Why is the Supporters Trust Silent?


Active member
Jan 28, 2016
Mosh pit
Hahaha the betting = bad, alcohol = absolutely fine because we do real ale tours before games story is very unsurprising to me

Max has a point. I was really against the use of betting companies logos on shirts etc but I've changed my mind. DB9 also made a great point about hypocrisy earlier when referring to the league being sponsored by skybet.

Personally I wouldn't buy a shirt sponsored by a betting company purely because all their logos are rubbish and boring. I've yet to see one that looks distinguished and visually impressive.

There are lots of things that cause bad things to happen in this word which aren't banned so I just guess it depends on what moral views you have really but hypocrisy isn't attractive for any business.

Fareham Grecian

Active member
Dec 20, 2006
Preparing for liftoff
Then if I'm right that the Trust has an open part of their meetings and a closed part, That person who said about betting is evil should of kept his views til the closed part when people like Ed wasn't present and could of been dicussed then?
No-one said betting was evil, that’s just Ed’s wishful thinking to justify his crap


Very well known Exeweb poster
May 5, 2009
Hunkered down
How in Christ's name do you embed a video? Off-topic but witty if you are childish. Can somebody help?
Edit - it seems to have worked.
Funnily enough there was a filly born in France in 2000 which the owner tried to register as Gros Nouchons which I am advised translates as Big Tits. The French racing authorities refused the name but when Big Tits was offered instead it was accepted. Vraiment.


Dec 2, 2010
The Trust has a clear policy on gambling sponsorship and it seems like the correct decision was reached in line with that policy.
Leaving aside the rights or wrongs of bookmakers as sponsors, the real issue is why a member of the commercial department spent time developing a deal which was always going to be rejected if the position of the Trust was this clear. One hopes it was this episode which prompted the Trust to reach its position rather than the club not understanding what was a previously established Trust policy.

As an aside, it is perfectly reasonable for the Trust to hold the power of veto on certain matters as that is a common requirement for significant shareholders and might already form part of their governance of the club (if I recall correctly).


Active member
Mar 10, 2019
I know I'm going into specifics here but the idea of that Sponorship with the betting club on the kit, Were we in the "Skybet" era where Skybet is plastered everywhere from the ground to the matchday programme or was it beforehand? There's very little point in trying to take the moral high ground when a lot of our income comes from a betting company (Via the EFL).
Players under 18 cannot have Skybet logo on their shirt.

Colesman Ballz

Well-known Exeweb poster
Dec 28, 2014
So what happens when an under 18 makes a first team appearance?
Cue much scrutiny of pictures from games featuring Amps, or Crisene's cameo debut ! Logically the shop would just prepare a kit but not affix the skybet patches, but you never know ?
  • Like
Reactions: DB9