~sigh~

In the meantime, I do my best to emulate you, Sir.

You really cannot be this stupid - you clearly do not understand the concept of opportunity cost. How can you possibly say how expensive the opportunity cost is to me? You have no understanding of my life or the time constraints that are involved. As I said you really don't understand opportunity cost. The opportunity cost of going to a library would be expensive, I have limited spare time and significant demands on that time. There are things I would have to miss to go to the library. Over a year this would build up and the opportunity cost increase.

I have an expense account which is business related so again not sure how that comment relates to the opportunity cost of going to the library. Just another desperate attempt at deflection - typical RLfans poster!! As for pay increases my firm haven't awarded a pay increase in 4 years - tough out here in the real world!!

One wonders what the "opportunity cost" of spending time on RLFans is, then.



We know. You've told us. You asked nicely but your nasty boss said 'no'.

Which is why you squeal about those nasty unions who actually make an effort to organise in order to win rises etc by negotiating in numbers.

Can't imagine what the "opportunity cost" of such nefarious behaviour is – or of not doing as they do and then whinging about it.

The answer as to why we've been so good at winning medals: We won more by sitting down than standing up

The answer as to why we've been so good at winning medals: We won more by sitting down than standing up

cod'ead wrote:The answer as to why we've been so good at winning medals: We won more by sitting down than standing up Maybe we should canvass for new events, such as: - Sychronised sofa sitting - Greco-Roman fighting over the remote control - half-time sprint to put the kettle on?

cod'ead wrote:The answer as to why we've been so good at winning medals: We won more by sitting down than standing up Maybe we should canvass for new events, such as: - Sychronised sofa sitting - Greco-Roman fighting over the remote control - half-time sprint to put the kettle on?

cod'ead wrote:The answer as to why we've been so good at winning medals: We won more by sitting down than standing up fwit aussies brought that up at the last Olympics. But only after they realised we'd done better than them. Funny that.

cod'ead wrote:The answer as to why we've been so good at winning medals: We won more by sitting down than standing up fwit aussies brought that up at the last Olympics. But only after they realised we'd done better than them. Funny that.

Ah I see. We're back into the realms of Sal's own little real world again are we? Where libraries can be only be visited in work time, where peoples free time is reduced to a £per hour figure, where minimum wage carers have expense accounts, where anyone who disagrees with Sal is either stupid or a workshy communist, and where only Sal has to deal with wage restraint or private sector conditions. You have free time, visiting a library costs you nothing in monetary terms which is what you were comparing it to earlier, I refuse to believe that you cannot spare half an hour of your oh so valuable and expensive free time to visit a library occasionally since you seem to manage to play golf, watch rugby league, and spend large amounts of time on RLFans.
As for your real world rubbish, just shut up for Christ's sake, it's utterly embarrassing, you're not the only person who works in the private sector and deals with private sector pressures, so stop the cringeworthy self-flagellating guff.

Anyway, back on topic, I think it's obvious the big increases in funding has led to big increases in performances. Sadly I can't see that funding continuing for that long.

It'll be interesting in the next twelve months to see what happens to athletes funding, I can't remember where I saw it but there was a list somewhere on t'interweb of the amount of funding to GB Olympic Sports over the past four Olympics, this time around it was higher than the Bejing funding but probably only by inflation (about £250 mill from memory).

Given that most of that is lottery funding and when the lottery was set up one of its three aims was to fund sports in GB then its going to be interesting to see how this current government could ever claw back that situation.

It seems to be quite well administered too, I noticed the high jumper Robbie Grabarz talking last night of how his lottery funding had been removed last year after his coach had told him to go away and only come back if he was serious about competing rather than messing about, he had to apply to the Ron Pickering Foundation for funding to get through last year.

Then you have no point, it is a commercial agreement set up with sufficient caveats in the contract to allow the business owner to either pay the required amount for a business opportunity, beyond the scope of the year in year out agreement, or vacate the space so someone else can. This is perfectly normal with catering franchises at venues such as Excel.



Never said that, just asked for the same standard of evidence you would expect from others.



Nope, never said that at all, trademarks need to be protected though, if they are owned by big business or a small operator it doesn't matter, you work with intellectual property, what would happen if your rights weren't protected?

A small cafe changing its name to cash in really has no leg to stand on.



That is a leap of reasoning that Sal would struggle with, which bit on NO did you struggle with? Landlords that have evicted tenants are the lowest of the low, along with those idiots that thought they could rent out houses for thousands and the morons that set hotel room rates, their profiteering will bite them on their backside.

Absolutely. I mean, it's not like every taxpayer in the country on average has stumped up something like £400 a medal, why should they have any interest whatsoever in prospering as a result of the Olympics we have 100% funded?

Yes, 100%. Not a penny from Coca Cola, Heineken, McDonalds etc since the whole thing results in a net and vast PROFIT for each of those companies - a profit in which neither Mr Cafe nor you nor I will share.

The whole country, and especially the taxpayer, should be able to try to make a few extra bob on the back of the Olympics, if they can find a way to do so without actually ripping off the trademarked logos on substandard merchandise being passed off as genuine, and reasonable exceptions like that.

Calling your cafe the Olympic Cafe presupposes that someone owns the universal rights to the word "Olympic". They don't. The chap is in no way implying that he is an official Olympic cafe nor would anyone be so stupid as to think he was even for a second. I understand he changed the name to the "Lympic" cafe. Do you not agree that the fact that seems to be fair enough just brings these sort of trivial powerplays, and the law, into disrepute?

What next? A confectioners near us has some gingerbread men wearing kit, with Olympic rings on. that to me is just getting into the spirit of things, and is perfectly fair, and perfectly reasonable. I am not arguing that there should be no line - just that it has been drawn in an absolutely ludicrous way.