Ryan Giggs, football money and the effect on the economy

lemonjelly

chucky wrote: »

if the guy earns millions a year what has it to do with anyone else. he's a talented person making the most for himself and his family.

if the guy decides to go with another woman what has it got to with anyone else, apart from him, his wife and the Big Brother contestant.

too many people love these car crash stories that get quite boring.

Whilst I agree that the content of these stories is boring, and amounts to little more than gossip, I suppose the public interest argument is that he generates a large income from advertising and endorsements because of the cultivated whiter than white image.

A bit like tiger woods losing all his sponsorships...

FTBFun

PasturesNew wrote: »

They used to run OK when the footballers earnt 3/6.

Actually a fair few league clubs went bust before the money increased substantially, and before the maximum wage was removed.

Accrington Stanley (the original one) for example.

chucky

lemonjelly wrote: »

Whilst I agree that the content of these stories is boring, and amounts to little more than gossip, I suppose the public interest argument is that he generates a large income from advertising and endorsements because of the cultivated whiter than white image.

A bit like tiger woods losing all his sponsorships...

i like to look at them as individuals, i don't see them as products.

the public interest argument is popular because it generates rumour and threads like these. if people didn't make them into idols people wouldn't be shaking their head criticising them for their actions.

ps. i think Gareth Barry has one too.

lemonjelly

chucky wrote: »

i like to look at them as individuals, i don't see them as products..

I agree, & in an ideal world we'd all see the world this way.

chucky wrote: »

the public interest argument is popular because it generates rumour and threads like these. if people didn't make them into idols people wouldn't be shaking their head criticising them for their actions.

ps. i think Gareth Barry has one too.

But lets be pragmatic, big stars do make a lot of money out of cultivating and farming out their image. Without it, we'd have a significantly reduced advertising industry. Contrary to poular belief, loads of [STRIKE]idiots[/STRIKE] people do buy stuff because it is endorsed by a particular celebrity. In Liverpool, when people heard sharp were sponsoring Manyoo, tv sets were instantly dumped - that is the logic of the crowd.

And if they do get fantabulously wealthy based upon lie(s), then arguably that is a form of fraud is it not. Definitely it is contrary to the image they've cultivated.

lemonjelly

rxbishop wrote: »

None of our business who he's throwing one up imo. Quite right that there is a law in place to stop it, though it doesn't exactly appear to have worked this time.

If a member of my family cheated on their partner, I'd be horrified if it was all over the papers and stuff - not nice for the innocent spouse nor the children. Good luck to him for smashing her back doors in, but it really is not any of our business.

So which one are you? Andy Gray, or Richard Keys?

Generali

chucky wrote: »

ps. i think Gareth Barry has one too.

Someone wrote on another website, "He's siht so it doesn't count!" although the Attorney General might take a different view (link)

Supposedly he's not the only England footballer with one of these ridiculous injunctions although the rumourmongers might be getting confused by the John Terry one that was overturned.

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/lawyers-to-offer-cut-price-super%11injunctions-201105233852/

A host of actors and premier league footballers, including Ryan Giggs obviously, have taken their super-injuction back to the lawmongers where they bought it and asked for a refund.

With the market in the doldrums Britain's lawyers are now offering Super Injunction Lite, which lasts for about 20 minutes but costs just £12,000, or an own-brand 'value' super injunction which is virtually useless but is only £6.50 or two for a tenner.

adouglasmhor

It would be a Triumph™ if someone could get the name of the actor who paid for a pegging from a well known prostitute.

rxbishop

he's been named by a politician now, so all over the papers tomorrow.

duchy

rxbishop wrote: »

what giggs did and the way the papers discuss it is disgusting, do they not care about Giggs' wife and kids. .

I guess they have as much concern for them as he does-Public figures know the consequences-and know the risk of getting caught out is for them greater than say your average Luton fan. Knowing all that he went ahead with no thought for them.

Thrugelmir

[quote=[Deleted User];43858514]
If he didn't think it is scandalous why did he buy an injunction? It's not as if he is an A-list celebrity is it.[/QUOTE]

The wealthy have the money, so can afford to waste it on expensive lawyers. Doesn't matter what walk of life one is in.

Society is dividing between the haves and have nots.