Should We Accept Payment From Betting Companies? An Essay.

On Tuesday 11th July, Back of the Net was chosen to take part in a series of videos, filmed in Manchester, which analysed the findings of a “Fan Hope” survey, where football fans expressed their predictions ahead of the 2023/24 Premier League season. Akin to the “The Overlap” fan debate shows, the filming was sponsored and supported by Sky Bet, and as such, their brand name was inexorably linked with the production – both on screen and also on the various social media teasers.

This week, on Thursday, we tweeted about it, as is standard for any production that we take part in. Whilst this was met with a lot of support from Cherries fans via likes and retweets – a minority of supporters took exception to the link, citing “immorality” and “normalisation of gambling” as the reason for their abhorrence at the connection.

Understandably, it’s a subject which stirs a lot of emotions. Indeed, earlier last season, when AFC Bournemouth chose Dafabet as their front of shirt sponsor, it caused plenty of outrage amongst the Twitterarti, because whilst for some, it was an astute business decision, for others, it was morally bankrupt – with many people questioning the moral integrity of football clubs that decide to “cash out” on gambling companies.

AFC Bournemouth undoubtedly knew the deal would cause tension amongst supporters, however they took the decision on the basis that the educational legacy from the deal might actually outweigh the moral negatives of getting into bed with “yet another gambling brand”. The caveats that were put in place as part of the lucrative sponsorship meant that it was hoped that the important life lessons that can be taught and learned about the industry might just supersede the negatives of having a “name on a shirt”.

It’s easy to see why fans have issues with sponsorships like this, because they normalise the culture of gambling, a culture which in some circumstances can lead to pain, anxiety, and ultimately financial turmoil. Therefore, there is a moral tightrope that CEO’s and Commercial Directors have to walk when pondering these deals, because, whilst they are trying to make decisions which secure the future of the organisation, they’re also trying to navigate the inescapable link that their business is partnering up with companies which can stimulate depression and debt.

In a recent Sky Bet Fan Hope survey, #afcb fans predicted a 13th place #pl finish! 🍒

If this is the case, who are the 7 finishing below us?

Are we being over-optimistic?

The time for talking is now!

Head to @skybet Fan Central to have your say #adhttps://t.co/9kwqyMvdUi pic.twitter.com/1s7Ec8m0n1

— Back Of The Net 🍒 (@afcbpodcast) July 27, 2023

Whilst the uproar was very much on a smaller scale with Back of the Net’s association, we very much felt the wrath of the small selection of fans who told us that it is “not a good look”, and that we should “get a grip” and “do better” – all points that we understand and respect. In fact, I know the feeling of being in debt (albeit not through gambling), as well as the sleepless nights and endless worry that comes with it.

What was my reason for debt? Well, it was… ermm… how do I put this? It was Back of the Net.

The “success” of the podcast, if you can call it that, has caused problems for me on more than one occasion. Unsurprisingly, the strain was felt the most during lockdown, a feeling that was compounded by the simultaneous sense of having a moral responsibility to keep things going for the sanity and enjoyment of all who tuned in.

Feedback suggests the channel has become almost “essential” to their lives, which has given us a desire to see the it succeed and improve.

Starting off as a passion project rather than a commercial enterprise, the aim has always been to bring supporters closer to the club they love and to give fans an independent experience of what it’s like to support AFC Bournemouth. As time has gone on, feedback has suggested that the channel has become almost “essential” to viewers lives, therefore it has given us a desire to see it succeed and improve – something I believe we have achieved.

However with that comes an inevitable increase in outgoings, and positive feedback alone cannot keep it sustainable. For instance, our costs include our video software subscription (HD plan), our podcast hosting, website hosting, graphics software, microphones, our cables, a mobile data-plan to upload sizeable videos on the go, our Epidemic Sound subscription – and there are are many more. Even the service we use to accept donations itself requires a monthly fee! Plus soon, we’re about to purchase our third camera, which costs £450 – cosmic!

Whilst we perhaps could “cut some corners” with some of the tools and gadgets we use, the aim has always been to produce content which helps shake off the stereotypes of our club being “little old Bournemouth” by providing a professional but fun way for fans to follow the Cherries with voices that reflect the sentiment of the fanbase.

Fortunately for us, we have a group of incredible backers who have enabled us to do that, donating as little as £3 per month to help us keep producing content – and it has helped massively. They have no idea how much they are helping us! Similarly, even the people who don’t financially contribute, but “like” or “retweet” our content – are so important to us, as it helps get our work seen by as many people as possible.

With this in mind, when we are offered the chance to take part in a sequence of videos in return for a financial incentive which can go towards improving our output, then, if the shoe fits, we will open the door for a conversation. Believe it or not, we pick and choose wisely which organisations we work with, and as such, we regularly turn down sponsorships with metronomic regularity – as, simply put, they don’t match our own values.

With monies received, we can pay for our expenses, and have made a significant donation to Talking Cherries.

On this occasion with Sky Bet, the Fan Hope Survey videos involved two hours of filming in Manchester – a ten hour round trip. It cost over £100 in petrol, £15 in tolls, plus we paid for our food & drink for the day. As well as this, we sacrificed a days work. With monies received, we paid off the expenses, made a significant donation to Talking Cherries, and put the rest back into funding the podcast. Morally wrong? Perhaps.

Earlier last season we ran a promotion in association with Greene King for their Season Ticket app. Again, this was a tie-up which could be deemed as “normalising” an industry which has similar pitfalls and problems. But for us, the focus was not to encourage viewers to have ten pints, but instead to highlight their Season Ticket app – saving them money and offering them a free drink the next time they happen to be going into a pub (alcoholic or otherwise). Morally wrong? Maybe.

In terms of Sky Bet, it was a decision we took on the basis that companies like that have a marketing budget which they will spend regardless, so our thought pattern was that it would be “better” for anyone susceptible to gambling to see a tweet featuring a bloke talking about the love for his football team rather than an advert which encourages punters to whack £50 on Solanke getting a shot on target inside ninety minutes. Morally wrong? Possibly.

If being criticised on social media or losing a viewer helps pay for a few Mental Health First Certificates, then we’ll live with that.

Since we started Back of the Net we’ve promoted and contributed to fundraisers which has seen £2000 go towards Forest Holme hospice and £5000 raised for Melanoma Focus, so if being criticised on social media or losing a viewer helps pay for a few Mental Health First Certificates, as is the case in this example, then – we’ll live with that.

Whilst we understand and respect the perspectives of those who disagree, it’s a decision we took to help support the greater good. Similarly, we just don’t want to get into debt again over this project – a project which close to 13,000 people seemingly enjoy. If you’re one of the ones who can’t agree with it, we do understand. Similarly, if your views are so strong that you cannot bring yourself to tune in again, then we respect that too – and as such, we would fully recommend the other AFC Bournemouth related fan channels out there, all of which are brilliant in their own way.

As ever, it’s just a case of balance.

We appreciate there is such a moral balance when it comes to giving the slightest chink of limelight to industries which can be so divisive, and you could say we have potentially been more complicit than others in securing the future of our pod by accepting payment from them – but where do we stop? Do I not drive my diesel car to away games, should I not have a pint on camera, and would featuring a hotdog on the vlog be dangerous incase it contributes to an obesity epidemic?

As ever, it’s just a case of balance – and our personal opinions are that, by participating in a Sky Bet sponsored fan survey which asked us to talk in detail about the club we love… it really isn’t all that deep.