PIF and RB Sports & Media

[SAK]

55 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

Al-Rumayyan said the plan was for us to be No.1, Staveley suggested that we would be challenging for the league in 5 years.

 

Them buying us just to be a sustainable club makes no sense. Firstly, we're never going to be sustainable, they've officially put in £400m already, we run at a massive loss. Secondly, what would that offer Saudi Arabia?

 

They almost certainly want a top club that will win things and everything that comes with that.

Grand statements yes but actions to date don’t match that. Don’t they have form for this?

 

To be sustainable there’s going to have to be some investment. When asked they could hardly say we bought cheap, want to get all departments in order, sign untapped talent, build up some success and then flip for a profit. £305m sale price plus £400m sunk with a £1B valuation (going by Bloomberg) they’re still up. 
 

Media reports at the time stated this wasn’t a Man City/PSG vanity project but changed soon afterwards to whip up fear (wonder who was briefing them?) The lack of will to circumvent the roadblocks put in front of us suggests they’re not that bothered.

 

What’s in it for the Saudis? Do they need us or any other football club to sportswash or for prestige when Aramco is splashed across F1 tracks, LIV golf has some of the biggest stars signed up and they’re putting on the big title fights in boxing for way less scrutiny?

 

Maybe we’re just a cheap investment opportunity for a global fund requiring relatively little ongoing investment (for them) with the potential for a big future sale price and that’s what we offer them?

 

I hope I’m wrong and they have big plans in football (preferably with us).

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 17:52 by SAK

[Stifler]

1 hour ago, BergenMagpie said:

Why do you mention Staveley if you dont know? Has that been hinted?

It wasn’t Staveley, the texts are there to be seen. The leaks came from Ashley’s side, and someone who had to be included in the deal between Ashley, the club, and Staveley. Honestly, it reads like it was Lee Charnley.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 17:59 by Stifler

[et tu brute]

1 hour ago, BergenMagpie said:

Why do you mention Staveley if you dont know? Has that been hinted?

No I don't know but they were her messages, so was just asking, how do you know that it definitely wasn't?

[et tu brute]

4 minutes ago, Stifler said:

It wasn’t Staveley, the texts are there to be seen. The leaks came from Ashley’s side, and someone who had to be imcided in the deal between Ashley, the club, and Staveley. Honestly, it reads like it was Lee Charnley.

Thanks I never read the article, so was just asking the question. I see the usual doom patrol are on the march again 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 17:57 by et tu brute

[Stifler]

Personally, I think they are downplaying the vanity project thing. If there was no PSR rules, they would be splashing whatever cash they have to buy us everything we need. We have already heard that they were angered by the lack of activity on the summer, and we are apparently getting a £1bn-£4bn stadium.

 

Manager wise, there isn’t really a reason to sack Howe right now and for it not to look a bit kneejerk/harsh. On top of that, who would replace him?

I honestly think when Pep leaves Man City, then they will make a move for him, I’m not saying we will get him, but make a move for him.

 

It’s amazing what a bad result, and some click bait articles from well known pot stirring journalists will do to people on here in terms of negativity.

[Stifler]

2 minutes ago, et tu brute said:

Thanks I never read the article, so was just asking the question. I see the usual doom patrol are on the march again 

Yeah, if it wasn’t Lee Charnley, then it will be that lawyer that Ashley sent up to help facilitate a sale, although the language used by Staveley to him is a bit too direct for what I think she would say to a competent lawyer, and the language used by him reads a bit weak, very much like we all assume Charnley to be like.

[et tu brute]

7 minutes ago, Stifler said:

 

It’s amazing what a bad result, and some click bait articles from well known pot stirring journalists will do to people on here in terms of negativity.

Oh yes, and I don't think it's due to negativity either. I'm convinced there are some on here, who purposely stir the pot whenever anything negative happens. I'm also convinced these people would probably be happy with mid table and other owners. The stadium plans when released will (imo) clarify everything

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 18:06 by et tu brute

[SAK]

@Stifler I don’t think your comment about negativity is specifically directed at me but I’m putting out there that I’m  very positive about PIF only that I don’t think they ever planned to spend mega bucks on us.

I just think their plan was good scouting, data to profile and target the right untapped signings, good structure, a plan, good exec leadership, support for coaching team by providing the right facilities and tech leading us to get into Europe regularly, more often than not Europa/conference league with the odd CL year when others dip. Better than the shitshow we were.

