Shirt sponsor

[Silas]

31 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

For those arguing that vaping is less harmful than smoking,...

I'm done arguing, I'm just stating it as fact now:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/28/vaping-is-95-safer-than-smoking-claims-public-health-england

British Medical Journal the same, as I've already said, NHS too.

The rest of points on it made by people fair enough, all seem valid.

Just interesting how people rate the different "bad" substances.

The obesity/sugar/diabetes crisis in youngsters is far more harmful at present than vaping imo, but no one would bat an eyelid if Mars or Snickers was going on the shirt. Hard to know where to draw the line. 

I suppose there was a fair bit of pushback on Macdonald's and Coke sponsoring recent football competitions. 

Just you take out alcohol, tobacco, gambling, all sugary products, all fatty products, all loan companies....then what you left with? Maybe cars? Nope, they're polluting the planet so can't do that till they all go electric. 

There's a hell of a lot clubs that need sponsors and a dwindling pool of companies to oblige, particularly after the pandemic.

[47er]

1 hour ago, Silas said:

Different World an eternity ago.

If you picked up today's scientists/medical professionals and plonked them back then they'd identify smoking as bad in about 2 days. (Also a lot of corruption back then).

They've been looking at vaping in depth for a decade plus now. 

Totally get the encouraging children/crap branding angle though. 

Vaping creates addiction to nicotine. How can that possibly healthy?

Its less damaging to the lungs because you don't get the tar, but its not healthy.

Far from it.

[JBiz]

The difference between inhaling something burning, and something in vapour / evaporated is night and day.

Whilst Id agree with anyone that the legality of nicotine is worth discussion - vaping is inherently safer. 
 

That’s a fact, not opinion.

[47er]

Just now, JBiz said:

The difference between inhaling something burning, and something in vapour / evaporated is night and day.

Whilst Id agree with anyone that the legality of nicotine is worth discussion - vaping is inherently safer. 
 

That’s a fact, not opinion.

Another fact---safer is not the same as safe.

[JBiz]

Just now, 47er said:

Another fact---safer is not the same as safe.

Comparing it to smack? Is that anything other than ridiculous?

If we’re using our own experience- the advert we used when winning the league was for a product that’s far more difficult for me to kick.

[Silas]

2 minutes ago, 47er said:

Vaping creates addiction to nicotine. How can that possibly healthy?

Its less damaging to the lungs because you don't get the tar, but its not healthy.

Far from it.

Jesus Christ, what is with everyone tonight? Second person to say this.

I have never once even insinuated vaping is "healthy".

Let's use the term harmful for clarification. It was said vaping wasn't less harmful than smoking. 

I'm saying it is "less harmful", categorically, it's not even close (95%), and pretty much every medical organization agrees unanimously.

And yet I'm being called out for it. 🤔

Not smoking, and not vaping are both by far the best choices anyone can make in their lives. Because, as has been said, nicotine is one of the most addictive substances around.

Some have said sugar may be close but I won't take us down that rabbit hole.

[Dreams of 1995]

My issue isn’t with the product it is selling but let’s be honest the brand name itself is just….horrible 

“Totally Wicked” sounds awful to be honest. Just screams cheap and crap 

I don’t think advertising vaping to young people is a good thing though but to be honest you only need to go into a corner shop nowadays and they are front and centre stage of the counter. I actually think those vapes are pretty good, and they make social smoking that bit more enjoyable because you aren’t left with the terrible taste a cigarette leaves and your clothes don’t smell of it 

[47er]

7 minutes ago, Silas said:

Jesus Christ, what is with everyone tonight? Second person to say this.

I have never once even insinuated vaping is "healthy".

Let's use the term harmful for clarification. It was said vaping wasn't less harmful than smoking. 

I'm saying it is "less harmful", categorically, it's not even close (95%), and pretty much every medical organization agrees unanimously.

And yet I'm being called out for it. 🤔

Not smoking, and not vaping are both by far the best choices anyone can make in their lives. Because, as has been said, nicotine is one of the most addictive substances around.

Some have said sugar may be close but I won't take us down that rabbit hole.

Gee you're a bit sensitive aren't you?If its not healthy, let's not assist it eh?

