Si Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Staveley wants a relegation clause. Substantial amount refunded should we go down. This all sound ridiculous now. Like buying a house not paying for a thorough survey finding your roof is f***ed then claiming you want half your money back, get real. You buy something in the knowledge it is a club that has just been promoted and there is a risk, fund the f***ing thing! Are we now going to end up with the female equivalent of Ashley? It's nothing like buying house. If you need a new roof your income doesn't suddenly get cut significantly. They know what they are buying. You cant start negotiating a new boiler 6 months after a purchase, or saying i can only buy this property on the grounds that boiler stays in tip top shape for the remainder of the year. Wtf you have me comparing us to a boiler now to make a point. Point is a relegation clause for a club isnt going to work or happen imo. No one is saying it is or isn't, in fact most of us see it as a political move as part of her bid in which she's willing to drop to get a better deal for herself. You are the one dismissing her credibility because of this one aspect. When I buy a Festive Bake I do so in the understanding that if it makes me sick I can complain and get a refund. A football club is much more expensive than a Festive Bake usually (waves at mackems!) but no less complex or enjoyable this just seems a sensible precaution to ensure maximum enjoyment from it's warm flakey goodness by making sure we are compensated for the loss of tv money if we are relegated. Greggsenomics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964 Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Staveley wants a relegation clause. Substantial amount refunded should we go down. This all sound ridiculous now. Like buying a house not paying for a thorough survey finding your roof is f***ed then claiming you want half your money back, get real. You buy something in the knowledge it is a club that has just been promoted and there is a risk, fund the f***ing thing! Are we now going to end up with the female equivalent of Ashley? It's nothing like buying house. If you need a new roof your income doesn't suddenly get cut significantly. They know what they are buying. You cant start negotiating a new boiler 6 months after a purchase, or saying i can only buy this property on the grounds that boiler stays in tip top shape for the remainder of the year. Wtf you have me comparing us to a boiler now to make a point. Point is a relegation clause for a club isnt going to work or happen imo. No one is saying it is or isn't, in fact most of us see it as a political move as part of her bid in which she's willing to drop to get a better deal for herself. You are the one dismissing her credibility because of this one aspect. When I buy a Festive Bake I do so in the understanding that if it makes me sick I can complain and get a refund. A football club is much more expensive than a Festive Bake usually (waves at mackems!) but no less complex or enjoyable this just seems a sensible precaution to ensure maximum enjoyment from it's warm flakey goodness by making sure we are compensated for the loss of tv money if we are relegated. Greggsenomics. Can we have a half eaten Mike Ashley as the baby Jesus? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Staveley wants a relegation clause. Substantial amount refunded should we go down. This all sound ridiculous now. Like buying a house not paying for a thorough survey finding your roof is f***ed then claiming you want half your money back, get real. You buy something in the knowledge it is a club that has just been promoted and there is a risk, fund the f***ing thing! Are we now going to end up with the female equivalent of Ashley? It's nothing like buying house. If you need a new roof your income doesn't suddenly get cut significantly. They know what they are buying. You cant start negotiating a new boiler 6 months after a purchase, or saying i can only buy this property on the grounds that boiler stays in tip top shape for the remainder of the year. Wtf you have me comparing us to a boiler now to make a point. Point is a relegation clause for a club isnt going to work or happen imo. No one is saying it is or isn't, in fact most of us see it as a political move as part of her bid in which she's willing to drop to get a better deal for herself. You are the one dismissing her credibility because of this one aspect. When I buy a Festive Bake I do so in the understanding that if it makes me sick I can complain and get a refund. A football club is much more expensive than a Festive Bake usually (waves at mackems!) but no less complex or enjoyable this just seems a sensible precaution to ensure maximum enjoyment from it's warm flakey goodness by making sure we are compensated for the loss of tv money if we are relegated. Greggsenomics. Can we have a half eaten Mike Ashley as the baby Jesus? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 I think normally you accept a certain level of risk when taking over the future of a football club as someone would with any company. It's up to them to do their analysis of the ability of our manager, the standard of players we have, where those players have come from and the general trajectory of our performances over the last year or so to decide what they're willing to offer. If we're bought before January they'll be partly responsible for how the season goes anyway. It's a bit cheeky to try to create terms whereby you'd pay less for something (that you're looking to make money/status out of), if it turns out your initial analysis wasn't correct. Especially if you've then had a say in improving on that initial impression yourself via potential transfers etc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 It’s not cheeky at all in my mind. The asset is worth a certain value in the premier league and a certain value in the championship and the offer reflects that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcjb Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Is Amanda trying to beat Ashley at his own game? Seems like she's trying to get us at the cheapest values as possible, going against Fat Mike who is trying ambitiously to get that over-inflated £380m from potential buyers? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 There will be details and reasoning to such clauses to which we aren't privvy to. It does seem strange at first glance but not if it's to mitigate against points deduction or if it drags on beyond January and any new owners ability to affect things through the transfer window diminishes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 It’s not cheeky at all in my mind. The asset is worth a certain value in the premier league and a certain value in the championship and the offer reflects that. They currently would have some say in where it ends up though, so it is cheeky to basically try to cover for that by paying less if it doesn't go well. Probably just a negotiating tactic anyway. Again with another house analogy, you cannot agree to pay £170k on the basis that the house only stays or goes up in value but pay £150k if it turns out the market crashes in your area or they build a bunch of flats next door in a years time. Especially if you're someone who makes decisions which determine whether they end up building flats next door in a years time. You go into it accepting risk & do your analysis of the situation upfront. Then you pay what you deem it to be worth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 It is not analogous to buying a house in any way ffs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUFC_Chris Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 It’s not cheeky at all in my mind. The asset is worth a certain value in the premier league and a certain value in the