[Archived] Would you be happy with a pay day loan company on the shirt

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

I've seen a picture of next season's Newcastle away strip which carries the 'Wonga' logo. Are they not of the 'QuickQuid' ilk? If so why aren't the Barcodes getting the same sort of grief the Twotters got?

Bolton weren't getting grief from outside, it was from their own fans/MP. I think most fans (and most people for that matter) view the concept of payday loan companies as being fairly repugnant, but most aren't quite bothered enough to do something about it other than verbally disapprove of it to their friends. The difference is one Bolton fan decided to start an online petition, and that immediately gave everyone a fairly effort-free but public platform to air their grievance. If 1 Blackpool or Newcastle fan had bothered to do it I think you'd have seen the same reaction. So to me the difference is Andy Walton, its amazing what 1 person can achieve if they're willing to make the effort.

[ABBEY]

If anyone's to sponsor my site I'm open for offers ... And no pride

[Majiball]

If anyone's to sponsor my site I'm open for offers ... And no pride

I'll lend you some money at 2000% apr. if you like?

[Guest Norbert]

I've seen a picture of next season's Newcastle away strip which carries the 'Wonga' logo. Are they not of the 'QuickQuid' ilk? If so why aren't the Barcodes getting the same sort of grief the Twotters got?

I think the Newcastle fans were mightily p_SSed off with the Wonga deal, especially since may have included stadium naming rights or something. The difference is they know Mike Ashley does not give a flying crap about whether he upsets them, and he'd ignore any letters of complaint etc.

And I'll loan anyone money at 1500% apr, so I'll easily undercut Majiball and that Bee Loans at the top of my screen.

[Tom]

Striking how quickly Bolton sorted another sponsorship deal after how we have struggled

[Amo]

I can only assume (happily) that you have not had dealings with the kinds of companies we are talking about.

This isn't like doing the lottery or having a beer. You will become directly targeted for more and more tailored loans pressuring you into borrowing.

You will not convince me that payday loans are a good thing and perform a service with any tangible social benefit.

You have a beer and you feel good, have too much and you become unwell. You bet a few quid on a football match and it increases the excitement, you put your mortgage on a horse you will likely lose.

You borrow even a moderate amount of money from a loan shark and you are already in trouble.

There are good thinks about moderate drinking or gambling. It's got nothing to do with patronising suggestions about moral predilection.

I'm not sure where you get the impression that I support payday loans. I've readily admitted that I would avoid them, and I willing accept that they're an extortionate business practice. I wouldn't be happy with one sponsoring my team, but once again I felt the same about Bet24. No double standards here, fella. Nonetheless, they can serve a purpose for some people who struggle to borrow. There are times where you will need money unexpectedly, be it a family emergency or a car breakdown. Does it exploit people in these situations? Possibly, but then what business doesn't? They're all designed to make money out of the consumer one way or another. Immoral they may be, but as long as they're not illegal, there's no actual wrongdoing.

Payday loans are simply a product of the economic crash, and I do think they get something of a bad rap, when they're really the last in the chain. Before payday loans, it was credit cards that used to be frowned upon.

And I'll reiterate a previous point: Will people be boycotting this year's kit because it's well documented that Nike use sweatshops? What's more unethical, people in the free world running to loan sharks because they can't keep their house in order, or impoverished children in the third world being forced to work for peanuts? I'll leave you to decide.

[Stuart]

I'm not sure where you get the impression that I support payday loans. I've readily admitted that I would avoid them, and I willing accept that they're an extortionate business practice. I wouldn't be happy with one sponsoring my team, but once again I felt the same about Bet24. No double standards here, fella. Nonetheless, they can serve a purpose for some people who struggle to borrow. There are times where you will need money unexpectedly, be it a family emergency or a car breakdown. Does it exploit people in these situations? Possibly, but then what business doesn't? They're all designed to make money out of the consumer one way or another. Immoral they may be, but as long as they're not illegal, there's no actual wrongdoing.

Payday loans are simply a product of the economic crash, and I do think they get something of a bad rap, when they're really the last in the chain. Before payday loans, it was credit cards that used to be frowned upon.

And I'll reiterate a previous point: Will people be boycotting this year's kit because it's well documented that Nike use sweatshops? What's more unethical, people in the free world running to loan sharks because they can't keep their house in order, or impoverished children in the third world being forced to work for peanuts? I'll leave you to decide.

I can see your point, although you've avoided addressing those I raised. I think that with payday loans there is no by-product. It's all about skimming money of people who really can't afford it but have no choice but to bend over. There aren't really any good bits.

Gambling, you can occasionally get a win and at the minimum it can get your heart pumping. Drinking, obvious. Nike products, you get to wear some leisure wear and you don't directly or immediately associate your purchase with the alleged sweat shop issues (assuming it wasn't some supply chain cost cutting rather than any corporate strategy). With the payday loans, there is no good part. Maybe being able to pay your rent for another month but at the same time amounting potentially unaffordable debt.

[DE.]

Well done to Bolton for doing the right thing and ditching QuickQuid. Moral issues aside, a good portion of the fanbase were clearly unhappy with the decision and it was the right thing to listen to them in this instance. I remember when our club had that kind of relationship with the community.

[92er]

I'm not sure where you get the impression that I support payday loans. I've readily admitted that I would avoid them, and I willing accept that they're an extortionate business practice. I wouldn't be happy with one sponsoring my team, but once again I felt the same about Bet24. No double standards here, fella. Nonetheless, they can serve a purpose for some people who struggle to borrow. There are times where you will need money unexpectedly, be it a family emergency or a car breakdown. CREDIT UNIONS WOULD BE A MUCH CHEAPER OPTION.Does it exploit people in these situations? Possibly, but then what business doesn't? I THINK 2000 PER CENT INTEREST SUGGESTS SOME EXPLOITATION. They're all designed to make money out of the consumer one way or another. Immoral they may be, but as long as they're not illegal, there's no actual wrongdoing.IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN THE NEAR FUTURE-AREN'T THE GOVT DEMANDING SOME KIND OF REPORT FROM THE PAYDAY LOAN COMPANIES?

