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

[Shak]

Signing all the biggest dickheads in golf didn't exactly create a positive vibe

[Stifler]

54 minutes ago, Kanji said:

If you really want to sports wash, doing LIV is the complete opposite  

They had no choice though did they. The PGA kept on rejecting having tournaments in Saudi Arabia.

They can obviously buy their way into football, get an F1 race, but the PGA do have an unauthorised monopoly on golf.

[Jack27]

Swiss Ramble has released his examination of 2021/22 club finances. 
 

Bottom line on P&S (FFP) being: -£1m, £104m clear of the limit

 

Suggests our maximum loss for 2022/23 is 63m

 

 

Edited April 10, 2023 by Jack27

[TheBrownBottle]

2 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

Swiss Ramble has released his examination of 2021/22 club finances. 
 

Bottom line on P&S (FFP) being: -£1m, £104m clear of the limit

But that relates to the three years to 21-22.  21-22 was a £70m loss - so by 23-24 we’d only be able to make a £17m loss in each of the seasons 22-23 and 23-24.  

[r0cafella]

11 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

Swiss Ramble has released his examination of 2021/22 club finances. 
 

Bottom line on P&S (FFP) being: -£1m, £104m clear of the limit

 

Suggests our maximum loss for 2022/23 is 63m

 

 

 

Can’t read as he’s become paywall sadly. 
 

Also, it’s important to understand the accounting loss and the FFP loss are different figures. 

[GeordieT]

7 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Can’t read as he’s become paywall sadly. 
 

Also, it’s important to understand the accounting loss and the FFP loss are different figures. 

It’s c. £4.80 a month but that features a 7 day free trial (which you could cancel if minded). I’ve signed up for a month just to read this and as a nod to the value he’s brought over the last ten years or so.

[KetsbaiaIsBald]

This summer is going to clear up what we can actually do financially.  It could be a huge sponsorship deal for shirt, training ground and stadium.  Or a premier league handcuffed marginal improvement.   If it's the latter next season could be incredibly hard for us.  Potentially balancing Europe with the league with a marginally better squad.  We could easily slip down to mid table.  Making the bigger deals hard to justify again.  The rules set up to maintain the greedy six's dominance are well thought out.  They are not stupid.  We see teams flirt with breaking into it for a year and then really struggle.  I do think/hope we're different but its not going to be easy.  

[ExiledGeordie]

1 minute ago, KetsbaiaIsBald said:

This summer is going to clear up what we can actually do financially.  It could be a huge sponsorship deal for shirt, training ground and stadium.  Or a premier league handcuffed marginal improvement.   If it's the latter next season could be incredibly hard for us.  Potentially balancing Europe with the league with a marginally better squad.  We could easily slip down to mid table.  Making the bigger deals hard to justify again.  The rules set up to maintain the greedy six's dominance are well thought out.  They are not stupid.  We see teams flirt with breaking into it for a year and then really struggle.  I do think/hope we're different but its not going to be easy.  

How does it work with premier league ratifying sponsorship deals say if someone wants to sponsor the ground, training ground, shirt etc? Does the premier say “well your income is X and therefore we think they can only sponsor you Y?

[KetsbaiaIsBald]

26 minutes ago, ExiledGeordie said:

How does it work with premier league ratifying sponsorship deals say if someone wants to sponsor the ground, training ground, shirt etc? Does the premier say “well your income is X and therefore we think they can only sponsor you Y?

 

I dont know.  Personally I cannot see how they can legally do anything.  The example I use is:

 

- two Saudi companies both want to sponsor us

- bidding war

- we get a shirt sponsor ten times Man City (extreme example to illustrate the point)

 

How can they deny us?  We argue that we are Saudi owned.  Huge interest in us in Saudi.  Two companies wanted to have us and went mad.  I do not see how in court the premier league could win simple case of supply and demand.

 

I think an argument that your rivals are getting x, y or z is irrelevant and can't be fair trade.

 

 

Edited April 10, 2023 by KetsbaiaIsBald

[andyc35i]

Pretty sure it’s only related third party sponsorships that the rule applies. So I’d think the Noon sleeve sponsor would have been looked at and approved because PIF have some equity in the company 

[Dokko]

The biggest game the board have to play is how to get as much money into the club as legally possible. This is something different to Villa or Leicester. If FFP didn't exist, we'd be seeing a very different approach. 

 

I don't mind FFP holding us back. For me, it means if PIF leave the party, we'll have done all this with solid foundations and have a chance to support ourselves. Of course avenues would dry up, but by then we could bring in sponsorship which would be around the same level from genuine partners.

[andyc35i]

Just now, KetsbaiaIsBald said:

 

I dont know.  Personally I cannot see how they can legally do anything.  The example I use is:

 

- two Saudi companies both want to sponsor us

- bidding war

- we get a short sponsor ten times Man City (extreme example to illustrate the point)

 

How can they deny us?  We argue that we are Saudi owned.  Huge interest in us in Saudi.  Two companies wanted to have us and went mad.  I do not see how in court the premier league could win simple case of supply and demand.

I’m sure we’ll argue our case as much as we can. I think the ruling was really only been brought in to stop the type of thing that happened at Man City where Etihad game them hundreds of millions for naming rights to the shirt and stadium. This was at the time when they were just getting started and was clearly an insane sum.

[Dokko]

Also, the ground expansion can't come soon enough. It's something that cannot be taken away from us, and will continue to be a huge source of income for decades to come. Players come and go, as do managers & owners. Things like the ground & training complex are things which will shape our future for generations and again, help us support ourselves.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, andyc35i said:

I’m sure we’ll argue our case as much as we can. I think the ruling was really only been brought in to stop the type of thing that happened at Man City where Etihad game them hundreds of millions for naming rights to the shirt and stadium. This was at the time when they were just getting started and was clearly an insane sum.

