Jump to content
Newcastle-Online

PIF and RB Sports & Media - Darren Eales to step down from CEO after being diagnosed with blood cancer.

Yorkie

by Yorkie
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Kanji

Kanji

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, ManDoon said:

I got you, I guess I mean like it’s I don’t see the things as the same. They have a 5 percent stake in Uber, and I believe they’ve sold some off last year. I don’t think it’s a fair comparison people are making. I’m not wealthy but if had a couple mill I could buy into Uber. I can’t buy any of Newcastle and you don’t need to pass any tests to get a stake of Uber. I think Morgan Stanley own more Uber than PIF 


Yeah, anybody who tries to use those type of investments needs to frame the argument better. If there was some materiality to those investments - then maybe those public companies would engage into some dialogue of sorts but given they are large dollar low % investments, I assume they didn’t. 
 

It is quite something though if Palace and Man United’s ownership either took legit placed capital in prior companies or current club’s commercial income via a source they are actively lobbying against in the PL. while it’s not surprise to me, it’s really wild how co mingled this shit is - I wouldn’t doubt many of the Pl owners have invested in and with folks with dodgy links that their fans wouldn’t like….

 

But there are no friends in business when it relates to sport. It’s quite sickening in that it just seems heavily predatory and bent. But ho hum, right?

 

 

Edited by Kanji

Link to post
Share on other sites
geordiesteve710

geordiesteve710

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, LFEE said:

Dan Roan had done a compare and contrast Tweet about it at (Saturday) 15:27 so I think it’s went out before KO and has slowly filtered through during the first half. Point taken though that it was late in the day for those going to the CP game.

 

Exactly my sentiments. They would’ve been best off not releasing anything after the KIO meeting and let the dust settle and get the lay of the land but in the main concentrate on the football.

Fair enough. The club tweet with it was 15:58 so I just assumed that's when the statement was put out. Also heard a theory (that I'm not sure on the logic behind) that it was a hastily-arranged "fuck you" in response to the Palace banner. I hope not because we really don't need the club being run by daft impulsive types.

 

Agree with your comments re the first club statement, but my comments were also about KIO who in hindsight should have approached the club in private rather than tipping SSN off that they urgently needed to raise the issue woth the club. (In fairness they didn't actually release a statement themselves which is what I had incorrectly remembered.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
LFEE

LFEE

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, geordiesteve710 said:

Fair enough. The club tweet with it was 15:58 so I just assumed that's when the statement was put out. Also heard a theory (that I'm not sure on the logic behind) that it was a hastily-arranged "fuck you" in response to the Palace banner. I hope not because we really don't need the club being run by daft impulsive types.

 

Agree with your comments re the first club statement, but my comments were also about KIO who in hindsight should have approached the club in private rather than tipping SSN off that they urgently needed to raise the issue woth the club. (In fairness they didn't actually release a statement themselves which is what I had incorrectly remembered.)

There might be some logic in that theory but like I discovered the statement was clearly prepared earlier and weirdly release by the clubs Twitter later than various journalists. I agree regarding KIO’s approach…

 

6 hours ago, LFEE said:

Ive nothing against KIO and support most of what they do but on this occasion I felt they got involved for the wrong reasons due to the profile of the takeover.


Like I said above but maybe didn’t make it clear I thought their approach was opportunist and not thought out and (like you say) they played it out in the media which lost them a little credibility IMO.

 

Hopefully the club and fans can move on from it all ?? But it’s a sign of things to come sadly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kanji

Kanji

Posted
Posted

During 14 years of MA ownership we deal with talking about his ownership. We spent 4 of those years very recently dealing with constant sale speculation, of those 4 years - 2 of which with PIF/PCP/RB and out of nowhere we get sold a few weeks ago. And here we are still talking about ownership :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
LFEE

LFEE

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Kanji said:

During 14 years of MA ownership we deal with talking about his ownership. We spent 4 of those years very recently dealing with constant sale speculation, of those 4 years - 2 of which with PIF/PCP/RB and out of nowhere we get sold a few weeks ago. And here we are still talking about ownership :lol:

It was the same in the 80’s and 90’s. Even the golden period of Hall & Shepherd was littered with many controversies ?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wandy

Wandy

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Ben said:

Nee way, not Mandy 

 

Hope not. I imagine the last two weeks have been a massive eye opener for her as to just how high profile and subject to scrutiny her role at the club is going to be. I hope she can handle it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PauloGeordio

PauloGeordio

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, MagCA said:

She also has a very serious degenerative disease so I can see her taking a back seat at some point soon. Probably once the upper hierarchy is established. 

Huntington’s onset can take years to develop when carrying the gene. I speak from having personal family experience. She could be working for many years with no symptoms showing to hinder the driven women that she obviously is. I’m sure time will tell. Bless her.

 

 

Edited by PauloGeordio

Link to post
Share on other sites
MagCA

MagCA

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, PauloGeordio said:

Huntington’s onset can take years to develop when carrying the gene. I speak from having personal family experience. She could be working for many years with no symptoms showing to hinder the driven women that she obviously is. I’m sure time will tell. Bless her.

 

 

 

I’m sorry to hear that is something that is affecting your family. Hope all is well. Let’s keep our fingers crossed Mandy can work for many years and be apart of the project.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PauloGeordio

PauloGeordio

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, MagCA said:

I’m sorry to hear that is something that is affecting your family. Hope all is well. Let’s keep our fingers crossed Mandy can work for many years and be apart of the project.

Thanks MagCA. Indeed she doesn’t strike me as a woman that wants to hand over the reigns any time soon ????

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kanji

Kanji

Posted
Posted (edited)

From the Athletic https://theathletic.com/news/newcastle-included-in-working-group-set-up-after-premier-league-meeting/lLUBCzXJYH6o/?source=twitteruk:

 

Quote

 

Close attention would be paid to market value and inflated deals would be blocked. Industry sources estimate that Newcastle’s shirt deal is worth in the region of £5 million annually. A related company trying to pay three or four times as much would be forced to explain how and why that higher valuation had been reached — and most likely see the agreement rejected.

Premier League sources have told The Athletic that the rules will be broad and wide-reaching. They could cover any of the firms that the PIF, for example, has invested in — even the likes of entertainment giant Disney.

“If Disney offers £4 million a year to sponsor the shirt, no one’s going to complain,” said one. “It’s a fair deal. But if they offer £20 million, they could well be classed as a related party — simply because it’s not a realistic market value. That’s the point.

“I don’t think anyone seriously thinks Disney would do that, but there might be other related companies, less well known, who could be used to pay well over the odds.”

 

 

I understand what the source is getting at, but I can't accept that "OK so Newcastle United is a 5m a year shirt team, and Liverpool is a 25m a year shirt team" - the whole point of these commercial deals is proforma and growth. Someone spending 10m, 15m, or even 25m a year on a shirt deal will be doing so based on the growth potential. To me that is a limit to free market. The materiality and thresholds should be based on comparable brands, companies, etc. ie: the airline companies have average of X, high - medium - low of X. 

 

I am very uncomfortable with how it's portrayed - esp the "and most likely see the agreement rejected" which is terribly unreasonable and incredibly poor way to conduct business. 

 

 

Edited by Kanji

Link to post
Share on other sites
et tu brute

et tu brute

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, morpeth mag said:

I hope we send NDM as our rep together with a tape recorder

 

It's totally anti-competitive and would be thrown out of court. I really hope the other clubs do try and block PIF as it will open the powderkeg on everything.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...