No mate, it meets every criteria. You seem to have decided that there is good use of capital for making money and bad use of capital for making money, and if it's bad use then it doesn't get to wear the badge.

That's nonsense.

It is what it is irrespective of the moral judgement we make of it.

I'm not making any judgement on them as a sponsor here. The example you gave of people dying on roads, and is it the driver's fault or the network's? Well it's the driver's. They have personal responsibility for their actions, but those accidents are a part of the system in place today no matter who caused it. I don't blame capitalism for the existence of these companies. It's not a necessary condition that they exist. But they do exist, and they're part of the deal as it stands today. We don't get to pretend they're a whole other thing entirely.

I said no such thing. "Capitalism" can no more do good or bad things than can any other amorphous concept or system. It is people who do good or bad things, in it's name or using or abusing its system. Same as my roads analogy.

That's why I said "seem", because I couldn't think of any other reason to disavow this financial services company from the capitalist family. It is what it is.

I will be buying and wearing the new bulls shirt and I also would like to thank Provident for supporting our team, the company is no worse than the banks that have helped put this country in the state it is in now. Whilst you may disagree with their work practices it is a legal company trading in the UK and employing a lot of people in Bradford.

I will be wearing the new shirt because it is my club's shirt. Design, quality and other issues are totally irrelevant.

I always thought it was rappers?

People kill rappers?

Tupac and Biggie didn't commit suicide.

I have enjoyed reading the hand wringing socialists in this thread. On the basis of their argument we shouldn't have accepted JCT600 as a sponsor as they arrange car credit that folk can't afford. Nor should we have encouraged Tetley to sponsor the main stand knowing what alcohol can do to your liver.

All I know is we have a Labour MP heavily involved in running the club and clearly he doesn't see a problem.

As with most things, if in doubt blame Thatcher!

This thread has just been ruined by the usual plethora of pompous bores IMO.

If you don't like the sponsor then tough titties. It is here for 3 years, it has safeguarded our team and it may well help make us successful again.

I would take a sponsorship from the Jimmy Savile Foundation if it meant us winning trophies again.

In fact, I hope we get Wonga on the sleeves, Cheque Centre on the back (top) and the Money Shop on the bottom. That would really annoy people.

They choke to death on the plastic packaging?

Nar, people having differing opinions are what good threads are made of. It's been ruined by the fact that people on RLFans tend not to be able to argue their way out of a paper bag, and confuse repetition of content free, straw man nonsense with debate.

Anyway, compared to where we were just a few weeks ago, I think it's brilliant that we're able to nitpick between ourselves over whether we think a sponsor is appropriate. Who knows, soon we might end up actually having threads about what actually happens on the field!?!

Yeah that pretty much sums it up for me too.

Well, as I said on VT, I've watched BBC's Panorama and it was very Michael Moore-esq. Edited with music ques to fit an agenda and lacking in anything other than the thinnest of flimsy arguments.