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

midds

midds

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Abacus said:

Purely from an NUFC point of view, at least, all the time, they are messing with the concept of 'fair market value' here. Chelsea are obviously not a related party, so they can sign whatever deal they like.

 

Not saying this any sort of plan to do that at all, but with that as precedent, it makes it harder to deny a sponsorship to a club like us, who are actually in the Champions League as being fair market value.

 

(The question of Saudi involvement in the League in the first place and whether that's a good thing is a different one for the other thread, recognising that I can't have my cake and eat it.)

 

 

 

Thought Chelsea -> Clearlake -> PIF -> Riyadh Airlines? ???

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kid Icarus

Kid Icarus

Posted
Posted (edited)

Probably not, because I imagine that's a big part of sportswashing (as adverse to that word as some people are) - that eventually the majority of fan's moral stances become murky, and so noone can say anything should improve somewhat without yet participating in society.  

 

 

Edited by Kid Icarus

Link to post
Share on other sites
Abacus

Abacus

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, midds said:

Thought Chelsea -> Clearlake -> PIF -> Riyadh Airlines? ???

 

May well need to be corrected there. I thought Clearlake were asset managers, including substantial PIF assets - so it's not like one owns the other. But yes, it may not be as simple as I thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Prophet

The Prophet

Posted
Posted

This is the problem with the current "fit and proper stuff". PIF are fucking enormous and will have fingers in pies all over the show. The amount of massive investment firms, particularly based in the US, investing in football clubs will cause loads of conflict issues moving forward.  There was a good recent example with Redbird and the ownership of Milan/Lille.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kid Icarus

Kid Icarus

Posted
Posted (edited)

It's different but not too dissimilar to all of the Russians buying up properties and buying influence in the US and UK pre-Ukraine imo. I imagine part of the idea is that when the shit hits the fan (the oil runs out for example) and there's even the slightest Western temptation to suddenly decide that, actually, the Saudi state is bad and it was always bad (like we did with Russia/Abramovich etc), by that point their tentacles will be so far reaching that it would be impossible to perform the same 180 that happened with Russia. 

 

The whole Abramovich thing was an absolute clinic in media "we've always been at war with Eurasia"-level heel-turns though, and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if in the right conditions we saw our media largely go from 'we need to have the conversation' to 'obviously they're being sanctioned, having their assets frozen, and being deported' so quickly that it would give you whiplash.

 

 

Edited by Kid Icarus

Link to post
Share on other sites
TheBrownBottle

TheBrownBottle

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Superior Acuña said:

 

Sounds pretty weird when I you think our chairman is, I assume, heavily involved in that deal.

Our chairman is also the chairman of Riyadh Air.

 

It’s definitely weird.  At some point some of support might actually start questioning some of this stuff - do they seriously need to be sponsoring Chelsea?
 

If Sports Direct were giving another club three times as much as our sponsorship deal when Ashley was here, I can guess what the response would be. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
TRon

TRon

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

But it seems a reasonable assumption that the chairman has a say in what it is doing.

 

I’m struggling to see how this isn’t a problem - if true. 

 

Well it isn't ideal, that's for sure. But if it's a problem, it's difficult to see what the solution is. At the end of the day we are the brand associated with PIF, their ultimate aim has already been declared as to make us number one, not Chelsea.

 

If we have dreams of being champions again, which other owners are likely to deliver?

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
duo

duo

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Wilson said:

The more they're involved in the Premier league the better for us I suppose, surely it makes it less likely/harder for us to be scrutinised for every move we make? 

It won't make a blind bit of difference. All I see happening is PIF lining the pockets of clubs we're wanting to catch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kimbo

Kimbo

Posted
Posted

PIF are basically weaving themselves into the ordinary business of these clubs until the relationship gets to the point where they all feel comfortable joining a Saudi led super league. Whether we’ll be taken along for the ride remains to be seen, I have some doubts. Saudi ambitions will be far bigger than just having a good domestic league, and far far bigger than having one good premier league side. When super league time comes and they’re picking clubs get into it, the core member clubs will probably vote us out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pata

Pata

Posted
Posted (edited)

We are one tiny fraction of PIF's portfolio, feel like analysing their every move is simply a waste of time. They care a lot more about getting Riyadh Air a foothold in global airline business than potentially helping our rival. I'm certain the decisions they make regarding our club are made in the best interests of the club but we are still completely insignificant to their big vision.

 

 

Edited by Pata

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...