[Ianrally]

As a smoker from the age of 16 to 70 I have total sympathy with all who try to stop. It is definitely the hardest thing I’ve ever done. I tried patches, gum, mist spray, none worked for me, but never vaping, only because I’d seen too many quit cigs but get fixed onto vaping permanently. That was a personal choice and vaping is one method recommended by the NHS as an aid to stop smoking. I don’t think any method is 100% guaranteed to work, and are they all safe? 
That’s the $6400 question. I stopped using an NHS recommended product called Champix. It worked  and I’ve been a smoke free zone for two years, but Champix has since been removed from the list because it has been found that it may cause cancer in certain people. A double edged sword then. 

[47er]

13 minutes ago, JBiz said:

Comparing it to smack? Is that anything other than ridiculous?

If we’re using our own experience- the advert we used when winning the league was for a product that’s far more difficult for me to kick.

Sorry to hear you are addicted to alcohol Biz. Good luck with fighting that.

It doesn't mean its alright to advertise something else addictive though.

[rog of the rovers]

Certainly been a good advertising campaign already! 
 

4 pages is more than most pre match threads these days! 😂

Edited January 18, 2022 by rog of the rovers

[tomphil]

3 hours ago, JBiz said:

Only problem I have is that part in bold, as it’ll ultimately end up meaning people are addicted to nicotine without even ever smoking.

Similar to the alcopops, but I guess this probably is hypocritical, as I enjoy the odd bitter lemon IPA

Bitter lemon flavored ale ?   It just had to be you.. 😂

Think i'd rather vape to be honest.

[toogs]

1 hour ago, Silas said:

Some have said sugar may be close but I won't take us down that rabbit hole

Nah, Pringles are worse. 

[Butty]

This is class. We’ve had nothing to moan about for months so the first opportunity some are taking 😂 Recoverite have messed up, could the club have been able to get a different sponsor sorted? Maybe. Was there people whinging when Totally Wicked were announced as our training kit sponsor? Not that I saw! We’re gunna have it on our shirts till the end of the season, it is what it is. It’s no worse than those clubs who have gambling sponsors. Are any kids going to look at our sponsor and want to start vaping? I highly doubt it. 

[JHRover]

If we put aside the question of whether Rovers could or couldn't have forseen/prevented this issue earlier - either by not getting into bed with Recoverite to begin with or by reviewing things in the summer rather than allowing us to get half way through the season - the idea that they can just stick something over the top of the existing sponsor logo and expect people to buy it I think absolutely stinks.

There's absolutely no interest in making the club even appear professional and projecting a positive image of it. I mean most of us see it with the corner shop operation at Ewood on matchdays and the rapidly deteriorating state of Ewood - not an ounce of pride from those running the club - but to expect players and fans to represent the club wearing replica shirts as shown in those photos - just couldn't give a stuff could they?

Going back to the days of Probiz stickers being slapped on the kits or the generic stock training gear made to look like an away kit. Just a couldn't be arsed attitude at a time when momentum and performances are such that any club with ambition in this position would be able to attract much better sponsorship and would ensure it was presented well.

 

[Sparks Rover]

30 minutes ago, JHRover said:

If we put aside the question of whether Rovers could or couldn't have forseen/prevented this issue earlier - either by not getting into bed with Recoverite to begin with or by reviewing things in the summer rather than allowing us to get half way through the season - the idea that they can just stick something over the top of the existing sponsor logo and expect people to buy it I think absolutely stinks.

There's absolutely no interest in making the club even appear professional and projecting a positive image of it. I mean most of us see it with the corner shop operation at Ewood on matchdays and the rapidly deteriorating state of Ewood - not an ounce of pride from those running the club - but to expect players and fans to represent the club wearing replica shirts as shown in those photos - just couldn't give a stuff could they?

Going back to the days of Probiz stickers being slapped on the kits or the generic stock training gear made to look like an away kit. Just a couldn't be arsed attitude at a time when momentum and performances are such that any club with ambition in this position would be able to attract much better sponsorship and would ensure it was presented well.

 

As if you couldn't get Euro Garages on the front....peanuts to them and potentially a Premier league club....our commercial dept has been shit for years.

[RevidgeBlue]

4 hours ago, Tom said:

Smoking was considered healthy once upon a time wasn’t it? Not convinced we know the full effects of vaping and social vapers yet 

I have particular issue with this one as the logo and branding looks to be aimed at younger people, lots of youngsters vape who probably never smoked to begin with.

On top of that the logo is shit and the patchwork job looks awful 

That's my view on it as well exactly Tom.