 

All the while being a low value unimportant investment for PIF.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 18:14 by SAK

[Stifler]

5 minutes ago, SAK said:

@Stifler I don’t think your comment about negativity is specifically directed at me but I’m putting out there that I’m  very positive about PIF only that I don’t think they ever planned to spend mega bucks on us.

I just think their plan was good scouting, data to profile and target the right untapped signings, good structure, a plan, good exec leadership, support for coaching team by providing the right facilities and tech leading us to get into Europe regularly, more often than not Europa/conference league with the odd CL year when others dip. Better than the shitshow we were.

 

All the while being a low value unimportant investment for PIF.

It wasn’t directed at anyone, but a general observation on here, and not limited to today either.

[LordJake]

9 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Yeah, if it wasn’t Lee Charnley, then it will be that lawyer that Ashley sent up to help facilitate a sale, although the language used by Staveley to him is a bit too direct for what I think she would say to a competent lawyer, and the language used by him reads a bit weak, very much like we all assume Charnley to be like.

I very much doubt it’s Charnley. I knew Lee very well and he wouldn’t do anything to destabilise the club. Staveley and co wanted him to stay on for another year as they bedded in but he felt with the Ashley association it was better for the club to have a clean break. He once described running the club as going into a boxing match with one foot in a bucket of cement and one hand tied behind your back

[Ben]

15 minutes ago, LordJake said:

I very much doubt it’s Charnley. I knew Lee very well and he wouldn’t do anything to destabilise the club. Staveley and co wanted him to stay on for another year as they bedded in but he felt with the Ashley association it was better for the club to have a clean break. He once described running the club as going into a boxing match with one foot in a bucket of cement and one hand tied behind your back

 

The fucka was on minimum wage, I can't imagine he left because of his morals 

[Mahoneys Tache]

11 hours ago, duo said:

That's a picture I wasn't expecting to see. No Context? ha

Ahnuld needs to stop dyeing his hair. 

[Mahoneys Tache]

This is like watching the dialogue in ‘murica after a clever bit of psy-ops by the Russians. Sow division and create a ruckus so that people who are all pissing in the same pot start pissing on each other’s shoes instead. The journalists with an agenda are trying to make things awkward and you are all being played like fiddles. Dozy fuckers. 

[Jackie Broon]

5 hours ago, SAK said:

Grand statements yes but actions to date don’t match that. Don’t they have form for this?

 

To be sustainable there’s going to have to be some investment. When asked they could hardly say we bought cheap, want to get all departments in order, sign untapped talent, build up some success and then flip for a profit. £305m sale price plus £400m sunk with a £1B valuation (going by Bloomberg) they’re still up. 
 

Media reports at the time stated this wasn’t a Man City/PSG vanity project but changed soon afterwards to whip up fear (wonder who was briefing them?) The lack of will to circumvent the roadblocks put in front of us suggests they’re not that bothered.

 

What’s in it for the Saudis? Do they need us or any other football club to sportswash or for prestige when Aramco is splashed across F1 tracks, LIV golf has some of the biggest stars signed up and they’re putting on the big title fights in boxing for way less scrutiny?

 

Maybe we’re just a cheap investment opportunity for a global fund requiring relatively little ongoing investment (for them) with the potential for a big future sale price and that’s what we offer them?

 

I hope I’m wrong and they have big plans in football (preferably with us).

 

 

 

 

The Bloomberg 'valuation' is just what was paid by PIF for Staveley's shares multiplied by the percentage she owned, it's not a true valuation of the club.

 

No one is paying £1bn for us as things stand. They could just about break even on the £700m so far.

 

We make absolutely no sense as a financial investment.

[Keegans Export]

6 hours ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

The Bloomberg 'valuation' is just what was paid by PIF for Staveley's shares multiplied by the percentage she owned, it's not a true valuation of the club.

 

No one is paying £1bn for us as things stand. They could just about break even on the £700m so far.

 

We make absolutely no sense as a financial investment.

As a short-term investment you're absolutely right but why do you think so many American hedge funds are buying (or trying to buy) PL clubs? They're not in it for sportswashing, they're banking on the value of their investments ultimately going up well ahead of inflation. 

 

Flipping us now would be daft and as you say your ROI would be minimal, if anything at all. But in 10+ years?

[The College Dropout]

6 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

As a short-term investment you're absolutely right but why do you think so many American hedge funds are buying (or trying to buy) PL clubs? They're not in it for sportswashing, they're banking on the value of their investments ultimately going up well ahead of inflation. 