championship and the offer reflects that. They currently would have some say in where it ends up though, so it is cheeky to basically try to cover for that by paying less if it doesn't go well. Probably just a negotiating tactic anyway. Again with another house analogy, you cannot agree to pay £170k on the basis that the house only stays or goes up in value but pay £150k if it turns out the market crashes in your area or they build a bunch of flats next door in a years time. Especially if you're someone who makes decisions which determine whether they end up building flats next door in a years time. You go into it accepting risk & do your analysis of the situation upfront. Then you pay what you deem it to be worth. PCP are thinking, even if it's done before Jan, and they have that window to bring in players, one window isn't necessarily enough to halt a relegation slide. The lack of investment in the playing squad is an issue which goes back years, and is on Ashley's back in my opinion. It's reasonable for them to want to protect themselves from that at least in the short term, for the remainder of this season for example, anything after that would then be their own doing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 It is not analogous to buying a house in any way ffs. It quite easily is as a general point really. Your last point about income not being cut with a house can easily be brought into the same analogies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_69 Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 It’s not cheeky at all in my mind. The asset is worth a certain value in the premier league and a certain value in the championship and the offer reflects that. They currently would have some say in where it ends up though, so it is cheeky to basically try to cover for that by paying less if it doesn't go well. Probably just a negotiating tactic anyway. Again with another house analogy, you cannot agree to pay £170k on the basis that the house only stays or goes up in value but pay £150k if it turns out the market crashes in your area or they build a bunch of flats next door in a years time. Especially if you're someone who makes decisions which determine whether they end up building flats next door in a years time. You go into it accepting risk & do your analysis of the situation upfront. Then you pay what you deem it to be worth. Only if the deal is completed before the January window. If it goes through after that then the plight of the club is dictated by what Ashley allows Rafa to do in the transfer market. That's where this deal differs from buying a house, festive bake or anything else. There aren't transfer windows that could dictate the value of the house, festive bake by the end of a season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54 Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Teamtalk so its probably bullshit: Meanwhile, Staveley’s group have also stipulated that the £300million price will only be fully achieved if Newcastle go on to win the Champions League in the next 10 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mighty__mag Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 It is not analogous to buying a house in any way ffs. It quite easily is as a general point really. Your last point about income not being cut with a house can easily be brought into the same analogies. Most of us average poor people own a house as our most valuable asset. So its all i can compare it with. And i wouldnt want to have someone make me offers where i owe them after a sale. Id just move on to another buyer or take it off the market. It all depends how desperate Ashley is to get out. Or risk losing his precious pennies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Teamtalk so its probably bullshit: Meanwhile, Staveley’s group have also stipulated that the £300million price will only be fully achieved if Newcastle go on to win the Champions League in the next 10 years. :lol: qualify they mean surely? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmymag Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Ashley's position at NUFC is now untenable! Rejoice people, this is going to happen! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mighty__mag Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Teamtalk so its probably bullshit: Meanwhile, Staveley’s group have also stipulated that the £300million price will only be fully achieved if Newcastle go on to win the Champions League in the next 10 years. Seen that also. Even City cant achieve that target. So im guessing thats bullshit. If it is in there its more of a laugh than the relegation one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleBingo Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 The lad who spoke to Staveley is saying that there are definitely clauses in the deal, and he's expecting some more info this afternoon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Teamtalk so its probably bullshit: Meanwhile, Staveley’s group have also stipulated that the £300million price will only be fully achieved if Newcastle go on to win the Champions League in the next 10 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Teamtalk so its probably bullshit: Meanwhile, Staveley’s group have also stipulated that the £300million price will only be fully achieved if Newcastle go on to win the Champions League in the next 10 years. Seen that also. Even City cant achieve that target. So im guessing thats bullshit. If it is in there its more of a laugh than the relegation one. Strange they kept it so low. Could easy have went up to 7 trillion if we were to win the Champs league for what difference it would make. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaydnNUFC Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Teamtalk so its probably bullshit: Meanwhile, Staveley’s group have also stipulated that the £300million price will only be fully achieved if Newcastle go on to win the Champions League in the next 10 years. That just can't be true. It's mental. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlies Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 The lad who spoke to Staveley is saying that there are definitely clauses in the deal, and he's expecting some more info this afternoon. keep us posted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontownman Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Sell the club in desperation through the press and expect to make a loss. Ashle is bent over a Barrel on this one. The minute they went public to flush out buyers was the minute he flushed his value down the drain. I hope there is compromise as we all know he is pig headed enough to keep the club out of spite. Guess those 'want to find the buyer that has the best long term interests of the club' quotes will be tested now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaydnNUFC Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Sell the club in desperation through the press and expect to make a loss. Ashle is bent over a Barrel on this one. The minute they went public to flush out buyers was the minute he flushed his value down the drain. I hope there is compromise as we all know he is pig headed enough to keep the club out of spite. Guess those 'want to find the buyer that has the best long term interests of the club' quotes will be tested now. So Staveley/PCP have the upper hand in these negotiations you reckon? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBG Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 All I'm saying is it's too much of a coincidence this news breaking after my tidbit OMG they were just testing (17:05pm, 16/11/17 for you journalists out there wanting FACTS), the tannoy system at St James' when I walked by. Is this the last due diligence check? #itk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts