PIF and RB Sports & Media

[kingxlnc]

Perhaps Paul Mitchell got one deal done eh, using his RB contacts? 

[Dr.Spaceman]

What an excellent few days for the club, offloading Pivas & Lewis then announcing this. Well done to all involved.

 

Oh aye, and three points against those slugs on Sunday too. Happy days 

 

 

Edited September 3 by Dr.Spaceman

[Sima]

 

Owners helping Chelsea out again.

 

 

Edited September 3 by Sima

[The Prophet]

Folk need to stop thinking about PIF as your average firm with regular jointed-up decision making.

 

They're a public investment fund, that oversee multiple portfolios and projects. We're a small, albeit well known fish, in a large pool of investments.

 

Very little thought will be going into "if we invest in a, it might have a knock on effect on b". It'll be more or less passive investment across the board.

 

 

Edited September 3 by The Prophet

[Kimbo]

13 minutes ago, Sima said:

 

Owners helping Chelsea out again.

 

 

 

It sounds like he did fuck all at Strasbourg. Why not give Chelsea a profit for him.

[gbandit]

KSA - Come for the money, Stay for the death of your career

[Unbelievable]

10 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

Folk need to stop thinking about PIF as your average firm with regular jointed-up decision making.

 

They're a public investment fund, that oversea multiple portfolios and projects. We're a small, albeit well known fish, in a large pool of investments.

 

Very little thought will be going into "if we invest in a, it might have a knock on effect on b". It'll more or less passive investment across the board.

This. In any case clubs in SA shouldn't make their transfer business dependent on how it may affect Newcastle United. It's nonsensical to think this way.

[gdm]

55 minutes ago, Rocker said:

Red Bull. It doesn't give you wing-ers.

[The Prophet]

15 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

This. In any case clubs in SA shouldn't make their transfer business dependent on how it may affect Newcastle United. It's nonsensical to think this way.

 

Yep, if anything they'll prioritise their domestic market.

[The College Dropout]

38 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

Folk need to stop thinking about PIF as your average firm with regular jointed-up decision making.

 

They're a public investment fund, that oversee multiple portfolios and projects. We're a small, albeit well known fish, in a large pool of investments.

 

Very little thought will be going into "if we invest in a, it might have a knock on effect on b". It'll be more or less passive investment across the board.

 

 

 

Same notion applies to us becoming #1. 
 

PIF are not committed to us the same way Abu Dhabi are too City or Roman was to Chelsea.  At least to the point that both of those owners likely cheated to get their clubs to the top and stay.  And built networks to ensure it.  

[Unbelievable]

I've not seen any sign to suggest our owners aren't committed to us becoming the best we can be. They've invested the best part of 400m (on top of the 300m it cost to buy us) to date, they are working on plans for a new or developed stadium, they are working on a new training ground and if it wasn't for a set of artificial rules they no doubt would have invested more. They are doing everything you could reasonably have wished for when we were crying out for a change of ownership a few years ago.

[RobsonsWonderland]

5 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Same notion applies to us becoming #1. 
 

PIF are not committed to us the same way Abu Dhabi are too City or Roman was to Chelsea.  At least to the point that both of those owners likely cheated to get their clubs to the top and stay.  And built networks to ensure it.  

I'm not sure I agree to that extent.

 

I believe from their other activities PIF would have invested the maximum amount that was allowed.

 

If there were no restrictions we would have seen a vastly different squad to what we have now and I dare say some of the players that have ended up in the Saudi League.

 

 

[TheInfiniteOdyssey]

Still no sign of the ‘imminent’ stadium feasibility report? 

[The College Dropout]

19 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

I've not seen any sign to suggest our owners aren't committed to us becoming the best we can be. They've invested the best part of 400m (on top of the 300m it cost to buy us) to date, they are working on plans for a new or developed stadium, they are working on a new training ground and if it wasn't for a set of artificial rules they no doubt would have invested more. They are doing everything you could reasonably have wished for when we were crying out for a change of ownership a few years ago.

That’s cash of which they have plenty to spare.  
 

I’m talking the will and expertise to do whatever it takes to get us to the top. That’s not throwing money at a problem alone, there’s desire and expertise above and beyond that.  
 