 

Flipping us now would be daft and as you say your ROI would be minimal, if anything at all. But in 10+ years?

If you look at City and Chelsea (and all the undercover spending) do you think their owners turn a genuine profit vs 10% they would get in the stock market?

[Keegans Export]

8 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

If you look at City and Chelsea (and all the undercover spending) do you think their owners turn a genuine profit vs 10% they would get in the stock market?

Why didn't Ratcliffe do that with his £1bn rather than buy part of Man Utd? Perhaps the Friedkin Group would be better off sticking their £500m in stocks instead?

 

I don't think any of them will make a profit day-to-day but I assume they're hoping to have a considerably more valuable asset than they bought once it comes time to sell up. Otherwise what are all these American companies doing? They can't be accused of sportswashing.

[Guest]

No leaks from yesterday’s PL meeting?

[Abacus]

I assumed that some American companies have been banking on ever expanding worldwide TV income in a relatively closed league to grow their assets. It's no real surprise they were generally more in favour of the ESL to the horror of most real fans.

 

I do wonder about when and whether the saturation point gets reached, though. I can't be bothered to watch much of the CL league qualifiers this year for that reason - too much football in a stale format. You wouldn't think that as a Villa fan this season, but I wonder about whether that will be the case should the novelty wear off for them.

 

I guess, though, I'm not the target market, it's more international fans. Even there, though, it can't grow forever and many of the remaining untapped markets are poorer and don't have the money to assume it will grow forever.

 

In the meantime one of the reasons the pl is the most watched league in the world has been the unpredictability, rather that the procession it has become, and the atmosphere at the grounds which are in danger of lessoning just because the match going fans aren't the priority.

[Menace]

8-10% a year is considered a good return in the stock market. Ashley essentially bought us for £120m and sold us for £320m if you believe the figures. He also got plenty of free promo for his parent company. Not a mathematician by any means but this surely shows that owning a football club can be successful? I think they are banking on someone big to outbid Sky one day and tv rights to basically explode.

 

City also sold 10% to a Chinese company for around 300M, so they're currently valued at around 3BN if you base it on this figure.

 

Edit again: City sold 13% for 265 almost 10 years, so lord knows what they're actually valued at now.

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 07:26 by Menace

[TRon]

14 hours ago, SAK said:

@Stifler I don’t think your comment about negativity is specifically directed at me but I’m putting out there that I’m  very positive about PIF only that I don’t think they ever planned to spend mega bucks on us.

I just think their plan was good scouting, data to profile and target the right untapped signings, good structure, a plan, good exec leadership, support for coaching team by providing the right facilities and tech leading us to get into Europe regularly, more often than not Europa/conference league with the odd CL year when others dip. Better than the shitshow we were.

 

All the while being a low value unimportant investment for PIF.

 

 

 

 

If it was unimportant, why would they have jumped through hoops to get the takeover done when the PL and most of English football itself was hostile to it? They even had to climb down and put aside their differences with Qatar over the Bein Sport wrangle which would have been anathema to them.

 

If they just wanted a cold investment, a football club is hardly the most hard nosed decision. Even if it was for brand value for KSA, then they would want to be the biggest and the best to make it have the impact they were after.

[jack j]

Thought we'd be announcing sponsorships left right and centre after city beating the league the other week.

[Decky]

23 hours ago, Doctor Zaius said:

FFP / PSR is in place to stop us and others becoming a top club. It's a glass ceiling designed entirely to keep the status quo and basically prevents PIF realising their ambition with us.

 

While it's in place, and the entire system is rigged, then they'll never be able to achieve what they want to. 

 

Itll take some time to hit the biggest heights that they want but when you look at Villa we could definitely be doing a lot better than we currently are even within these rules. 

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 16:24 by Decky

[TRon]

1 minute ago, jack j said:

Thought we'd be announcing sponsorships left right and centre after city beating the league the other week.

 

I imagine the Staveley WhatsApp leaks were released as a veiled warning that there can be more obstacles raised if PIF get too ahead of themselves.

[Jackie Broon]

19 minutes ago, jack j said:

Thought we'd be announcing sponsorships left right and centre after city beating the league the other week.

 

It would probably be more sensible for us to submit them to the PL for approval, which would put the PL in a very difficult situation of being potentially liable to pay us damages if they refuse or delay them.