+- Sports Babble - sports forum (https://www.sportsbabble.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Football (https://www.sportsbabble.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: English Football Leagues (https://www.sportsbabble.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+---- Forum: Sky Bet League One (https://www.sportsbabble.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=79)
+----- Forum: Huddersfield Town (https://www.sportsbabble.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=70)
+----- Thread: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers (/showthread.php?tid=12878)
RE: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers - ritchiebaby - 22-01-2024
Slightly off-topic but right on the button from theo. The most galling thing about the whole business is that she is raking in cash from the poor beggars who are hooked in gambling their cash away, often resulting in losing everything, even their lives in a few sad cases. Absolutely staggering example of her abandoning all semblance of conscience and decency.
RE: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers - Lord Snooty - 22-01-2024
Have to say, although I'm against gambling and against people earning ridiculous amounts of money and not paying a proper percentage of tax, that article would never had been written about a bloke. All seems a bit like the journalist doesn't like successful women.
RE: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers - theo_luddite - 22-01-2024
There's two of them, (authors) so here's links to more of their stories so you can work out for yourself which one you think has a jealousy problem Snoots.
https://www.theguardian.com/profile/rupertneate
https://www.theguardian.com/profile/marksweney
By the way, they didn't look into this but I did. Whoever looks after the Denise Coates Charity funds 'investments' needs some investigation too. They managed to lose £33m somehow when just following the stock exchange would have netted a small but reasonable %age profit. Less than £20m in each of the last 2 years has been donated to 'charitable causes'.
RE: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers - Lord Snooty - 22-01-2024
I can't read all that nonsense, theo. Took me long enough to read the first one you linked to.
I know I bang on a bit when I'm doing my match threads but some of these journalists bore me stiff with their long winded, Oxbridge educated, too clever for the likes of me columns they write.
The Grauniad is a bit too high brow for an old Daily Mirror reader like me. Or should I say ex reader. Not bought a newspaper in years.
I saw an article yesterday online. Ooh that looks interesting, I thought. Ten paragraphs in, got bored. Too much waffle. Do they get paid by the amount of words?
RE: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers - theo_luddite - 22-01-2024
I draw the line at around 2-3 laptop screens full Snoots. In short, you've your opinion about that article, I've got mine. I don't see the jealousy you see. Losing around £60m a year seems to be a habit for bet365 on £billions/year of turnover despite having £billions in 'cash in hand' at the bank. (I looked at their Companies House filings too). Like I said, that loss wouldn't be a loss if her and her brother, father and others weren't taking £100m a year in 'dividends' on top of their 'wages'. In other words, it's a tax fiddle regardless of how succesful she is and bet365 are as a company. I could dig more but I don't want to bore the pants off everyone (even if I already have).
Good luck with trying to read The Mirror on-line these days. Even an executive at Retch (who own them and The Unexamined) smashed his phone against a wall as their websites are unreadable, due to all the slow loading pop-up advertising and click-bait.
RE: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers - Lord Snooty - 22-01-2024
The point I was trying to make was that the article was saying things like, why is she earning all this money? She's earning more than all these top blokes.
In the spirit of Amelia's article, I took it to be another journalist putting down succesful women, like they always have done. I don't doubt that there is corruption rife in what she's doing. I haven't a clue what the point of it all was. Just a load of figures. When people are talking about millions of pounds, I switch off.
I don't want to get into a battle of intellect with you, theo, cos I know I can't win. And I wouldn't want to even if I thought I could win.
RE: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers - ritchiebaby - 22-01-2024
You both make good points in your posts and I'm sure you're both on the same side in general.
Intellect is something I would never profess to have, but I'd like to think I have a fair bit of gumption (that's common sense, just in case it's a Scottish word, not the liquid cleaner). I don't mind whether the offender is male or female, I generally know when someone's "at it", and that is definitely the case with the people in the DC Foundation. If the whole organisation founders, the liablity for each one of them is limited to £10. Hmmmm.
When I was still a young 'un, I always thought of myself as a centrist, leaning slightly to the left. As I've got older, and even older still, I've developed a strong list to the left. That's mainly because I've had loads of experience of the attitudes of those on the right. Another couple of years will see me keel over to the far left if this lot continue as they are.
However, that's enough from me on the subject and I will retire gracefully (
) from this conversation.
RE: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers - theo_luddite - 23-01-2024
I read it as she was earning all this money and that was compared to a bunch of other top earners. I don't see the "because she's a woman and they are men" argument in there at all. We'll have to agree to disagree.
RE: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers - Lord Snooty - 23-01-2024
You're probably right anyway, theo. It's just that when I read anything in the main stream media, I'm looking for a hidden agenda. I don't believe anything I read these days.
RE: Bottleless Blackburn v Terrible Terriers - WakeyTerrier - 23-01-2024
New manager anyone ?