It was brought in to prevent another man city aka us. Man city have long since been ordained apart of the “big 6” hence these measures only being brought in to stop us or anyone else for that matter. 

[KetsbaiaIsBald]

Just now, andyc35i said:

I’m sure we’ll argue our case as much as we can. I think the ruling was really only been brought in to stop the type of thing that happened at Man City where Etihad game them hundreds of millions for naming rights to the shirt and stadium. This was at the time when they were just getting started and was clearly an insane sum.

 

This is where things are going to get difficult.  PIF have their fingers pretty much everywhere.  Everyone could be classed as related.  This could get really messy and maybe already is behind the scenes.  

[ExiledGeordie]

3 minutes ago, KetsbaiaIsBald said:

 

I dont know.  Personally I cannot see how they can legally do anything.  The example I use is:

 

- two Saudi companies both want to sponsor us

- bidding war

- we get a short sponsor ten times Man City (extreme example to illustrate the point)

 

How can they deny us?  We argue that we are Saudi owned.  Huge interest in us in Saudi.  Two companies wanted to have us and went mad.  I do not see how in court the premier league could win simple case of supply and demand.

 

I think an argument that your rivals are getting x, y or z is irrelevant and can't be fair trade.

 

 

 

If you consider that at the very least we’ll have a new shirt sponsor and highly likely at least one other source of sponsorship. Put that together with annual premier league money and potential champions league revenue then they should be able to really kick on this summer. I guess the top four finish is the game changer in terms of targets and outlay. 
 

Veering into the transfer thread I know but I’d expect at least 4 top quality signings who could potentially start plus 1 or 2 young work in progress potentials.

 

[Jack27]

1 minute ago, Dokko said:

Also, the ground expansion can't come soon enough. It's something that cannot be taken away from us, and will continue to be a huge source of income for decades to come. Players come and go, as do managers & owners. Things like the ground & training complex are things which will shape our future for generations and again, help us support ourselves.

And a shiny new state of the art training ground complex sponsored by a Saudi airline or telecom company wouldn’t go amiss

[Keegans Export]

7 minutes ago, ExiledGeordie said:

How does it work with premier league ratifying sponsorship deals say if someone wants to sponsor the ground, training ground, shirt etc? Does the premier say “well your income is X and therefore we think they can only sponsor you Y?

It's based on "fair market value" so basically you can't artificially inflate the value of your sponsorship deals.

 

It's the reason why most reports put our next shirt sponsorship at around £20m - behind the "established" top 6 but ahead of the rest of the 14. Could end up being more if we end up in the CL obviously. 

[Jack27]

1 minute ago, KetsbaiaIsBald said:

 

This is where things are going to get difficult.  PIF have their fingers pretty much everywhere.  Everyone could be classed as related.  This could get really messy and maybe already is behind the scenes.  

Going to be fun to watch it unfold in our new documentary this summer 

[ExiledGeordie]

1 minute ago, Keegans Export said:

It's based on "fair market value" so basically you can't artificially inflate the value of your sponsorship deals.

 

It's the reason why most reports put our next shirt sponsorship at around £20m - behind the "established" top 6 but ahead of the rest of the 14. Could end up being more if we end up in the CL obviously. 

Ah I see, cheers ?

[Jackie Broon]

8 minutes ago, andyc35i said:

Pretty sure it’s only related third party sponsorships that the rule applies. So I’d think the Noon sleeve sponsor would have been looked at and approved because PIF have some equity in the company 

 

Nope, all deals of £1m or more have to be approved by the PL.

[KetsbaiaIsBald]

2 minutes ago, Dokko said:

Also, the ground expansion can't come soon enough. It's something that cannot be taken away from us, and will continue to be a huge source of income for decades to come. Players come and go, as do managers & owners. Things like the ground & training complex are things which will shape our future for generations and again, help us support ourselves.

 

Just now, Jack27 said:

And a shiny new state of the art training ground complex sponsored by a Saudi airline or telecom company wouldn’t go amiss

 

The training ground and stadium is what I am most looking forward to.  It will put to bed the doubts that PIF are not committed to the scale of investment that Man City saw.  It will set up up for decades.  The sooner this happens the better.

[Dokko]

3 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

And a shiny new state of the art training ground complex sponsored by a Saudi airline or telecom company wouldn’t go amiss

 

Well that's it. 

 

£50m for new training complex and a £10m a year deal to sponsor it, but that money goes into players and we pay for the complex ourselves (which is outside of FFP)

 

For the stadium, instead of naming the stadium, you name the stand and sponsor that. 

[KetsbaiaIsBald]

4 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

Nope, all deals of £1m or more have to be approved by the PL.

 

I really like the idea of 52,000 £999,999.99 sponsorship deals for seats in the stand.  

 

 

Edited April 10, 2023 by KetsbaiaIsBald

[TheBrownBottle]

2 minutes ago, Dokko said:

Also, the ground expansion can't come soon enough. It's something that cannot be taken away from us, and will continue to be a huge source of income for decades to come. Players come and go, as do managers & owners. Things like the ground & training complex are things which will shape our future for generations and again, help us support ourselves.

Expanding the Gallowgate isn’t likely to result in significant increases in income - and the problem we’re going to have is always going to be match day revenues. Even with 60k in the ground, we’d be taking a fraction that which Arsenal, Spurs etc do.  8k extra seats in the Gallowgate will only bring in c.£3-4m per season (barring cup games).  The relatively small population size combined with low average incomes stops the club from earning what others do.  Higher corporate seating revenues is where the money could be made from international money - corporate boxes etc.  Spending large sums on the executive areas once we’re reestablished at the top end of the table is where those match day revenues will come into play.