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

[Infatuation Junkie]

7 hours ago, Manxst said:

Ketsbaia was decent enough. You could’ve chosen much better from the likes of Khizanishvili, Ferreyra, Doumbia, Barreca, Bentaleb, Rose, Ireland, Harewood, Fitz Hall, Onyewu, Diatta, Kuqi, Gonzalez, Riviere, Muto, Ki etc…! Fuck me, we’ve had some dross over the last decade. 

 

Haha. I chuckled. 
 

This signing will stick with me forever though. I sat like a complete helmet all night and had earlier the next day for Ketsbaia.

 

I was as mental as he was and nearly kicked the tv like he did the advertising boards mate.

[Manxst]

Just now, Infatuation Junkie said:

 

Haha. I chuckled. 
 

This signing will stick with me forever though. I sat like a complete helmet all night and had earlier the next day for Ketsbaia.

 

I was as mental as he was and nearly kicked the tv like he did the advertising boards mate.

???

[The Prophet]

https://twitter.com/MiguelDelaney/status/1661455269711302662

 

Delaney raises some fair points.

[Exiled in Texas]

So it’s at a value less than other contracts for similar placed clubs … but still inflated.

[nufc123]

1 minute ago, Exiled in Texas said:

So it’s at a value less than other contracts for similar placed clubs … but still inflated.

Strange isnt it 

[The Prophet]

It's one of those things that probably shouldn't be allowed, but the horse bolted so, so long ago.

[Exiled in Texas]

I would understand if it was exceeding the market, but other teams/companies have set the markets. 
 

Now they are arguing that “little old Newcastle” cannot possibly be worth paying what other big 6 teams are worth. 
 

Next they will require contracts to be based on the coefficient of success based on last 10 years (update as required to protect big 6)

[et tu brute]

Senior football executives  No mention of the fact that they will be employed by other 'top 6' clubs. I take no notice of what that bitter cunt publishes. I'm quite sure our owners will know exactly what is acceptable under the current rules. 
 

[Manxst]

9 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

It's one of those things that probably shouldn't be allowed, but the horse bolted so, so long ago.

King Power stadium? And isn’t Everton’s training ground sponsored by Usmanov? 

[The Prophet]

This is it. Delaney needs to keep banging the drum, just he's likely to be used and abused by bad faith actors in doing so.

[The Prophet]

Just now, Manxst said:

King Power stadium? And isn’t Everton’s training ground sponsored by Usmanov? 

 

 

Exactly.

[SAK]

So his argument is the deal is within the laws, the value is within fair market value, but Saudi Arabia is autocratic so bad?
 

“While there is understood to be sound advice that the deal represents fair market value given the Champions League qualification, the question from some executives in the game is whether the new regulations are as relevant in this case given they concern the same ownership”

 

Isn’t that what regs concerning related party transactions cover already I.e owners using related entities for funding?

[Turnbull2000]

The cartel of 'big' clubs are are going to lean very heavily on the PL and UEFA to stop this, aren't they? It's a big jump in sponsorship yes, but we've made an even more massive jump in performance and club publicity Sitting between the domestic cartel of 6 and the rest seems quite reasonable.

[Manxst]

Nothing article by a nothing cunt. Mackems will be lapping it up and rejoicing someone else has their levels of fewm and bitterness.

 

[Boey_Jarton]

6 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

https://twitter.com/MiguelDelaney/status/1661455269711302662

 

Delaney raises some fair points.

If the deal can be proven to demonstrate fair value then the fact it is with a related party is entirely irrelevant.

 

There are no rules prohibiting related party transactions and in many cases such transactions make perfect commercial sense and bring synergies - e.g. Ryan Reynolds using his other businesses to sponsor Wrexham. The fact Reynolds has control of both companies has value and is why the sponsorship deal makes sense i.e. 'win-win'. In fact, it's what (partly) commercially justified the acquisition of Wrexham in the first place. 

