Interesting piece or not, the linked tweet came directly from the whuisa account that agreed that the exwhuemployee turned down the donation as a stand against socios. Which was also implied in the article. Come on now pal, please don’t try the old politicians trick of swerving the issue. This is a gross misjudgment of character , and you should be apologising, not only for that train of thought, but for trying to drag us all into it as well by tagging us. If you want to raise money, raise money, do not try to make it a stance to garner support as I fundamentally disagree for denying charitable donations for charity for good causes because of personal opinion and/or agenda. You should be ashamed of yourself for even suggesting that was a good idea. So should Sanchoz.
By publically thanking Socios it legitimises them in the eyes of West Ham fans, makes them more desirable, and more likely therefore that fans will put hands in pockets.
That's my view on it anyway.
It's the oldest trick in the dodgy marketing book.
Let's face it if Socios were serious about atruistic donations then they could have quite easily have asked for it to be kept quiet
I also think that Ex has been put in an awkward position, he is damned if he takes it and damned if he don't.
It was the public thankyou that raised my left eyebrow.
My question would be, out of all the different charities available, why would Socios donate to one run by Ex? It's doubtful to me that anyone from Socuos has even heard of the guy.
It's like someone has been set up.
Or there could in fact be a legitimate reason.
Nicky, I would be glad of your thoughts on this please.