I'm fairly sure that in years to come vaping will be deemed to be harmful in much the same way as smoking and that the Companies in question will face litigation.

The people that started it off won't care as they'll have made their millions and will probably be long gone.

Meanwhile the  history books will probably look back on this as a particularly ignominious period in our shirt sponsorship history.

Out of interest, any other professional football Clubs been desperate enough to have a vaping company as their shirt sponsor?

 

[Sparks Rover]

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

That's my view on it as well exactly Tom.

I'm fairly sure that in years to come vaping will be deemed to be harmful in much the same way as smoking and that the Companies in question will face litigation.

Pulmonary Blebs 

Waggot is a Bleb

[AspRover]

Honestly I don't have a strong opinion on totally wicked or vaping in general but by the gods I enjoyed being the club with a non controversial shirt sponsor. The recoverite logo colour coordinated and looked good with the shirt design and even though I still don't really know what recoverite actually do at least they weren't a Macau based internet casino or whatever. It was genuinely good pr for the club. This won't be.

[Butty]

59 minutes ago, AspRover said:

Honestly I don't have a strong opinion on totally wicked or vaping in general but by the gods I enjoyed being the club with a non controversial shirt sponsor. The recoverite logo colour coordinated and looked good with the shirt design and even though I still don't really know what recoverite actually do at least they weren't a Macau based internet casino or whatever. It was genuinely good pr for the club. This won't be.

Wouldn’t worry about it to much it’s only till the end of the season. They’ve been sponsoring our training gear for a while now and nobody was bothered. They’ll be queuing up to sponsor us when we’re in the prem next season 😉

[Upside Down]

4 hours ago, Silas said:

I'm done arguing, I'm just stating it as fact now:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/28/vaping-is-95-safer-than-smoking-claims-public-health-england

British Medical Journal the same, as I've already said, NHS too.

The rest of points on it made by people fair enough, all seem valid.

Just interesting how people rate the different "bad" substances.

The obesity/sugar/diabetes crisis in youngsters is far more harmful at present than vaping imo, but no one would bat an eyelid if Mars or Snickers was going on the shirt. Hard to know where to draw the line. 

I suppose there was a fair bit of pushback on Macdonald's and Coke sponsoring recent football competitions. 

Just you take out alcohol, tobacco, gambling, all sugary products, all fatty products, all loan companies....then what you left with? Maybe cars? Nope, they're polluting the planet so can't do that till they all go electric. 

There's a hell of a lot clubs that need sponsors and a dwindling pool of companies to oblige, particularly after the pandemic.

 

4 hours ago, JBiz said:

The difference between inhaling something burning, and something in vapour / evaporated is night and day.

Whilst Id agree with anyone that the legality of nicotine is worth discussion - vaping is inherently safer. 
 

That’s a fact, not opinion.

It's still advertising nicotine products to children.

Whether or not they are more or less harmful than actual cigarettes is a mute point.

[JacknOry]

Even the branding is obviously aimed at kids/young adults. Totally Wicked man. Is something I guess they imagine kids would think sounds 'cool'. 

Vaping is much healthier than smoking for sure and it helped me kick smoking. I now do neither. However, while it is a great aid for smokers trying to quit, in reverse it can bring kids into smoking. They start on vapes, get the nicotine addiction then on occasion when they have no juice, coils or whatnot - what do they do?

Edited January 19, 2022 by JacknOry

[bluebruce]

13 hours ago, J*B said:

From what I’m told, allegedly there’s still a bill outstanding from Totally Wicked for the training range and stadium branding. If that was the case, I wonder how much - if anything - they’ve paid for this new sponsorship.

Are you saying we have cancelled a deal with a sponsor because they won't pay what they owe on time, to replace them with a sponsor who won't pay what they owe on time?

[Herbie6590]

10 hours ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Was there not something mentioned about recoverite being involved in the physio / recovery side of the club? I wonder if the rumours around the “skeleton staff” at Ewood means they weren’t being involved how they would like to have been, or weren’t receiving the data they should have been getting or something 

It’s strange for a brand to pull out without going bust or struggling financially. Recoverite must have good reason…

👆🏻👍🏻

[Riversider28]

I think more than anything the reason that people are getting into such a lather over this sudden change in sponsors is that our now cheap looking shirts are going to be plastered all over Sky for the next few weeks at least. I for one find this very embarrassing and it somewhat takes the shine off our fantastic run of results and current league position. Totally Ticked.