 

His article suggests that they have experts employed to test 'fair value' but what Delaney won't know is that demonstrating the value of an intangible asset like sponsorship is difficult if not impossible. They can (and will) reference other club's deals, and in this context our deal looks fine. However, you can only take that so far since you end up with a circular argument whereby no club can ever do a deal that contradicts other deals. 

 

Moreover, the true value of an intangible asset is the long term discounted  incremental cash flows attributed to it. It would not be at all difficult for a Saudi firm, controlled by PIF, to create a financial model that demonstrates that premier league exposure has a lot of value to a young and growing Saudi population.

 

Having said all that, I don't contest that part of the rationale behind PIF's acquisition and the future sponsorships of Newcastle is to create a brand that supports Saudi's image (aka sports washing). However, that argument is largely irrelevant in the context of valuing sponsorship deals. 

 

 

[SAK]

Stuff like this makes me think why don’t our ownership just say fuck it and go down the City/PSG route. Playing nice isn’t getting us anywhere with other clubs and the media, they’ll always try to stiff us even with little improvements, may as well go full on Galactic Empire. 

[Exiled in Texas]

Wait till someone challenges the business case that Etihad airlines are getting an increase in flight sales that exceeds their sponsorship of City.
or TeamViewer (whatever that is) are getting increased sales equal to their ManUtd sponsorship.

If not then the market value is not a true value.

 

[DahnSahf]

The whole point of 'fair value' was to address deals between related parties!

I mean there's never going to be a risk of an inflated deal if the parties aren't related is there, FFS?

[Keegans Export]

12 minutes ago, DahnSahf said:

The whole point of 'fair value' was to address deals between related parties!

I mean there's never going to be a risk of an inflated deal if the parties aren't related is there, FFS?

Actually, that's exactly what other clubs were worried about - PIFs "influence" being enough to encourage non-related parties to offer big sponsorship packages, presumably in anticipation of receiving some Saudi money down the line.

 

It's the main reason (in my opinion) why any deal over £1m has to pass the "fair market value" test now, not just related party transactions. 

[madras]

18 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

Actually, that's exactly what other clubs were worried about - PIFs "influence" being enough to encourage non-related parties to offer big sponsorship packages, presumably in anticipation of receiving some Saudi money down the line.

 

It's the main reason (in my opinion) why any deal over £1m has to pass the "fair market value" test now, not just related party transactions. 

Don't really see how that stands up unless you can prove that there's money down the line outside of what any business would usually get from sponsorship.

[DahnSahf]

1 hour ago, Keegans Export said:

Actually, that's exactly what other clubs were worried about - PIFs "influence" being enough to encourage non-related parties to offer big sponsorship packages, presumably in anticipation of receiving some Saudi money down the line.

 

It's the main reason (in my opinion) why any deal over £1m has to pass the "fair market value" test now, not just related party transactions. 

.

Right, which is exactly why the only applicable criterion is fair market value. If the deal is seen to be 'at arms length' nothing else is relevant.

 

 

Edited May 24, 2023 by DahnSahf
Grammar

[TheBrownBottle]

59 minutes ago, madras said:

Don't really see how that stands up unless you can prove that there's money down the line outside of what any business would usually get from sponsorship.

Yep, that’s going to be very difficult to stand up in a tribunal.  Correlation still wouldn’t mean causation in that regard. 

[TheBrownBottle]

1 hour ago, SAK said:

Stuff like this makes me think why don’t our ownership just say fuck it and go down the City/PSG route. Playing nice isn’t getting us anywhere with other clubs and the media, they’ll always try to stiff us even with little improvements, may as well go full on Galactic Empire. 

Probably because they’re not as keen as chucking the same amount of money at it.  KSA isn’t a petty city-state with a tiny population and a colossal amount of oil per capita.  It’s a country - and while it is a dictatorship and will chuck money around, it would still be an investment and not a loss-making vanity exercise. 

[Wilson]

 

https://streamable.com/1atqpz

 

[Charlies]

1 hour ago, Wilson said:

 

https://streamable.com/1atqpz

 

I shouldn’t of watched this before I go to sleep