Does anyone actually buy the Daily Record?

[MosesMcNeil 1,664]

I despise the rag and everyone that writes in it.

You know all the people that write for the Record? You know who amongst them support The Rangers - but despise them anyway?

That's about as mature as sticking the V sign in public when representing club and country.

[schwantz 23]

yes i buy it

for the crossword

Admire your honesty mate - cant help wonder why anyone would help to financially prop up an institution that despises everything Rangers.

what paper doesnt?

I'd think its pretty well proven that the Record in particular, really does have it in for us - don't you think?

so does every other paper

Worse than the Record? doubt it...I'd think the Sun is in 2nd place, but then again I don't buy papers anymore, but I do think you get much less sensationalistic journalism in the Mail or Express. All depends what you want from a paper - objective intelligent reporting, or subjective sensationalistic reporting aimed at one particular football club.

Freedom of choice is a great thing mind - and my choice is quite clear on this topic.....I'd never put money into that paper - ever !

And yet we still have Bears from here linking their sites.

I don't think it does any harm to highlight what they are saying about Rangers, does it? Know your enemy and all that..

The Record survives on the amount of papers sold - not web site hits. Simple really.

[BlueIsTheColour 35]

I don't buy any newspapers, i get all of my football news through this site.

I think the recent events have just proved that journalists in this country are given far too much importance and their inflated egos can be damaging to the game.

[fourfourtwo 2,003]

I don't read any tbh

[RyanMac 185]

yes i buy it

for the crossword

Admire your honesty mate - cant help wonder why anyone would help to financially prop up an institution that despises everything Rangers.

what paper doesnt?

I'd think its pretty well proven that the Record in particular, really does have it in for us - don't you think?

so does every other paper

Worse than the Record? doubt it...I'd think the Sun is in 2nd place, but then again I don't buy papers anymore, but I do think you get much less sensationalistic journalism in the Mail or Express. All depends what you want from a paper - objective intelligent reporting, or subjective sensationalistic reporting aimed at one particular football club.

Freedom of choice is a great thing mind - and my choice is quite clear on this topic.....I'd never put money into that paper - ever !

And yet we still have Bears from here linking their sites.

I don't think it does any harm to highlight what they are saying about Rangers, does it? Know your enemy and all that..

The Record survives on the amount of papers sold - not web site hits. Simple really.

No its not simple, you obviously don't understand commercial awareness and how for every 'hit' they get on there website they can then command a higher advertisement fee. Websites are also extremely cost effective as you don't have as much staff wages or overheads, therefore they give you a much higher profit margin.

If you want to see how there doing then go a head, give them money, but i am staying well clear of them, just as RM should.

[schwantz 23]

In hind sight and looking at the (early poll stats) percentage of bears that would still buy the rag, I perhaps should have added a question along the lines of:

'Over and above the obvious anti-Rangers reporting this week by the daily Record, what would it actually take to stop buying it? Or would you just continue to stick your head in the sand and financially support an institution that's hell bent on destroying the club you support?'

[RyanMac 185]

In hind sight and looking at the (early poll stats) percentage of bears that would still buy the rag, I perhaps should have added a question along the lines of:

'Over and above the obvious anti-Rangers reporting this week by the daily Record, what would it actually take to stop buying it? Or would you just continue to stick your head in the sand and financially support an institution that's hell bent on destroying the club you support?'

I don't think it does any harm to highlight what they are saying about Rangers, does it? Know your enemy and all that..

Changed your mind, or are you arguing just for the sake of it?

[schwantz 23]

yes i buy it

for the crossword

Admire your honesty mate - cant help wonder why anyone would help to financially prop up an institution that despises everything Rangers.

what paper doesnt?

I'd think its pretty well proven that the Record in particular, really does have it in for us - don't you think?

so does every other paper

Worse than the Record? doubt it...I'd think the Sun is in 2nd place, but then again I don't buy papers anymore, but I do think you get much less sensationalistic journalism in the Mail or Express. All depends what you want from a paper - objective intelligent reporting, or subjective sensationalistic reporting aimed at one particular football club.

Freedom of choice is a great thing mind - and my choice is quite clear on this topic.....I'd never put money into that paper - ever !

And yet we still have Bears from here linking their sites.

I don't think it does any harm to highlight what they are saying about Rangers, does it? Know your enemy and all that..

The Record survives on the amount of papers sold - not web site hits. Simple really.

