You might need to order more straw for future construction purposes after that effort.

Given the price of season tickets the Bulls had been flogging over the past few seasons, it's clear the previous administration had all those E demographics in mind as C1/C2 and D were abandoning the club in droves due to the lack of on-field success. My only surprise is they didn't prey on the vulnerable by offering those £60 season tickets via a credit loan scheme and an APR of 499% payable over 36 months. At least that way, it'd only cost the E's a tenner a month as they pay around £360 for a £60 season ticket loan. Provident Financial will sure as hell show them how it should be done instead.

Good luck with in getting more sponsors onboard. Cash Converters, Money Shop and Poundland might be interested now. Not sure about Russell Smith's Opticians as their target demographic is most definitely A and B. Those Carl Zeiss lenses and designer frames don't come cheap!

now some one has posted the documentary make your hone mind up about it, mine will never change but thats me, if you think its OK, then fare enough, but Bradford Bulls is off limits for me and my family & a lot of Friends will give it a miss but thats are choice, i will spend the brass on my home Club

Rugby League fans love a good boycott don't they?

Pathetic.

I will remember your solidarity with those less fortunate when they look to abolish disability legislation.

Then again you will think that people campaigning against things they dont agree with is pathetic.

Ok mate.



Boycotting a Rugby League team over its choice of sponsor is pathetic, yes.

Because i don't have the same view as you, how is that a boycott, my opinion is mine, you must be well off, or just don't give a toss so long as it doesn't bother you, watch the program, or are you too busy on the keyboard

You and your family refusing to go to Bradford because of their sponsor is a boycott. And its pathetic.

I saw the program when it was on. Yes they are a company that has unsavoury elements, but you show me a business that doesn't. It also doesn't change the fact that it is still a completely legal company that ultimately people have a choice to use.

I trust you are also boycotting Widnes, Wigan and Hull FC for their Magners sponsorship as alcohol kills millions every year. What about Wigan, Cas and Fev for their Probiz sponsorship, specialising in tax avoidance? Wigan for their sponsorship with Betfred and ApolloBet, ruining millions of gambling addicts lives?

Thought not.

Its totally different, my and my family do not agree with anything what as gone on with the bulls,i have not asked any person not to go so its not a very big boycott, i would not dream to tell people not to support the Bulls, i have seen what lending company's do through work, but for me and my family to miss going wont hurt anybody, my opinions are mine, the money we save will still go into RL, just a different club

You are just recycling irrelevant arguements.

Everyone has a view on what they feel is acceptable when it comes to business practice.

Why is it that you criticise some people who say that Provident is over the line they feel is acceptable.

Would you draw the line at anything or do you just not give a damn.

Oh to be so indifferent to real issues.

Yeah, thats still a boycott.

They're a loan company BG. They don't kidnap and skin children, they don't organise seal clubbing trips, they don't tie fireworks to cats. They lend money to people who ask to borrow money from them.

If folk don't like Provident thats fine. I don't like Magners cider so I don't drink it.

To boycott a Widnes game because they are sponsored by Magners however would be pathetic.

But they dont just do that there sales people specifically target vulnerable people and do take advantage of them.

They do not sit in nice plush offices saying , "Loans dealt with here", above the door.

There sales staff are effectively self employed agents with very little monitoring of who they sell too. This attracts some dodgy people ( i know investment banks do the same but that is a different matter for now).

They encourage people to take out loans they will struggle to afford.

I worked with one woman who took a loan out and asked why .

They knocked on her door and said would you like some help for christmas, get a small loan from us and the kids can have a nice present from santa for christmas.

Emotionally very good way to get a sale.

Do you know which is there best time of the year for sales,

[size=200Christmas[/size

Do you know who takes out these loans

poor desperate people on housing estates all over Northern England who want to buy their kids something for christmas ( oh i forgot all these poor people have free will, they choose to take out the loans, they are all fat, beer swilling, chain smoking dole scroungers with 50 inch plasmas who have to accept responsibility).

I regard that as pretty low and i draw the line of what i find acceptable.

As i keep saying to Bulls fans buy the shirt if you want, support the club but blank out the sponsors name and show that you might want their money but you dont agree with their methods.

It is still their choice though. And nothing to do with Bradford Bulls.



Thats completely fine. Boycotting Bradford completely however is pathetic.

Don't let common sense get in the way.

Apparently Omar Khan is the love child of Adolf Hitler, Rajas make the UK's only Kitten burgers, and Provident only take children as security on loans.

