Jump to content

Mike Ashley (former owner) (still alive)


Recommended Posts

Professor Simon Chadwick is a professor of Sports Enterprise at the Salford Business School, part of the University of Salford.

 

He’s got some knowledge of Saudi Arabia and the Royal Family’s approach to business.

 

He’s not too sure regarding the link to Newcastle United.

 

***

 

“Have canvassed views of Saudi Arabians I know (in Saudi Arabia) about the proposed country takeover of NUFC. Three common responses: 1) ‘nobody is talking about it here, not an issue’; 2) ‘if it’s true, it’s a private investor, not the government’; 3) ‘no way this will happen’.

 

“Neom, Qiddiya, the Red Sea Project, Saudi Aramco, Uber, Tesla - some of the investments Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund are funding or invested into. Also working closely with Japan’s Softbank & founder Masayoshi Son, which were given $100bn to invest in value-adding assets

 

“Neom to cost $500 billion; Qiddiya likely to cost about the same. Red Sea Project also likely to cost billions. Public Investment Fund’s Uber stake cost £3 billion. And to this hugely valuable, infrastructure & tech focused portfolio, PIF wants to add Newcastle United...!!??!!??”

 

Oh Well

 

If Saudi media isn't reporting anything it might suggest that leaks are water-tight at their end. As we all suspect know anyway.

do you really think their media would report anything without the governments say so

Link to post
Share on other sites

Large sovereign funds are generally well-diversified- they aren't a single objective fund. They invest across all asset classes and sizes (although sometimes they have investment subsidiaries to specialise in niches or in smaller investments). The fact that investments are different, rather than comparable in size and nature means nothing in context of this deal. It's quite possible for the Saudi fund to designate an amount for sports related investments under a sub-investment strategy of $xbn. Maybe this whole deal is a non-starter, but that's a particularly shit line of logic as to why it wouldn't happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally think if Ashley is going to say no then it’s already done. If that’s the case then leaks would be appearing all over from the buyer that this has happened. If he’s said yes then it’ll have moved on to the next stage, possibly with the premier league for review but still everyone has to keep quiet. This silence although torturous is probably the best thing right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They should be ripping Ashley apart when this "takeover" doesn't go through. Instead they'll go back to what Charlotte Crosby had to say on Brexit and you won't believe how old 19yr old Matty Shortstaff will be on his next birthday.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course

 

 

TV piracy hits Saudi Newcastle takeover – not the beheadings and crucifixions then?

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/jan/29/tv-piracy-saudi-newcastle-takeover-beheadings-crucifixions-mike-ashley

 

Why do the media make more of the Saudis humanitarian record when they're buying us but all the clubs that are owned by the Russians or the Chinese get hardly any bother at all? They're worse than the Saudi in the humanitarian world rankings... not by much, but certainly worse none-the-less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course

 

 

TV piracy hits Saudi Newcastle takeover – not the beheadings and crucifixions then?

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/jan/29/tv-piracy-saudi-newcastle-takeover-beheadings-crucifixions-mike-ashley

 

Why do the media make more of the Saudis humanitarian record when they're buying us but all the clubs that are owned by the Russians or the Chinese get hardly any bother at all? They're worse than the Saudi in the humanitarian world rankings... not by much, but certainly worse none-the-less.

 

It’s because they’re looking at taking us over.  There’d be not a peep if an offer was going into the Glazers.

 

I remember 1996, The Mirror in particular were terrified that we were going to win the league.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Of course

 

 

TV piracy hits Saudi Newcastle takeover – not the beheadings and crucifixions then?

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/jan/29/tv-piracy-saudi-newcastle-takeover-beheadings-crucifixions-mike-ashley

 

Why do the media make more of the Saudis humanitarian record when they're buying us but all the clubs that are owned by the Russians or the Chinese get hardly any bother at all? They're worse than the Saudi in the humanitarian world rankings... not by much, but certainly worse none-the-less.

 

There's been lots of articles in The Guardian about what's going on in Russia and China and the shameful actions of both governments. I guess the difference is Putin and Xi don't own clubs or aren't currently looking to buy clubs over here to the best of my knowledge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course

 

 

TV piracy hits Saudi Newcastle takeover – not the beheadings and crucifixions then?

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/jan/29/tv-piracy-saudi-newcastle-takeover-beheadings-crucifixions-mike-ashley

 

Why do the media make more of the Saudis humanitarian record when they're buying us but all the clubs that are owned by the Russians or the Chinese get hardly any bother at all? They're worse than the Saudi in the humanitarian world rankings... not by much, but certainly worse none-the-less.

 

Can you list "all the clubs" that are owned by the Chinese and Russian governments?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course

 

 

TV piracy hits Saudi Newcastle takeover – not the beheadings and crucifixions then?

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/jan/29/tv-piracy-saudi-newcastle-takeover-beheadings-crucifixions-mike-ashley

 

Why do the media make more of the Saudis humanitarian record when they're buying us but all the clubs that are owned by the Russians or the Chinese get hardly any bother at all? They're worse than the Saudi in the humanitarian world rankings... not by much, but certainly worse none-the-less.

 

It’s because they’re looking at taking us over.  There’d be not a peep if an offer was going into the Glazers.

 

I remember 1996, The Mirror in particular were terrified that we were going to win the league.

 

Can vaguely recall MOTD (I think) showing the top of the prem, from second down.......guess who was top......hated the media, with a couple of exceptions, ever since

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course

 

 

TV piracy hits Saudi Newcastle takeover – not the beheadings and crucifixions then?

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/jan/29/tv-piracy-saudi-newcastle-takeover-beheadings-crucifixions-mike-ashley

 

Why do the media make more of the Saudis humanitarian record when they're buying us but all the clubs that are owned by the Russians or the Chinese get hardly any bother at all? They're worse than the Saudi in the humanitarian world rankings... not by much, but certainly worse none-the-less.

 

It’s because they’re looking at taking us over.  There’d be not a peep if an offer was going into the Glazers.

 

I remember 1996, The Mirror in particular were terrified that we were going to win the league.

 

Can vaguely recall MOTD (I think) showing the top of the prem, from second down.......guess who was top......hated the media, with a couple of exceptions, ever since

 

No recollection of that mind.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...