No its not simple, you obviously don't understand commercial awareness and how for every 'hit' they get on there website they can then command a higher advertisement fee. Websites are also extremely cost effective as you don't have as much staff wages or overheads, therefore they give you a much higher profit margin.

If you want to see how there doing then go a head, give them money, but i am staying well clear of them, just as RM should.

Sorry I have to disagree, there are many, many Gers fans out there who still buy the paper - its the Scottish distribution that matters to them. Papers have reluctantly opened up web sites due to media pressure, and not as a cash investment.

If fans are to be educated, they need to be informed what papers like the Record are saying about THEIR club - lifting a quote to highlight these issues is essential in taking the fight to them. I don't trawl through any papers or their respective websites. I do however, think its useful to highlight anti-Rangers editorials when appropriate. Even if it stops one more fan buying the rag - its worth it.

Burying our head in sand simply wont work - the WWW is there to be used by us all and we should use it, like they use it against us. Less we retreat into our own wee insular world and exclusive web sites and ignore whats going on around us - Rangers PR Dept anyone?

[schwantz 23]

In hind sight and looking at the (early poll stats) percentage of bears that would still buy the rag, I perhaps should have added a question along the lines of:

'Over and above the obvious anti-Rangers reporting this week by the daily Record, what would it actually take to stop buying it? Or would you just continue to stick your head in the sand and financially support an institution that's hell bent on destroying the club you support?'

I don't think it does any harm to highlight what they are saying about Rangers, does it? Know your enemy and all that..

Changed your mind, or are you arguing just for the sake of it?

Deary me - please read my other post regarding web site quotes to highlight issues in papers.....and no I havent changed my mind, nor do I argue - unless provoked !

[RyanMac 185]

yes i buy it

for the crossword

Admire your honesty mate - cant help wonder why anyone would help to financially prop up an institution that despises everything Rangers.

what paper doesnt?

I'd think its pretty well proven that the Record in particular, really does have it in for us - don't you think?

so does every other paper

Worse than the Record? doubt it...I'd think the Sun is in 2nd place, but then again I don't buy papers anymore, but I do think you get much less sensationalistic journalism in the Mail or Express. All depends what you want from a paper - objective intelligent reporting, or subjective sensationalistic reporting aimed at one particular football club.

Freedom of choice is a great thing mind - and my choice is quite clear on this topic.....I'd never put money into that paper - ever !

And yet we still have Bears from here linking their sites.

I don't think it does any harm to highlight what they are saying about Rangers, does it? Know your enemy and all that..

The Record survives on the amount of papers sold - not web site hits. Simple really.

No its not simple, you obviously don't understand commercial awareness and how for every 'hit' they get on there website they can then command a higher advertisement fee. Websites are also extremely cost effective as you don't have as much staff wages or overheads, therefore they give you a much higher profit margin.

If you want to see how there doing then go a head, give them money, but i am staying well clear of them, just as RM should.

Sorry I have to disagree, there are many, many Gers fans out there who still buy the paper - its the Scottish distribution that matters to them. Papers have reluctantly opened up web sites due to media pressure....

At that exact moment i stopped reading. So they were pressurised by themselves to create a website?

It's ALL to do with money, EVERYTHING has to do with money, even the whole anti-Rangers propaganda shit thats happening just now is to do with money. We hear that they are writing this nonsense about our club and we have to know, its the human psychology to know the negatives. So we buy their papers and go on their websites which bring them in money. BTW the website creates more of a profit than the hardcopy side diue to the little overheads and the worldwide market possibilities.

[BillyBoy84 0]

Hmmmmm I buy the record. Dont reeally see it as anti-rangers to be honest, its pretty even handed.

As long as u take it with a pinch of salt its not too bad.

[schwantz 23]

It's ALL to do with money, EVERYTHING has to do with money, even the whole anti-Rangers propaganda shit thats happening just now is to do with money. We hear that they are writing this nonsense about our club and we have to know, its the human psychology to know the negatives. So we buy their papers and go on their websites which bring them in money. BTW the website creates more of a profit than the hardcopy side diue to the little overheads and the worldwide market possibilities.

I'd be interested if you could perhaps substantiate that statement? does it have any provenance?

[StevenDavis 112]

I'd never buy it, but I maybe might read it ever now and again, just for a time waster.

[schwantz 23]

Hmmmmm I buy the record. Dont reeally see it as anti-rangers to be honest, its pretty even handed.

As long as u take it with a pinch of salt its not too bad.

And after this weeks events? You still think its 'even handed'?

Speechless...then again its your choice I guess...

[BillyBoy84 0]

Hmmmmm I buy the record. Dont reeally see it as anti-rangers to be honest, its pretty even handed.

As long as u take it with a pinch of salt its not too bad.

And after this weeks events? You still think its 'even handed'?

Speechless...then again its your choice I guess...

Aye. It is.

[gizmico1986 0]

Hmmmmm I buy the record. Dont reeally see it as anti-rangers to be honest, its pretty even handed.

As long as u take it with a pinch of salt its not too bad.

And after this weeks events? You still think its 'even handed'?

Speechless...then again its your choice I guess...

Aye. It is.

sniff sniff

[BillyBoy84 0]

Hay fever?

[papaguy51 912]

My dad buys the Sunday Mail, but it's usually the Herald.

I just use the PA's newswire. No bias there

[RyanMac 185]

I'd be interested if you could perhaps substantiate that statement? does it have any provenance?

Its common financial knowledge that websites create a higher profit margin than any other marketing means, and not just in publishing. That is not up for debate, you don't have to employ as many staff or have a large site with large maintenance costs. Couple that with £x for y hits, you are getting to keep more of that money for yourself, thus having a greater profit margin.

Thats basic financial awareness, im sure people on here know in more detail about it than i do.

[schwantz 23]

I'd be interested if you could perhaps substantiate that statement? does it have any provenance?

Its common financial knowledge that websites create a higher profit margin than any other marketing means, and not just in publishing. That is not up for debate, you don't have to employ as many staff or have a large site with large maintenance costs. Couple that with £x for y hits, you are getting to keep more of that money for yourself, thus having a greater profit margin.

Thats basic financial awareness, im sure people on here know in more detail about it than i do.

I'd be interested in where your information comes from? or is it unsubstantiated information?

Oh and I'm not trying to provoke, its the university education in me that craves provenance when folk quote things to me !

[papaguy51 912]

I'd be interested if you could perhaps substantiate that statement? does it have any provenance?

Its common financial knowledge that websites create a higher profit margin than any other marketing means, and not just in publishing. That is not up for debate, you don't have to employ as many staff or have a large site with large maintenance costs. Couple that with £x for y hits, you are getting to keep more of that money for yourself, thus having a greater profit margin.

Thats basic financial awareness, im sure people on here know in more detail about it than i do.

I'd be interested in where your information comes from? or is it unsubstantiated information?

Oh and I'm not trying to provoke, its the university education in me that craves provenance when folk quote things to me !

I think they do command a greater fee (advertisement-wise) depending on the hits their site gets.

It's quota based though, it's not like they get extra money for every single hit.

They base it on different parts of the site. If the Sports site gets more hits than the Business section, advertising space on the former is more expensive.

[blueballss 2,973]

I'd never buy it, but I maybe might read it ever now and again, just for a time waster.

[Youllneverwinaway 0]

I'd be interested if you could perhaps substantiate that statement? does it have any provenance?

Its common financial knowledge that websites create a higher profit margin than any other marketing means, and not just in publishing. That is not up for debate, you don't have to employ as many staff or have a large site with large maintenance costs. Couple that with £x for y hits, you are getting to keep more of that money for yourself, thus having a greater profit margin.

Thats basic financial awareness, im sure people on here know in more detail about it than i do.

hmmmm - not quite as simple as that im afraid. If you are looking at a company who sells on the internet then you are correct as there is no or little cost for phone calls, staff, electricity etc etc but it cannot be said, FOR A FACT, with regards to publishers or newspapers as it would depend on the traffic v paper sales stats.

What is true though is that by clicking on their website, you 100% do improve their financial stability and status as they can show potential advertisers their web analytics to prove what traffic they have.

[rendog 0]

I but it every now and again.

[RyanMac 185]

I'd be interested if you could perhaps substantiate that statement? does it have any provenance?

Its common financial knowledge that websites create a higher profit margin than any other marketing means, and not just in publishing. That is not up for debate, you don't have to employ as many staff or have a large site with large maintenance costs. Couple that with £x for y hits, you are getting to keep more of that money for yourself, thus having a greater profit margin.

Thats basic financial awareness, im sure people on here know in more detail about it than i do.

I'd be interested in where your information comes from? or is it unsubstantiated information?

Oh and I'm not trying to provoke, its the university education in me that craves provenance when folk quote things to me !

So your university education included financial awareness and business management? That is where i acquired my basic knowledge as it was paramount in my field. Now maybe the course or university you attended didn't deal with such pressing issues, but to think that the papers don't make money from their websites is just naive.