The best sales time for most businesses is christmas



They lend money to people who ask to borrow money from them.

We could come up with such criticisms of any potential sponsor, whether large or small or even enterprise of gov agency. Whether it be a supermarkets use of factory farming a manufacturer using sweatshops, the Royal Mail frequent thefts a charity even and their common chuggers and force fed religion, or the gov itself and expenses abuse. We can come up with a raging criticism of anyone.

Lets save our real fury for those that want to put money into our sport.

And EWWENORFOLK is an ostrich or should that be a sheep. baa, baa

Maybe Bradford Bulls should change their name to to the Bradford Ewes to reflect the attitude of their fans. Then again maybe i am being too hard on them, there are probably plenty of decent Bradford fans who feel uncomfortable about it and it is just the sheep who post on rlfansforum.

Quote Many Newcastle fans are furious with the plans to have Wonga emblazoned on the front of the famous black and white stripe shirts. Newcastle fan Michael Martin, editor of the True Faith fanzine, warned the proposed tie-up would be bad for the club. Sponsorship: Blackpool's shirts are emblazoned with the Wonga logo He told the Daily Mirror: 'The people who run Newcastle, for the fans, have a social responsibility. 'I would love them to honestly answer one question: Would you, Mike Ashley [Newcastle United owner, seriously recommend borrowing money from Wonga at those interest rates? If you can't answer yes then they shouldn't be our shirt sponsors. 'Newcastle is being used to normalise their product. It cheapens and tarnishes the Newcastle United brand. I wouldn't want my logo next to them, so what do other sponsors think? 'This is close to breaking point for me, the one that breaks the camel's back.' Read more: www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/card ... z2C343WhZm Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook '" Football fans in more socially aware than rugby league fans shocker.

Quote Many Newcastle fans are furious with the plans to have Wonga emblazoned on the front of the famous black and white stripe shirts. Newcastle fan Michael Martin, editor of the True Faith fanzine, warned the proposed tie-up would be bad for the club. Sponsorship: Blackpool's shirts are emblazoned with the Wonga logo He told the Daily Mirror: 'The people who run Newcastle, for the fans, have a social responsibility. 'I would love them to honestly answer one question: Would you, Mike Ashley [Newcastle United owner, seriously recommend borrowing money from Wonga at those interest rates? If you can't answer yes then they shouldn't be our shirt sponsors. 'Newcastle is being used to normalise their product. It cheapens and tarnishes the Newcastle United brand. I wouldn't want my logo next to them, so what do other sponsors think? 'This is close to breaking point for me, the one that breaks the camel's back.' Read more: www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/card ... z2C343WhZm Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook '" Football fans in more socially aware than rugby league fans shocker.

Or maybe, just maybe, you are over reacting?

I suppose your attitude to the likes of Wonga and PF depends on what you think of other people.
If you believe people have intelligence, thinking capacity and should have a freedom of choice, then you're OK with these comanies.

If you think people don't have intelligence, that you should think for them, and you should make their choices for them, then you're against them.

or maybe i just work with a lot of poor and vulnerable people with big financial problems which are exploited by dodgy loans companies

Quote ="Richie"I suppose your attitude to the likes of Wonga and PF depends on what you think of other people. If you believe people have intelligence, thinking capacity and should have a freedom of choice, then you're OK with these comanies. If you think people don't have intelligence, that you should think for them, and you should make their choices for them, then you're against them.'" Maybe i think that clever people take advantage of vulnerable people. Maybe i think about what i post rather than just have an opinion. this woman maybe needed someone other than Provident sales reps to think for her. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19748048

Quote ="Richie"I suppose your attitude to the likes of Wonga and PF depends on what you think of other people. If you believe people have intelligence, thinking capacity and should have a freedom of choice, then you're OK with these comanies. If you think people don't have intelligence, that you should think for them, and you should make their choices for them, then you're against them.'" Maybe i think that clever people take advantage of vulnerable people. Maybe i think about what i post rather than just have an opinion. this woman maybe needed someone other than Provident sales reps to think for her. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19748048

Which is ultimately still their own choice.

see the link in my last post. I would argue that the woman involved was incapable of making an informed choice.

Maybe it would be alright to say to the old woman who lives next door her roof needs fixing and i can do it for £2000. Does not really matter if i can do it for £250 as it is still ultimately her choice.

Ultimately, yes.

It still has nothing to do with Bradford though.