What proportion of our top line derives from betting companies?

I think betting companies are predicated on exploiting vulnerable people into parting with sums they can not afford. I don't think our close involvement with them sits well with our identity/brand as a community club. Yes we all have choice and no-one forces people to gamble money they don't really have; but the club also has a choice and I was wondering how possible it would be for us not to take business from these vultures.

For one reason or another the few games I've made this term I've mostly been in the South Stand, and you can't avoid the awful tacky orange LeoVegas branding opposite, as well as on the shirts; the Coral branding on the Barclay; and the frequent ads for SkyBet on the changing image advertising thingies round the pitch.

I imagine the SkyBet thing is mandatory to go with the Sky TV deal and there's not a lot we can do about that. However the Coral and LeoVegas money is more directly under our control.

Does anyone have an idea roughly how much that is, either in absolute terms or as a percentage of our top line (I'm assuming it's fairly material)? Obviously other companies would pay for that exposure; but probably not as much as the parasites do. Any informed views on how much that might look like?

I think shirt sponsorship is much cheaper than one might imagine, for example, and plenty of more normal companies have done that with us in the past.

Posted By: Old Man, Apr 19, 16:08:33