• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Summer 2022 Transfer Window

If we'd sold them anywhere else would people even bat an eyelash?

It's a non-story, IMO.
 
M
Paddingtonwolf said:
Winky thing means fuck all. It's us doing what we need to.
Click to expand...
FFS. Although we appear to agree on something, why are you arguing against it or me?
We both clearly think that we have an ‘alternative’ way of loaning a player and that if he does well we can bring him back.
Whether doing ‘well’ is good enough that we see him as part of our first team [so we buy him] or that we sell him directly from Grasshoppers becomes an accounting issue only. My guess is that if it is the latter the Grasshoppers then subsequently pay a similar amount for another of our low value punts.
 
These players are never going to be purchased back so its a pointless thing to argue about really. We may have put such a clause in there but one of these 2 has just done absolutely nothing for Tondela FFS
 
I’m not arguing. It’s what we need to do with new rules. I’m not a fan of it by the way.
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
Of course it is.
Click to expand...

Oh, have I missed some evidence that the club are capable of negotiating deals that are particularly clever? Feel free to enlighten me.

I seem to recall you were indignantly confident that the Adama deal was going to work in our favour thanks to shadowy agreements, how'd that one work out
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
It didn’t. Our people are twats. I’m disappointed too.
Click to expand...

But still faith that this is going to end up earning us money?

At the end of the day, Fosun have had the ability to invest in an open, straight forward way, and haven't.

They've had opportunities to use any of their 100+ companies to sponsor us, but haven't.

Using young players and sister clubs to invest money is less efficient than easier methods they've already ignored. It ain't happening
 
Del Woppio said:
But still faith that this is going to end up earning us money?

At the end of the day, Fosun have had the ability to invest in an open, straight forward way, and haven't.

They've had opportunities to use any of their 100+ companies to sponsor us, but haven't.

Using young players and sister clubs to invest money is less efficient than easier methods they've already ignored. It ain't happening
Click to expand...
You're arguing a point about Grasshoppers that absolutely no one has ever made or will ever make.
 
Boozad said:
Yep.
Click to expand...

Iptv in general, or just for football? Or in a like 'piracy funds terrorists' kind of aversion?

I can only speak for me, but I can't really go to games, my life doesn't allow for it. I can generally manage to make myself available to watch the games on a foreign stream though, and so that feeling pretty guilt free about.

Watching the streams doesn't cost the club any of my cash because I wasn't going anyway. The game or two that I am able and choose to attend, I do so despite knowing I've got a stream. So streaming in and of itself isn't a barrier. Tbh I don't think in a binary choice between 'going' and 'streaming', that the latter ever wins, because they're vastly different experiences. I think those that can't go will stream, but streaming won't prevent 'going' in any significant way. And if a few do decide to stream instead of go, we've got 10,000 people on the waiting list to ensure the club still gets its seats filled. I guess I am technically stealing from South African sports networks, but then I'm also watching the adverts and helping with brand exposure.

I'm not naive enough to think it's not a 'victimless crime', it's illegal and probably largely immoral. But actually I think it's less immoral than charging a parent and a kid the best part of a hundred quid to go and watch a game of football, which is what it cost me last time I took my kid.
 
Del Woppio said:
Iptv in general, or just for football? Or in a like 'piracy funds terrorists' kind of aversion?

I can only speak for me, but I can't really go to games, my life doesn't allow for it. I can generally manage to make myself available to watch the games on a foreign stream though, and so that feeling pretty guilt free about.

Watching the streams doesn't cost the club any of my cash because I wasn't going anyway. The game or two that I am able and choose to attend, I do so despite knowing I've got a stream. So streaming in and of itself isn't a barrier. Tbh I don't think in a binary choice between 'going' and 'streaming', that the latter ever wins, because they're vastly different experiences. I think those that can't go will stream, but streaming won't prevent 'going' in any significant way. And if a few do decide to stream instead of go, we've got 10,000 people on the waiting list to ensure the club still gets its seats filled. I guess I am technically stealing from South African sports networks, but then I'm also watching the adverts and helping with brand exposure.

I'm not naive enough to think it's not a 'victimless crime', it's illegal and probably largely immoral. But actually I think it's less immoral than charging a parent and a kid the best part of a hundred quid to go and watch a game of football, which is what it cost me last time I took my kid.
Click to expand...
Without wanting to justify the it too much I agree with this. I'm also more likely to stay engaged if I can actually view the product and usually end up buying some merch along the way
 
Fuck me we need to sign some players.

Of course people, me included, will be annoyed at others stealing to watch what I pay nearly a grand to watch.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top