Interpolic

Kid Icarus. Uncanny.

Remy, Remy, Remy scored a goal on the telly and I hope he loves the toon.

I've had more intelligent and witty wanks, the bloke is a plank.

Intelligent and witty, areet.

Aye, every other fucker loves your glorious patter.

Throw BottledDog in and you can have 25 quid. Few others hoyed in for 30 quid and SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY.

If you took Ian/Inochi/Brett away from the forum then I'd pay £20 a year to frequent it.

Ugh. Fucking sanctimonious drivel. 'Bro' in there, too. #legend Wew, what a prick. Didn't even read the post properly, just went for his cool/funny/always right routine and away we go.

Nee Nar Nee Nar He knows that winds me up so he keeps on saying it. So blatant I'll attempt to ignore it.

They certainly didn't look like they were playing for him last year.

Must be an Irish thing or summit.

That Keegan quote is superb. Sort of links in with his comments about knowing it was the beginning of the end of him as NUFC manager when he felt sorry for Gerry Francis for beating his Spurs side 7-1. We'd generally always go out to beat sides by as many as we could under his management.

I know irony thanks, you knob. How is that irony?

He gets a game most the time, so more like Gouffran.

I disagree tbh, "It's an interesting point, ability might come into it" suggests he's saying "Fuck's the point in considering diet when you have better players, harrrr". Nobody has ever said that you will win games by eating pasta alone.

Really? It doesn't really work then, on any level.

Makes you wonder if he bothered about sports science and dietetics when they can come up with such flawed logic. That's an amazing comment. 3 teams get relegated because they're the rules you moron. Could be the 20 most talented teams in the world, 3 would still go down.

You've had 23 hours to praise him neesy and what have we heard from you in that time? Nowt sonna, not a peep.

Sorry lads.

This knacker hasn't been discussed for over 23 hours, is that a record?

And vice versa Aye probably, I'd personally just try to have a laugh and hope for the best in terms of finances. That's not a joke.

Actually I work in below-the-line marketing so I can point to the positive effects of our activity on behalf of clients and show how the spend increased revenue compared to a control group who weren't exposed to the campaign. In other words it's measurable. Measuring the effects of above-the-line marketing is admittedly far more tricky - and everyone realises that - but there aren't many people in the industry who think it has no effect at all, it's more about whether return on investment makes it worth it. Certainly companies such as Coca Cola and McDonalds have built their brands on aggressive above-the-line marketing and branding/sponsorship and have never let their foot off the gas. To say a company that sells sports gear probably hasn't benefitted from having a platform to advertise to a huge market that is more likely to buy sports gear than most other markets needs to be justified by more than a hunch IMO.

Nothing personal but you're an accountant IIRC? You seem a bit cynical about the value of marketing, I wouldn't have a job if people like you had their way.

I find it amusing that you mocked my point about TV advertising when a 10 year old could have seen the point I was I was trying to make then. Why does he bother with TV advertising if the reason for SD's success is having a monopoly of the market and "that's it really". It's quite expensive, he could be saving himself a lot of money by not bothering. I'm not sure if you're just doing this because you've dug a hole or you genuinely believe marketing isn't all it's cracked up to be unless you're a start-up brand or have a specific offer to plug.

I wonder why Mike Ashley wastes money himself on TV advertising, etc. The free stuff's doing him no good though. Oh dear. So advertising on TV is the same as doing what he's done at SJP. It's marketing mate, you either believe in it or you don't. It's generally a risk and reward thing but not so much if you're not paying anything for it. Or are you saying you believe in the effect of TV advertising but not advertising in football grounds (which appears on TV every week) and also not publicity (again a platform for which is TV). It's just TV advertising that's worth paying for and will drive revenue? Are you even keeping track of which forms of marketing you deem effective? It seems awfully ironic that a poster that's sympathised with Mike Ashley over the years thinks the ways that he's milked the club at no cost to himself have actually had no positive effect on his business. Just seems like a bizarre opinion and one that could be used to justify him continuing to take money out of the club for his loan while the squad is left short, when others are saying that actually that's a bit rich considering the vehicle we give him to market his other company at no cost.