It's okay to say that in hindsight, but I don't think that's true, myself. People aren't taking out these loans for the fun of their health, they're not doing it for 50 inch televisions (although I'm not saying that doesn't happen to a small degree(. Mainly people take out these loans for the same reason a person opts to work in a sweatshop, because it's that or they lose their house, can't feed their family, can't manage for the time being.

For the most part, people who take out these loans are doing it for their survival. It is wishful thinking and it is stupid on their part, that's understood, but the reason people turn to such companies is to get by. Not too unlike people who work in sweatshops because that's their only means of eating and living for the time being.

I don't think anybody disputes that it's stupid to use companies like Provident, what the rest of us are saying is that while yes there is responsibility for those who take the loans, that doesn't excuse the company for preying on the vulnerable like a kettle of vultures. You seem to think it's some sort of dichotomy whereby you either support the company or you support reckless borrowing, the reality is that you can be against both.

The minimum wage and Somalian porn argument was made to demonstrate that people consenting/choosing doesn't mean the people/companies preying on them are right in what they're doing.

I thought my argument, while being highly debatable, was pretty clear. Obviously not.

And make sure you read the rebuttal from Provident on their website, rather than resort to listening to only one side of the argument.

Also, they don't "sell to anybody". You have to prove you're able to afford the repayments. However, the way some people prove their capability of being able to pay are questionable in themselves.

But it's not either or, and that's the point. Just because people recklessly borrow money, and need to be responsible for their own actions, doesn't mean that a company that preys on said people is excused for what they do.

I will watch the program, all the facts are supposedly filmed by some one working there, then we can decide for ourselves

What do you mean "prey"

I'm pretty sure the person has to go to Provident and ask for the loan. Provident will then say yes we will give you the money but state CLEARLY if you do not pay it back you will be charge 4000%.

If that person signs anyway and can't afford the payment, as harsh as it is, that is their own fault. These vulnerable people have many other options to go to than a payday loan company.

Do you have a problem with Barclays pumping millions into the Premier league when they made people pay for a service without them knowing. Pretty sure that counts as theft or fraud. Do you refuse watch SKY sports which is owned by the same man at the centre of the phone hacking scandal. Do you also refuse to watch the BBC that is currently at accused of allowing many children to be abused?

So what your saying is sod_em, it wont effect me, typical, when your team when bang and couldn't raise the brass to pay its debts why didn't they approach this company for a lone to pay the debts off, im pretty sure they would have given you a good rate of interest.

Didn't you read the last page? You're recycling a flawed argument that's already been put to me - and answered.

What I mean by prey is exactly as the dictionary definition is(To victimise or make a profit at someone else's expense). The company, and others like it, prey on the most vulnerable of society. The fact that people [ichoose[/i to take out loans with them doesn't excuse what they do.

I don't know how many times I can say what I'm saying before it's understood. Am I not being clear in what I'm saying? I thought I was being clear. Do I need to write out my posts in coloured crayons for them to be understood?

Hallelujah at last, the quaint village yorkshire morality that has held rl back for 130yrs has now gone,surely this will now allow more companies to now look to sponsor/invest in RL.

Great news for Bradford and the game in general and I really cant believe people are criticising it. £300,000 a year is not to be sniffed at by any RL club, particularly Bradford after their recent troubles and as far as I recall they struggled to get a sponsor at all the last time they were looking for one. It is certainly at the higher levels for sponsorship in RL and really will help Bradford to become more of a force again.

is this another ''lets all rejoice in the Bulls good news' threads and if you dont you are a disgrace and not a true RL fan kind of thing ?

Brilliant news for Bradford, i'm so glad that after all the terrible things their club and wonderful fans have gone through this is another step in the right direction for this great club as it takes another step back to its rightful place as RL's flagship club....all hail the Bulls !!!!!!!!!!

I saw an add for this type of company and in not so small letters it states the interest, and to be honest only a complete moron would use these companies, and then to complain when they charge you an absolute fortune proves that you cant fix stupid!

To be brutally honest for 99.99% of the population in this country, your situation good or bad is of your own making!

These companies dont make people take out a loan and pay stupid amounts, its not difficult to curb your spending, we have all been in some level of debt in our lives, its quite simple cut out the stuff you dont need, (fags, beer, magazines, sky, gym), christ you can have cornflakes for your tea for a week its not that bad! Spend what you earn, it really isnt difficult to do.

A club that has been to the brink has managed to negotiate a cracking deal and people complain!

Only in RL!