Is RBS an appropriate 6Ns sponsor?

RBS has been has been fined $390m for Libor rate fixing http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21348719 is the tip of what appears to be emerging of a iceberg of financial wrongdoing.

RBS has been at the epicentre of a series of scandals since the whole edifice of international banking has laid waste to the economies of the Western World - particularly Europe. The headline loser on the corporate end of the incompetence and corruption is Fred the Shred who as I write is still no doubt weeping salty tears into his private swimming pool. Bonuses are being restricted and the penalties shared pro-rata between the fraudulent law-breakers and the young man or woman teller at your local branch. Socially and economically the rest of us to varying degrees have suffered to some degree. Some of us effectively only marginally whilst others enormously through redundancy, bankruptcy, marriage break-up and all of the other dire consequences of economic collapse.

Effectively RBS (the holding company of an array of mainstream financial service providers) having its ads emblazoned around the 6Ns stadia represents the moral bankruptcy the ERC paricipant unions.

Mind you that's not a lot different from the rugger-bugger tossers who emotionally supported Arpardheid SA in the 50s, 60's and 70s.

I don't think being morally bankrupt should disqualify a sponsor. Moral bankruptcy is too widespread in the sectors of society that have money to be used as a discriminating factor. Sponsors need to have money.

As a major bank- the majority of which is owned by HMRC- they do have money, our money, and they are not giving the taxpayer bailout back any time soon. With the full support of the current government and dare I say any future governments.

With that in mind, I'd rather they spent the money on a rugby tournament that more obscene bonuses. The Apartheid thing is neither here nor there, that was a situation in which change could be affected. No form of democracy or protest can take back the banks power other than moving your own small sum of money elsewhere.

Couple of things:

1) Isnt that Fred the Shred?
2) Do the ERC have anything to do with 6Ns?
3) I suspect there are very few corporations of the size needed to sponsor a tournament like this that have a 100% clean conscience since they started. It then depends where you draw your moral compass.

Greytiger sponsorships by banks and the industrial industry in rugby are here to stay.

Look at the likes of the Aviva Premiership,The Rabodirect Pro12, the Aviva Stadium, The Jp Morgan Sevens, the Allianz Park Stadium, the LV Cup, The HSBC sevens world series.

I dont think the world economy has anything to do with who sponsors the 6n's.

If RBS want to give rugby loads of money. Let them

Will I be opening an account with RBS anytime? No. But thats an entirely different matter

LondonTiger wrote:Couple of things:

1) Isnt that Fred the Shred?
2) Do the ERC have anything to do with 6Ns?
3) I suspect there are very few corporations of the size needed to sponsor a tournament like this that have a 100% clean conscience since they started. It then depends where you draw your moral compass.

1) Yes. And he no longer has any involvement with RBS. He is just a very wealthy man with no job now. And a very fat pension being drawn for leaving the taxpayer with a massive liability on its hands. At least his knighthood has been annulled. The *anker.
2) No.
3) If they were morally pure they wouldn't have any money! Barcelona FC are 'sponsored' by Unicef but in reality the sponsorship goes the other way, because Barca give them free exposure on their shirts in lieu of having a real sponsor.

Notch wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:Couple of things:

1) Isnt that Fred the Shred?
2) Do the ERC have anything to do with 6Ns?
3) I suspect there are very few corporations of the size needed to sponsor a tournament like this that have a 100% clean conscience since they started. It then depends where you draw your moral compass.

1) Yes. And he no longer has any involvement with RBS. He is just a very wealthy man with no job now. At least his knighthood has been annulled.
2) No.
3) If they were morally pure they wouldn't have any money! Barcelona FC are 'sponsored' by Unicef but in reality the sponsorship goes the other way, because Barca give them free exposure on their shirts in lieu of having a real sponsor.

Ferd - right
The rest is a man/Mammon debate.

Sounds like a bigger issue is finding a replacement if RBS end up in 'a dark place'

I'd have to add that in any other sphere of economic activity, a number of knowing conspirators in the banking crisis fraud and corruption would be in chokey.

RBS is being singled out because they are the 6Ns sponsors. That and only that.

I'll take out the ERC reference because I used it as shorthand for the associate nations.

Notch wrote:I don't think being morally bankrupt should disqualify a sponsor. Moral bankruptcy is too widespread in the sectors of society that have money to be used as a discriminating factor. Sponsors need to have money.

As a major bank- the majority of which is owned by HMRC- they do have money, our money, and they are not giving the taxpayer bailout back any time soon. With the full support of the current government and dare I say any future governments.

With that in mind, I'd rather they spent the money on a rugby tournament that more obscene bonuses. The Apartheid thing is neither here nor there, that was a situation in which change could be affected. No form of democracy or protest can take back the banks power other than moving your own small sum of money elsewhere.

It does depend whether the ramifications of past and any (quite possible if not probable) future revelations and consequent crimes and punishments will have an impact on the 6Ns brand.

Couldn't give a monkeys

As with Radge, that is the unmistakeable sound of me not caring.

Ever since Keith Wood's head turned blue after a scrum collapsed on the advertising paint I've been a big fan of RBS, and will forever remain so purely for that reason.

Or in other words, I don't care.

I don't care as long as they are paying a decent amount

The issue with RBS is surely that as they are effectively publically owned, why have we (or those of us on here which pay British tax anyway) paid for it?

Morally, meh, unless the sales of organic lemonade etc pick up for ethical producers, its unlikely that the sponsor of a big tournament will be anything other than a big coorporation.

Don't see the connection with SA at all. Personally I think sports and politics should be kept seperate as much as possible.

Bathman_in_London wrote:The issue with RBS is surely that as they are effectively publically owned, why have we (or those of us on here which pay British tax anyway) paid for it?

Morally, meh, unless the sales of organic lemonade etc pick up for ethical producers, its unlikely that the sponsor of a big tournament will be anything other than a big coorporation.

Don't see the connection with SA at all. Personally I think sports and politics should be kept seperate as much as possible.

BT might be a suitable suitor for sponsorship.

More specifically BTVision.

There is nothing organic in the alcoholic lemonade in the HEC sponsors.

Would BT Vision have any cash left when this new deal comes through?

I guess my humour didnt come through, I meant the producers of 'Smith's locally grown juice' or equivalent 'nice' company is unlikely to be able to sponsor the tournament.

Gaol the feckers