Jump to content

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Scoot said:

 

And waved through by the Premier league within 2 weeks...


This is the most shocking thing for me, that these kind of deals get waved through when they are clearly detrimental to the long term viability of the club. Burnley for example. 

 

Yet PIF get knocked back when they would clearly be beneficial to the club AND the local area.

 

PL clearly just want to protect their big  clubs from competition 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LV said:


This is the most shocking thing for me, that these kind of deals get waved through when they are clearly detrimental to the long term viability of the club. Burnley for example. 

 

Yet PIF get knocked back when they would clearly be beneficial to the club AND the local area.

 

PL clearly just want to protect their big  clubs from competition 

Yeah, however what is also baffling is that they and FFP allow Man Utd to be bought for £600m (now £1bn) of debt to buy themselves, and they are somehow self sufficient and comply with FFP rules, yet other clubs are getting slated for even checking their available credit lines.

‘Big debt is ok for small clubs because we don’t care if they go to the wall, and big debt is ok for big clubs because we will just allow them to keep financing, however if any non big club has debt or is given money that remotely gives them a chance or upsetting the big clubs, then that’s not on’.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Yeah, however what is also baffling is that they and FFP allow Man Utd to be bought for £600m (now £1bn) of debt to buy themselves, and they are somehow self sufficient and comply with FFP rules, yet other clubs are getting slated for even checking their available credit lines.

‘Big debt is ok for small clubs because we don’t care if they go to the wall, and big debt is ok for big clubs because we will just allow them to keep financing, however if any non big club has debt or is given money that remotely gives them a chance or upsetting the big clubs, then that’s not on’.

FFP is about profit and loss and not debt. And even then only certain losses count towards FFP. 

 

EG, I take out a billion dollar loan to finance a new stadium, this wouldn’t count against FFP. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hanshithispantz said:
  Hide contents

 


Henry Mauriss says he was ‘at the finish line’ to buy Newcastle. Will Sheffield United be different?

Henry Mauriss is an American businessman who has lodged a £115-million takeover bid for the Championship club Sheffield United yet, to many within the football industry, the source of the funding and how that would impact the club remains something of a mystery.

On April 21 this year, The Athletic revealed that the English Football League (EFL) is reviewing Mauriss’ offer as he attempts to purchase Sheffield United from the Saudi Prince Abdullah bin Mosaad bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud. The deal is subject to the EFL’s owners’ and directors’ test and Mauriss needs to satisfy the EFL by demonstrating the source and sustainability of his funding.

Mauriss has told The Athletic that he has “provided evidence of sufficient resources already, which has led the EFL to proceed with the remainder of its normal fit and proper examinations”. The EFL declined to comment but The Athletic has learnt that the organisation does not currently believe itself to be in possession of the relevant materials from Mauriss that would allow them to scrutinise and approve the takeover. Sources close to Mauriss say this work is ongoing by his financial and legal team.

Mauriss’ period of exclusivity has lapsed, although talks over a takeover are ongoing between his representatives and Sheffield United.

With his potential takeover of the Championship club still live, for the first time we can chronicle the intimate details of Mauriss’ previous attempts to purchase Newcastle United, which may be of interest to those watching this latest bid take shape.

At Newcastle, for example, we have seen evidence to say advisors to former owner Mike Ashley grew tired of the repeated delays, while Mauriss also appeared to explore the possibility of taking high-interest loans to purchase the club, as well as the potential of taking investment from an Emirati fund chaired by Sheikh Khaled, who is a distant relative of Manchester City’s majority shareholder Sheikh Mansour. A consortium led by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund ultimately purchased Newcastle for around £305 million last October.

Mauriss has insisted, on the record, that this takeover will not be leveraged as a loan against Sheffield United and he insists there will not be a minority partner. The deal, he says, will instead be funded via a bond for his company ClearTV Media, which will need to be repaid in time.

As a result, we submitted a number of questions to Mauriss, and publish several documents within this article, so that football supporters are fully aware of what may lie ahead for a prized community asset in Sheffield United, and to ask whether the delays and eventual failure of his Newcastle takeover may be repeated once more.

What is the state of play at Sheffield United?