You mentioned the stadium and training ground, almost 3 years - no concrete plans. I said this in another thread about Abu Dhabi:

- Likely cheated financial rules, hid it, won’t cooperate with authorities. 
- Multi club model to circumvent FFP. In terms of staff costs and player revenues from sales it’s all optimised to help City with FFP and move talent around

- Pursued legal action against authorities for rules they don’t like 

- Their entire football operation is setup to maximise the success of Man City.  Joined up this joint to ensure that happens. 

 

PIF seem happy to abide by the financial rules.  They don’t even heavily leverage the ‘circumvension’ techniques others have.  That I can blame on Staveley and/or Eales. 
 

Don’t have a multi club model. And barely leverage the other clubs they own.  No joined up thinking. Minteh FMV proven at around £40m, could’ve sold him to a PIF club then loaned him back.  They could be Deportivo or Tenerife and use those clubs for talent development and FFP circumvention. Far easier sell to Almiron, Wilson and Trippier than moving to Saudi. 
 

Likely other football operations are their priority.  
 

Throwing money for them is easy. But Anu Dhabi have done a lot more than that.  It’s a mindset and priority. 
 

I agree they will spend the ‘maximum allowed’. But that doesn’t mean they are doing everything possible to make us a success.   
 

You said it ‘small investment in a large portfolio’.  In life some things are absolute priorities and you will explore every nook and cranny to exploit, bend rules maybe even break them to succeed. Others you do the best you can and the cards fall where they will. And you’re right - what Abu Dhabi have done, what Abramovic did is above and beyond reasonable expectation.  
 

TLDR: PIF are not proving to be ‘success by any means’ the way Abu Dhabi have and continue to do so. 

 

 

Edited September 3 by The College Dropout

[bobbydazzla]

1 hour ago, Rocker said:

Red Bull. It doesn't give you wing-ers.

 

 

NUFC, it gives you whinge

 

 

Edited September 3 by bobbydazzla

[Unbelievable]

Why would you blame the owners of our club for playing by the rules, while at the same time challenging them, sometimes publicly and also no doubt behind closed doors? I think that is worth applauding them for, and Man City, PSG, Chelsea and the like deserve criticism and penalising for breaking the rules.

 

Also the "throwing money around is easy argument" is lazy. Our owners have put in place competent people and vastly increased the number of people we have working in vital areas like the commercial department, scouting, player conditioning, etc. They're building us from the ground up, because there was basically just a skeleton of a Premier League club when they arrived.

 

As for infrastructure, those plans take time. I really don't see how anybody in their right mind could look at what's been achieved in the less than three years since the takeover and think these owners are not committed. Have you already forgotten what "not committed" looks like after enduring it for 14 years?

 

 

Edited September 3 by Unbelievable

[The College Dropout]

Sorry for such a long response. 
 

My ultimate biggest concern (and in the grand scheme it’s a small concern) is that PIF are demanding owners but don’t open all possible doors. In the short term, I think it’s difficult to consistently qualify for Europe while our revenues and infrastructure is what it is. 

[Unbelievable]

4 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Sorry for such a long response. 
 

My ultimate biggest concern (and in the grand scheme it’s a small concern) is that PIF are demanding owners but don’t open all possible doors. In the short term, I think it’s difficult to consistently qualify for Europe while our revenues and infrastructure is what it is. 

How is that their fault though? Would you like it if our owners just flaunted the rules to buy the Real Madrid squad and win us the CL immediately only to see it taken off us after years of legal proceedings for breaking the rules? Hell, they have the funds to do it. If that's what they were after, they might as well have bought Real Madrid itself, and let us drift aimlessly under Ashley...

 

 

Edited September 3 by Unbelievable

[The Prophet]

While I agree with some of that. They've bought us just under three years ago and inherited an absolute mess.

 

Man City were bought pre-PSR.

 

They already had the City of Manchester Stsdium built.

 

The plans for the Etihad Campus were released almost exactly three years after their takeover.

 

The City Group wasn't established until nearly four and a half years after they were taken over.

 

While I'd fully expect progress, particularly on the stadium front, in the next year these things take time. Even longer when purchase a post-Mike Ashley shell of a club, playing catch-up while trying to comply with PSR. 

[Doctor Zaius]

Really

1 hour ago, Sima said:

 

Owners helping Chelsea out again.

 

 

 

 

Really don't understand this. 0 apps for Chelsea, did fuck all at Strasbourg.

 

Okay, the likes of Koulibally and Mendy etc that Chelsea managed to offload to Saudi for good money at least had big reputations.

