm trying to illustrate is that Sky-money is Sky-money, not fan-money. I'm saying that arguing that the Sky money is fan money becouse sky sells to fans is a fallacious argument. Cause if you look at where the money comes from, i.e. follow the money trail, you'll end up going in a circle.

Anyways, this is way off topic

It isn't though. Sky only pays that money to the leagues because it boosts their subscription to have premiership football, so it is because of the fans that Sky are willing to stump up that much cash and it is the subscription fees that are used.

American, great minds think alike...sometimes.

[American]

How is it a fallacious argument? If sky wasn't selling subscriptions on the back of having football, they wouldn't be paying so much for the rights. Media companies don't pay big bucks for rights because they want to give away their money.

Saying the fans don't pay Dunn's wages is the fallacious argument. The whole "business" of football is driven by the fans. If no one were watching sky or attending the matches, he'd be lucky to get 100 a month to play a game.

[Rainmaker]

How is it a fallacious argument? If sky wasn't selling subscriptions on the back of having football, they wouldn't be paying so much for the rights. Media companies don't pay big bucks for rights because they want to give away their money.

Saying the fans don't pay Dunn's wages is the fallacious argument. The whole "business" of football is driven by the fans. If no one were watching sky or attending the matches, he'd be lucky to get 100 a month to play a game.

And the fans wouldn't have money to pour into football if they didn't have jobs, hence the fans' employers pay Dunns (and other footballers') wages. Just now, I to one step furhter down the trail. More steps could be taken, all the way round the circle.

[T4E]

No, the employer pays the fan for services rendered - the fan from there chooses to spend some of their money on following football. You can't just remove the fan from the equation - without the fan the employers money would never have been diverted in that direction. Equally, without the fans work ethic, the money would not have appeared in the first place.

If anything, the fan plays a bigger role in this than is being credited.

[Wolverine]

Yes

[Rainmaker]

No, the employer pays the fan for services rendered - the fan from there chooses to spend some of their money on following football. You can't just remove the fan from the equation - without the fan the employers money would never have been diverted in that direction. Equally, without the fans work ethic, the money would not have appeared in the first place.

If anything, the fan plays a bigger role in this than is being credited.

Why do you think I'm taking the fan out of the equation? I'm not

I'm just saying that on the moneys way to the players it passes through several middle men, the fans are one. Some people are removing other middle men, like Sky. I'm just saying that remomig sky and giving the fans credit for suppling that money is like the example I made in my previous post.

The money needs the middlemen to get from A to B.

Players - Club - Sky etc - fans - employers - customers - and so on and so on

The above is a simplification, but I hope it illustrates my point.

And for the last time

I'M NOT REMOVING THE FANS

Edited July 8, 2006 by Rainmaker

[Tony Diamond Inc]

The question is should Dunny come home, it's such a hot potatato that it deserves it's own thread. Perhaps we should call it ...............' Should Dunny come home ?'

What does everyone think?

Edited July 8, 2006 by Tony Diamond Inc

[orwot]

The question is should Dunny come home, it's such a hot potatato that it deserves it's own thread. Perhaps we should call it ...............' Should Dunny come home ?'

What does everyone think?

would get the spouts out of the way...

[T4E]

Why do you think I'm taking the fan out of the equation? I'm not

I'm just saying that on the moneys way to the players it passes through several middle men, the fans are one. Some people are removing other middle men, like Sky. I'm just saying that remomig sky and giving the fans credit for suppling that money is like the example I made in my previous post.

The money needs the middlemen to get from A to B.

Players - Club - Sky etc - fans - employers - customers - and so on and so on

The above is a simplification, but I hope it illustrates my point.

And for the last time

I'M NOT REMOVING THE FANS

Thats exactly the point. The fact that you are referring to the fans as "middle-men" outside the the "A to B" route is removing the fans.

The middle-man is B - the employers being A and end beneficiaries being C. Without B, the path from A to C is non-existent. Without B, the money remains with A and never finds its way to C.

[Alan75]

Moved from transfer to Should DD come home

[Rainmaker]

Thats exactly the point. The fact that you are referring to the fans as "middle-men" outside the the "A to B" route is removing the fans.

The middle-man is B - the employers being A and end beneficiaries being C. Without B, the path from A to C is non-existent. Without B, the money remains with A and never finds its way to C.

And without A there is nothing that can go to C... This is a circle

To get the money from the employers to the clubs it passes through the fans, true. I've never negated that. They are a middleman between the emloyers and the club so to say. This is the fans contributing.

In the Sky situation Sky is the middleman between the subscribers (fans) and the clubs. The money route to the fans are the same in this case. Yet in this case it i somehow "correct" to negate the Sky middleman...

English is not my native language, but I don't believe there shold be any problems deciphering what I wrote.

[krislu]

Jealousy is a sad, sad thing.

so is bragging about how high income and intelligence one got, which luxury hotels one is staying at and how much £££ it's possible to spend shopping at fansy designer stores....

[speeeeeeedie]

I was only joking about Dunny chatting up DMF's bird. I've heard plenty of stories about lads getting the hump wth Dunn when he walked into a boozer. Most footballers are arrogant children in social situations especially when they are with friends/fellow footballers. Most are very nice and normal in one on one situations. They seem to revert to their pre-footballer persona.

DMF is suffering from a case of East Lancs disease; success is frowned upon. A local lad makes it big, lives the dream, makes loads of money and he chastised for forgetting his roots/being big time.

Should he come back? If he's on offer why not. We'll get him for free, offer him a Jeffers sytle contract and watch Tugay's replacement light up the place.

Edited July 10, 2006 by speeeeeeedie

[dillo_dillo]

He played full 90min!! Injury FREE!!

http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk/mail/b...-name_page.html

.... D. Johnson is Big-Club's new captain!

[Presty On Tour]

a few assists too.

[ihateburnley]

Don't get Revidge started on Damien Johnson....

Like Ricky said, I think a loan move for Dunn could benefit both parties. From what I've heard, David would love a return to the club and we are crying out for a bit of creativity in central midfield. If we could get Dunn on loan, put him through his paces in training and get him fit, then who knows - maybe he will eventually become the player he once was for us. He was excellent when on top of his game.

He's still only 26, and his record of 30 goals in 120 games was excellent for us. A midfielder who can get one goal every four games could be priceless for a club like us.

[mode_m]

I would love to see Dunn back! Especially on a free transfer.

[ianb]

What is an assist?

[joey_big_nose]

What is an assist?

The player who provides the pass/cross/etc to create the goal. In pretty common usage both sides of the Atlantic.