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

[deejeck]

 

[Izakaya]

1 hour ago, deejeck said:

 

New Our Friends In The North remake looks class.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Whilst we have the big six fighting against us now there are bigger players who will help our cause in years to come - sponsors.

 

Once we get a couple of names through the door they will be making sure that we are high profile as it will benefit them. Spurs go bye bye from the big boys table as it only sits six 

[bowlingcrofty]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-10517273/Staveley-brands-Ashley-claims-embarrassing-High-Court-battle.html

 

”They claim the new owners discovered only after the transaction that Newcastle had 'not received any sponsorship fees in respect of the Sports Direct or Flannels signage for the 2019/20, 2020/21 or 2021/22 seasons'.”

 

 

Edited February 16, 2022 by bowlingcrofty

[PauloGeordio]

2 hours ago, bowlingcrofty said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-10517273/Staveley-brands-Ashley-claims-embarrassing-High-Court-battle.html

 

”They claim the new owners discovered only after the transaction that Newcastle had 'not received any sponsorship fees in respect of the Sports Direct or Flannels signage for the 2019/20, 2020/21 or 2021/22 seasons'.”

 

 

 

Why am I not surprised? Onwards and upwards 

[Kid Icarus]

In November, she said she was 'looking forward' to the signs coming down and that it was a 'slight frustration' not being able to take a photo in the arena without a Sports Direct sign in it.

 

Ding ding ding ding

[Nobody]

6 hours ago, bowlingcrofty said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-10517273/Staveley-brands-Ashley-claims-embarrassing-High-Court-battle.html

 

”They claim the new owners discovered only after the transaction that Newcastle had 'not received any sponsorship fees in respect of the Sports Direct or Flannels signage for the 2019/20, 2020/21 or 2021/22 seasons'.”

 

 

 

Well it sounds to me like a delayed payment for those signs along with a 70000% interest is due. 

[mouldy_uk]

 

[sushimonster85]

2 minutes ago, mouldy_uk said:

 

 

Dan Ashworth definitely on garden leave, definitely not already working from home on Newcastle stuff, promise....

[morpeth mag]

47 minutes ago, mouldy_uk said:

 

Can't be right, we only sign ex players for that type of role.

[McCormick]

If they hated us before

[UncleBingo]

7 hours ago, bowlingcrofty said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-10517273/Staveley-brands-Ashley-claims-embarrassing-High-Court-battle.html

 

”They claim the new owners discovered only after the transaction that Newcastle had 'not received any sponsorship fees in respect of the Sports Direct or Flannels signage for the 2019/20, 2020/21 or 2021/22 seasons'.”

 

 

 

"For the football season beginning in August 2019 the Sports Direct Group will be charged £2million for the advertising rights.

Sports Direct still considers this to be value for its shareholders.”

 

I'm guessing he lied? 

[Stottie]

I don't know where to put this, but the club have announced a partnership with the analysis people Statsbomb.

They've talked about helping Brentford in the past in their podcasts, and that club certainly has done well in the transfer market with their limited resources.

Starting this now potentially means the club can use the rest of the season to start identifying targets for the summer.

[Kanji]

"will be charged" versus "Was charged" or "received" 

[McDog]

10 minutes ago, Kanji said:

"will be charged" versus "Was charged" or "received" 

 

 

 

versus "was never charged"

[Abacus]

2 hours ago, UncleBingo said:

"For the football season beginning in August 2019 the Sports Direct Group will be charged £2million for the advertising rights.

Sports Direct still considers this to be value for its shareholders.”

 

I'm guessing he lied? 

The NUFC accounts don't disclose what they were paid by Sports Direct (it's not required).

 

But the Sports Direct accounts for the same period say they were charged £2m by NUFC re sponsorships for the 19/20 season (it's in their related parties note).

[Kanji]

Interesting, hopefully Staveley is not lieing. SD is a public company so you'd imagine that would be audited - unless - truly while they were charged, it was never paid. 

[Superior Acuña]

Howay leave Brighton alone now lads.

[Abacus]

1 hour ago, Kanji said:

Interesting, hopefully Staveley is not lieing. SD is a public company so you'd imagine that would be audited - unless - truly while they were charged, it was never paid. 

Yes, it's in their audited accounts on Companies House. I was wondering how this could be true or square with what Stavely said.

 

So, rather tragically, I looked up the next year's accounts. Under that year's related party note it says the following;

 

"A provisions [sic] was made in FY20 for £2.0m payable to Newcastle United Football Club...this was reversed..."

 

Spelling mistake aside, if it's the same £2m and it was 'reversed', then that would explain it.

 

[Ben]

If we are questioning if Ashley is a cunt or not then that was answered years ago 

[Fantail Breeze]

Colour me shocked, Ashley is a liar.

 

It’ll probably take the consortium years to untangle all of the shite Ashley has put us in. 

[Ben]

3 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

Colour me shocked, Ashley is a liar.

 

It’ll probably take the consortium years to untangle all of the shite Ashley has put us in. 

The CEO was literally put in the back of a police car and taken for questioning 

[macphisto]

There's an article in the Athletic today about sponsorship deals in football, primarily at Man City. We're mentioned in the article too. 

 

I didn't read it in-depth as it was a bit boring but one thing did catch my eye. The owner of Everton or his company paid a record fee to be the shirt sponsor of Everton's womens team. There are so many ways to get around FFP, I wonder how else you could manipulate the women's team to funnel money into the club? 

 

 

Edited February 17, 2022 by macphisto

[r0cafella]

18 minutes ago, macphisto said:

There's an article in the Athletic today about sponsorship deals in football, primarily at Man City. We're mentioned in the article too. 

 

I didn't read it in-depth as it was a bit boring but one thing did catch my eye. The owner of Everton or his company paid a record fee to be the shirt sponsor of Everton's womens team. There are so many ways to get around FFP, I wonder how else you could manipulate the women's team to funnel money into the club? 

 

 

 

It’s a long read and actually not worth the time. 
 

the TLDR is the big boys want to stop anyone catching them and are using sponsorship rules to do that. City have found ways around it already by signing lots of small deals with related entities. 
 

basically everything we’ve discussed here previously. 

[NE27]

I know it's done to death, but how is that a fair playing field at all?

 

We've all accumulated wealth through rich owners, inflated sponsorship but we're not happy that's the way to go now. So now we will pull up the ladder and what you make now is what you make forever unless you go through a horrendous patch you can't buy your way out of?

 

Mad thing is, I agree with the sentiment originally, but the game is so far past that point that it is now a completely unfair playing field, and this would serve to protect no one but those who had the chance to flout them rules previously.

 

Edit: it's no wonder we are building up a legal team ffs going to be the busiest department at the club I think.

 

 

Edited February 17, 2022 by NE27