 

This one has done nothing, nobody knows who he is yet a PIF club are buying him for to the same amount Chelsea bought him. Something's not right and it's dodgy as fuck.

[Minhosa]

Rarely on the forum these days so, apologies if this is discussed elsewhere, but has anybody else heard talk of a press embargo in place ahead of news coming out over the next week or so?

 

Presumably stadium related?

[The College Dropout]

1 minute ago, Unbelievable said:

Why would you blame the owners of our club for playing by the rules, while at the same time challenging them, sometimes publicly and also no doubt behind closed doors? I think that is worth applauding them for, and Man City, PSG, Chelsea and the like deserve criticism and penalising for breaking the rules.

 

Also the throwing money around is easy argument is easy. Our owners have put in place competent people and vastly increased the number of people we have working in vital areas like the commercial department, scouting, player conditioning, etc.

 

As for infrastructure, those plans take time. I really don't see how anybody in their right mind could look at what's been achieved in the less than three years since the takeover and think these owners are not committed. Have you already forgotten what "not committed" looks like after enduring it for 14 years?

Not blaming them. Just trying to understand their position, goals and strategy. 
 

 

We are the most restricted club in the world by FFP. But we’ve been less publicly critical of it than Aston Villa, Everton and Forest. 
 

I don’t know what the club is doing behind closed doors, so cant comment. Not heard anything significant in the last 3 years mind. 
 

re hiring people - yeh that’s all great BAU. Man City and Chelsea have likely committed fraud to circumvent financial restrictions. Abramovic was secretly funding Vitesse, so they could loan Chelsea players and develop them.  Man City have setup a multi club model which largely is there to make Man City number 1. Hundreds of millions on other ventures - to support Man City.  Ratcliffe is trying to use his influence to make the local government fund the stadium renovations. Man City have seemingly bought the Manchester Council themselves. 
 

Do you get the distinction I’m drawing? PIF have invested in us tremendously as an investment. But it’s not City using every loophole imaginable to be financially compliant - and then some. It’s a different mindset.  
 

It’s not a criticism.  It should inform our expectations. Play by the rules to the T, we will only grow revenues so fast, will need to sell our best players at some point soon.  To succeed that way will take a long-term view which requires a focus on talent development and not immediate results. 

[Unbelievable]

You must have missed Eales' and Howe's repeated comments about how PSR is restricting us. Do you want them to add that it is all very unfair? I think they're playing a blinder by pointing out it is restricting us while letting others, be they journalists or representatives of other clubs, point out that the rules are creating an uneven playing field. Unless you think it would actually be beneficial if our public figureheads started slamming the PL (and the clubs who voted for this) publicly, instead of that being counter-productive to our cause?

[The College Dropout]

13 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

How is that their fault though? Would you like it if our owners just flaunted the rules to buy the Real Madrid squad and win us the CL immediately only to see it taken off us after years of legal proceedings for breaking the rules? Hell, they have the funds to do it. If that's what they were after, they might as well have bought Real Madrid itself, and let us drift aimlessly under Ashley...

 

 

 

It’s not their fault. But they shouldn’t expect the team to consistently qualify for Europe. We should act like an RB team or souped up Brighton.  
 

The noise from the club and the summer action suggests we need immediate results. That would require tremendous success and luck to be sustainable if we aren’t going to find FFP hacks. 
 

17 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

While I agree with some of that. They've bought us just under three years ago and inherited an absolute mess.

 

Man City were bought pre-PSR.

 

They already had the City of Manchester Stsdium built.

 

The plans for the Etihad Campus were released almost exactly three years after their takeover.

 

The City Group wasn't established until nearly four and a half years after they were taken over.

 

While I'd fully expect progress, particularly on the stadium front, in the next year these things take time. Even longer when purchase a post-Mike Ashley shell of a club, playing catch-up while trying to comply with PSR. 

City Group was founded the same year FFP was introduced to the PL.  ‘oh you think you can stop us? Multi club.’ 

 

They were bought pre-FFP and still lied and cheated their way to the top.  

I’m talking about priorities and mindset.  

[Kanj]

17 minutes ago, Minhosa said:

Rarely on the forum these days so, apologies if this is discussed elsewhere, but has anybody else heard talk of a press embargo in place ahead of news coming out over the next week or so?

 

Presumably stadium related?

Interesting take mate.