Re: 2011 Jersey : Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:36 am  

Gurus_Beard wrote: If only people researched first. Not difficult. http://www.bradfordbulls.co.uk/news/442 ... TH%20BULLS but where in that does it say, they are still your MAIN shirt sponsor, it just says they've extended sponsorship! and having worked for you boys last year i know that they have lots of different areas they sponsor.

Gurus_Beard wrote: If only people researched first. Not difficult. http://www.bradfordbulls.co.uk/news/442 ... TH%20BULLS but where in that does it say, they are still your MAIN shirt sponsor, it just says they've extended sponsorship! and having worked for you boys last year i know that they have lots of different areas they sponsor.

Re: 2011 Jersey : Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:37 am  

DILLIGAF wrote:

It's not been announced afaik. But then, was it ever actually announced that they wouldn't be the main shirt sponsor?

as guru pointed out they announced extension to current deal to cover 2011 season last year. But since then someone found a link to a trade website advertising for a new main shirt sponsor for 2011, hence the confusion.

Re: 2011 Jersey : Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:37 am  

seanm89 wrote:

but where in that does it say, they are still your MAIN shirt sponsor, it just says they've extended sponsorship! and having worked for you boys last year i know that they have lots of different areas they sponsor.

Re-read the first sentence or ring the club and ask. Again, not difficult.

Re: 2011 Jersey : Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:39 am  

Gurus_Beard wrote:

Re-read the first sentence or ring the club and ask. Again, not difficult.

ha, your using your own interpretation of the word major, it doesnt mean, it will be your shirts main sponsor, just that they are the major sponsor, often clubs have sponsors that are more valuable, but arent featured on the shirts at all.

Re: 2011 Jersey : Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:41 am  

I think it was the "Your Logo Here" image that was found that threw it into confusion. It looked very much like a new main shirt sponsor was being sought. In actual fact, that image seems to be a massive red herring.

Re: 2011 Jersey : Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:41 am  

seanm89 wrote:

ha, your using your own interpretation of the word major, it doesnt mean, it will be your shirts main sponsor, just that they are the major sponsor, often clubs have sponsors that are more valuable, but arent featured on the shirts at all.

Would you like to make a wager? I'll bet that JCT600 ARE our main shirt sponsor this year. You bet they aren't?

Acceptable? And if so, what wager would you like to make on it?

Re: 2011 Jersey : Mon Nov 08, 2010 12:06 pm  

seanm89 wrote:

ha, your using your own interpretation of the word major

Every human uses their own interpretation of the written word. However, as it says on the tin, they are the 2010 major sponsor and will thus appear on the playing shirt.

seanm89 wrote:

, it doesnt mean, it will be your shirts main sponsor

Yes it does.

seanm89 wrote:

, just that they are the major sponsor, often clubs have sponsors that are more valuable, but arent featured on the shirts at all.

Guff. All of it.

Ring the club. Simples.

Re: 2011 Jersey : Mon Nov 08, 2010 1:17 pm  

DILLIGAF wrote:

Would you like to make a wager? I'll bet that JCT600 ARE our main shirt sponsor this year. You bet they aren't?

Acceptable? And if so, what wager would you like to make on it?

wow your very defensive on this board, am i not allowed my opinion? im not the first person to raise this question yet because im from a different board you need to react more? why would i ever make a bet, ive interpreted things the way i want, and couldnt give 2 flying loves if you dont agree with me!

Gurus_Beard wrote:

seanm89 wrote:

ha, your using your own interpretation of the word major

Every human uses their own interpretation of the written word. However, as it says on the tin, they are the 2010 major sponsor and will thus appear on the playing shirt.

seanm89 wrote:

, it doesnt mean, it will be your shirts main sponsor

Yes it does.

seanm89 wrote:

, just that they are the major sponsor, often clubs have sponsors that are more valuable, but arent featured on the shirts at all.

Guff. All of it.

Ring the club. Simples.

it doesnt say that at all, also very nice of you dismissing my opinion on an opinions board, and as i already said, im not the first person to raise this question, yet im getting it in the ear.

you have an unbelieably narrow minded opinion on the situatuion! a major sponsor, does not a shirt sponsor make!! it can, but it doesnt mean it does!

Re: 2011 Jersey : Mon Nov 08, 2010 1:19 pm  

seanm89 wrote:

wow your very defensive on this board, am i not allowed my opinion? im not the first person to raise this question yet because im from a different board you need to react more? why would i ever make a bet, ive interpreted things the way i want, and couldnt give 2 flying loves if you dont agree with me!

it doesnt say that at all, also very nice of you dismissing my opinion on an opinions board, and as i already said, im not the first person to raise this question, yet im getting it in the ear.

you have an unbelieably narrow minded opinion on the situatuion! a major sponsor, does not a shirt sponsor make!! it can, but it doesnt mean it does!

What part of ringing the club up to clarify are you finding difficult?

Or would you rather ponce around on a board of opinions than deal with facts? Doesn't need an extended thread of rebuttals, just a simple phone call.

Re: 2011 Jersey : Mon Nov 08, 2010 1:20 pm  

seanm89 wrote:

wow your very defensive on this board, am i not allowed my opinion? im not the first person to raise this question yet because im from a different board you need to react more? why would i ever make a bet, ive interpreted things the way i want, and couldnt give 2 flying loves if you dont agree with me!

Not at all. I said I think they will be the main shirt sponsor, you seemed to be suggesting you didn't think they would. So I asked if you fancied a bet of some sort on that. I'm guessing from your massive overreaction that it's a "no" then.