for me the whole amount should go to the charities

When you're in the gutter you can gaze at the stars.

I share the sentiment you express here. Luckily it is in no way comparable with the Rhinos pink shirts which were NEVER produced with the SOLE aim of aiding a charity. Which makes me wonder why you brought it up?

I welcome your love but I'd have genuinely liked you to rationally explain your feelings on the subject but clearly it's a subject you're very emotional about and unable and or unwilling to do so, so I will leave it there.

There are a number of unanswered questions about these eBay listings, of which more have now appeared for auction, new listings where the opportunity to use one of eBays charity templates was ignored again, listings which could have benefited any charity by any nominated percentage and more importantly from the addition of Gift Aid to the final total.

Since the hastily scribbled addition on Sunday lunchtime to the existing listings after these points were raised here (so we know you are watching) there has been a deafening silence from the club, a great PR opportunity missed or simple embarrassment ?

I'd personally love to know...

1. Who is authorising these sales ?
2. Who (an individual) or what (a corporate) is the beneficiary of these sales ?
3. How much from the sales is to be donated to charity ?
4. Why not use the well established eBay charity listings ?
5. Why not take advantage of the well established Gift Aid scheme ?
6. Why is the Rugby Union bank account being used ?
7. Are accounting matters so dire that the club have to flog off old kit on eBay to survive ?


These are not difficult questions to answer, any marketing employee should know the answers without recourse to senior management.

It could be a magnificent PR exercise, or a spectacular PR disaster...

I'm not defending the club but it's obvious that no one on here knows how much from the auctions will be going to charity or how much the shirts cost to manufacture, stock, sell etc.

It's a limited shirt (only 1000 IIRC) so it will cost the club more than the standard replica and -£5 for charity, does anyone know what profit is left?

Would some people be happier if the club had never done this exercise and no money had been raised for charity.

IMO only 2 & 3 are of any importance.

This sums up my feelings, especially your final sentence.

I think you may both have missed the point.

Possibly by a country mile, or more.

Precisely what I think you have done, yet I have endeavoured to explain to you why I think that to be the case.

I've never pretended to be the sharpest tool, please tell me what I missed.

He didn't want to yesterday.

But he's very angry and far more moral than us.

But I'm still not sure why.

The issue of the replica shirts was never questioned


(Not quite sure why Gareth quoted himself or who he is addressing now, maybe the lunch needs to wear off a bit)

Who else is worthy of quoting on here?

Why are the replica shirts not relevant but the free T shirts from your charitable endeavour relevant?

Do you not think the principle is the same with the replica shirts and the players issue shirts, ie that there will have been a cost of production?

Me

Then why the secrecy in declaring how much of the auction total will be donated to an un-named charity, if we are to accept that the club need to clear £37.50 in order to make a profit on the shirts then why be so coy about how much they are prepared to donate and why not state that right at the very start of the auction, the line that was hastily added on Sunday lunchtime could easily have read "All profits etc etc..." but it didn't and the new auctions still do not.

That aside I also have personal feelings about businesses making profit on the back of a charity campaign, its one thing to use a charity banner to promote and sell a mid-season shirt issue but quite another to then auction off your "charity" shirt without any further regard for that charity, lets not mince words, there was no mention of any donation from the eBay auctions until it was noted here and there is still no indication as to whether its going to be another fiver a shirt split between Macmillan and Cancer Research UK.

I feel very uneasy about supporting an organisation who is quite happy to attach themselves to a charitable trust in order for that business to generate extra income on the back of the charity, and then to totally ignore a wonderful opportunity to assist that charity further.

Of course it could always be a complete fook-up by the marketing department, we shouldn't really rule that option out completely.