Sheffield United are currently owned by Saudi Arabia’s Prince Abdullah bin Mosaad bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud. He bought 50 per cent of the club in 2013 before assuming full control in 2019 after winning a legal case against Kevin McCabe, who owned the other 50 per cent. The club recently spent two years in the Premier League before dropping back into the Championship, where they finished fifth last season and lost out on promotion via the play-offs.

Prince Abdullah is open to selling the club and is said to be particularly pleased by the £115 million valuation of Sheffield United. Under the multi-club United World Holdings structure, he also owns Beerschot in Belgium, LB Chateauroux in France, Al-Hilal United in the UAE and Kerala United in India. This proposed takeover would solely be for Sheffield United.

Representatives of Mauriss attended Sheffield United games towards the end of the season but initial discussions began late last year before the framework of a price was agreed in January. Sources close to the takeover, on both sides of the deal, insist that while the American’s exclusivity period has lapsed, he still wishes to buy the club despite the team failing to reach the Premier League. Additionally, Mauriss has earmarked Stephen Bettis, the club’s current chief executive, to continue in his role if the takeover is successful.

Just how wealthy is Mauriss?

This is where it becomes unclear. For context, Mauriss is based in California and he owns a company called ClearTV. As ClearTV is a private company, it is difficult to know the true extent of Mauriss’ wealth. There is very little of note beyond the company’s website and some press releases online that details the work of ClearTV.

The Athletic has seen brochures promoting the company that say that the firm is headquartered in Los Angeles and “owns and operates a proprietary television platform that delivers highly relevant content to targeted audiences inside airports & healthcare venues (hospitals, et al)”.


The presentation says that “ClearTV is partnered with the the highest rated television networks and online producers in the industry”. Between the brochure and his website, they claim these include extremely famous brands, including Bravo, Sony Pictures, CBS Sports, AXS.TV, PGA Tour, Cooking Channel, ABC, Reuters, CNBC, VH1, History Channel, WSJ, Weather Channel, AMC, Disney, 20th Century Fox, NBC, Universal, the BBC and many more.
 

 

 

 

 

Sounds like a bit of an Anna Delvey.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I want to see this season is plans put in motion to start increasing our revenues massively. Ashley was an expert in minimising our finances and taking us from one of the richest clubs in football to one that generated next to nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, r0cafella said:

FFP is about profit and loss and not debt. And even then only certain losses count towards FFP. 

 

EG, I take out a billion dollar loan to finance a new stadium, this wouldn’t count against FFP. 

Take billion loan to buy players?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't rich owners pump their personal wealth into a football club again ? Can the Premier league not just have a contract that says " no backsies" so the owner can't just take the money out and plunge the club into debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, r0cafella said:

FFP is about profit and loss and not debt. And even then only certain losses count towards FFP. 

 

EG, I take out a billion dollar loan to finance a new stadium, this wouldn’t count against FFP. 

But a loan/debt can be and is often primarily used to cover a loss within football.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stifler said:

But a loan/debt can be and is often primarily used to cover a loss within football.

Yes of course. But For FFP purposes the calculation is based upon certain loses over a 3 year period. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ben said:

Why can't rich owners pump their personal wealth into a football club again ? Can the Premier league not just have a contract that says " no backsies" so the owner can't just take the money out and plunge the club into debt.

The whole point of FFP is to create a glass ceiling on ambitious clubs and owners. It’s function is to strangle competition. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

The whole point of FFP is to create a glass ceiling on ambitious clubs and owners. It’s function is to strangle competition. 

If we won £150 million on the Euro lottery could we use that ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Skeletor said:

How does that happen? Connecting flight?

 

There was a story the other day about plane full of passengers abandoned on the tarmac for 3 hours. Pilot had to ring 999.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

 

Airports are pretty much one way in, one way out tbf

 

Once you're through security it's pretty much a case of get on the plane or...?

 

Pretty bad to cancel a flight after you've already checked passengers luggage and let them through security tbh. I'd be as angry as he is.

 

 

Edited by Skeletor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Skeletor said:

 

Pretty bad to cancel a flight after you've already checked passengers luggage and let them through security tbh. 

Oh yeah, absolutely shocking from the airline there. Wasn't there a TUI flight/holiday recently where the same thing happened? 

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
×
×
  • Create New...