APayday loans are simply a product of the economic crash, and I do think they get something of a bad rap, when they're really the last in the chain. Before payday loans, it was credit cards that used to be frowned upon.I'M SURE YOU'RE RIGHT! BUT JUST THINK ABOUT DIFFERENCE IN INTEREST RATES BETWEEN THE 2.And I'll reiterate a previous point: Will people be boycotting this year's kit because it's well documented that Nike use sweatshops? What's more unethical, people in the free world running to loan sharks because they can't keep their house in order, or impoverished children in the third world being forced to work for peanuts? I'll leave you to decide.

The other thing that strokes me is that tobacco and gambling are both addictive actions from which people can seek and be given help-though I can't ccmment on how effective the help is.

PS- not shouting, just wanted to highlight the points I was making in the context of what you had written.

[thenodrog]

I rarely agree with your posts but on this subject am with you all the way. These companies exploit the vulnerable in our society, people who do not have access to the more usual forms of credit, and seem to act in a manner which is at the edge of legality. I've never really been happy with alcohol or betting as sponsors but not felt particularly strongly about it. Pay day loan companies is a step over the line.

One could argue then that these pay day loan companies are doing a service to society. People only ever learn from their mistakes don't they?

BUT

As far as I am concerned I couldn't care a fig. I'm no bleeding heart thats for sure. I've no doubt had an odd pint of Coors way back and I'm sure to have bought some paint with Crown on the tin at some point BUT I've never bought perspex, I've never bet on line or anywhere else for that matter, I've never insured with CIS, or bought a computer off Time and McKewans is total gnats p1ss.

In fact the only sponsorship that I've taken notice of has been on a negative basis! I avoided buying any Sharp products in the 90's like the plague and even changed my phone contract to 02 once vodafone became shirt sponsors at OT! Red Bull could win every race in motor sport and it will still taste @#/? and suprisingly even shittier with vodka in it.

[thenodrog]

The spread of these loan sharks are to do with the government in a way. Look up Adrian Beecroft, who was charged by the government to produce a report about how to reform employment laws. He is an executive of Wonga.com. Now, isn't it strange that countries like Germany have tackled the issue of loan companies

charging 2,000%+ APR, and despite the occaisional bit of hot air, we do

nothing?

Same for the tax loophole issue, with the bosses of Google having a cup of tea with David Cameron and George Osbourne round Downing Street. Sorting out some non-executive director's role in their post-politics career no doubt.

I apologise for going off on a tangent, but the promotion of these odious crooks and their freedom to rip people off really annoys me.

Do you believe Blair and Broon were any different? Or do yiou just choose to believe it? Check this out and rem this double dealing also cost lives!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/oct/12/tonyblair-labourhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/oct/12/tonyblair-labour

[Ben-2000]

People seem to be confusing Pay day loan companies and Loan sharks.

Loan sharks are illegal lenders who approach their victims and exploit them. Even to a point where they march them down to a cash machine on repayment day in extreme cases!

Pay day loans are advertised and marketed legally like any other loan. It's then upto people to decide whether they think that paying back £1000.00 for a £100.00 loan is worth it. These company's are providing a service and judging by how many of them operate, there is a big demand for them for people who have got themselves in a position where they are borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.

The reason they charge high interest is because they are taking a bigger risk on people who have poor repayment history elsewhere.

In my line of work (No I don't work for a Pay Day loan co.) I have found that people want money NOW... and think about the consequences later on, therefore Credit unions etc are an inconvenience as you have to make an appointment and open a savings account.

[LeChuck]

Pay day loans are advertised and marketed legally like any other loan. It's then upto people to decide whether they think that paying back £1000.00 for a £100.00 loan is worth it. These company's are providing a service and judging by how many of them operate, there is a big demand for them for people who have got themselves in a position where they are borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.

That doesn't make it right. All they're doing is increasing the debt. Nobody uses a Pay Day loan company unless they are in financial difficulty. Their whole business model is designed to take money from vulnerable people. Demand doesn't justify the thing.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

I don't think anyone's making the point that payday loan companies are illegal, people are saying they should be. Companies like to use buzz phrases like "operating within the law" and mention the term legal a lot, but what does that actually mean? Just because something is legal doesn't mean it should be. Operating legally can mean exploiting a loophole or out of date legislation and can involve doing something every bit as unacceptable and detrimental to society as an illegal act.

There's no real demand for them. Nobody would choose to borrow money at 1000% interest. They just exploit people who are really stupid or desperate by trying to persuade them a lot through advertising. Unfortunately if you're quite clever, have a big budget behind you, and have practically unlimited access to get the message across, its possible to persuade a thick person into almost anything. If the government legalised entertainment companies to pay people to run across a road dodging traffic, some people would sign up for it. There are far more sensible ways to get access to money, but some people will always take the stupid option regardless of how vindictive and cruel it is.

In my opinion these payday loan companies are very much that, vindictive and cruel. Wouldn't it be great if all these people who set them up instead sold a product that helped society, but maybe they don't have the brains/effort for that, its bound to be harder to produce a decent product to sell to people than it is to just steal lots of money from them.

[Stuart]

http://www.independent.co.uk/money/loans-credit/payday-loans-firms-raided-by-watchdog-8201373.html