PIF and RB Sports & Media

[Hovagod]

11 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

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. 

Well yeah- I don’t want us actively breaking rules.

[The College Dropout]

4 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

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?

 

Our owners, CEO have not come close to so publicly challenging FFP in this way.  

 

They could be manoeuvring behind the scenes.  But I’ll credit it when there’s proof. 

[Keegans Export]

19 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?

It'll just be Twitter "ITKs" guessing based on the interviews with Brad Miller a few weeks back and the big bosses being in town at the weekend.

[Kanj]

I am all for pushing to be the very best but I do not want to do that at the expense of breaking rules and fucking us over long term. There’s a very thin line we shouldn’t ever cross. 

[The Prophet]

5 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

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. 
 

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.  

 

Fair, so your take is that you'd like to see us challenge and exploit the rules more, say like a Chelsea?

[The College Dropout]

Im not advocating for cheating. 
 

Im advocating that our first team demands align with what the club can do financially. If we build organically, we need a football team focussing on youth development - academy and transfers. £60m+ transfers for CBs dont make sense. We probably won’t qualify for Europe every year as we give playing time to high potential youngsters. 
 

If we want Europe every season as a minimum from now, we need the money to invest in quality players for the first team succeeding straight away.  And keeping most of our best players. The only we can do that is if we push and bend the rules to generate maximum PSR headroom imo.  PIF don’t seem willing to do this yet.  
 

 

Im happy for either. It just needs to be sustainable and realistic. 

[Stifler]

25 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?

There is no press embargo per se, but the directors at the club are apparently doing interviews with the media over the international break. People assume it is stadium related, because of how the report is supposed to be imminent, however they could be doing it for something else.

[Unbelievable]

5 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

 

Our owners, CEO have not come close to so publicly challenging FFP in this way.  

 

They could be manoeuvring behind the scenes.  But I’ll credit it when there’s proof. 

 

And good on them for not coming out and saying such things. It would be held against us and increase the other clubs' resolve to keep implementing shitty rules to stop us.

 

The Saudis are in this for repuation. They will likely not want to be seen as these disruptors that come in, flash their cash and flaunt the rules. They want the respect to be earned for operating sensibly and with resolve.

 

Really, where does this sense of entitlement and urgency come from all of a sudden? Let them build the way they see fit, unless we're clearly going in the wrong direction, which we obviously are not.

[The College Dropout]

This is me supporting Howe btw. The only way targeting proven PL players makes sense is if he’s been told he needs to qualify for Europe next season.  Then he can’t take risks. Then he can’t prioritise developing talent. 

[The College Dropout]

1 minute ago, Unbelievable said:

 

And good on them for not coming out and saying such things. It would be held against us and increase the other clubs' resolve to keep implementing shitty rules to stop us.

 

The Saudis are in this for repuation. They will likely not want to be seen as these disruptors that come in, flash their cash and flaunt the rules. They want the respect to be earned for operating sensibly and with resolve.

 

Really, where does this sense of entitlement and urgency come from all of a sudden? Let them build the way they see fit, unless we're clearly going in the wrong direction, which we obviously are not.

I think the club think we should see regular European football already. Trying to sign Marc Guehi is a sign of urgency from the club. 
 

Id take a promising kid from France for half. Give him 2-3 years to develop.  Clearly the management don’t think they have that time.  

[The College Dropout]

And maybe it’s a case of.. if we can get Europe 4 times out of 5, we can justify the big sponsors. So get the results now to unlock it. 
 

But that plan requires A LOT of luck. 

[WilliamPS]

Overly pessimistic IMO, and I also think we should be seeing regular European football. Missed out this season only by the finest of margins and unusual circumstances. Without European games a finish of 5th place or so is totally achievable even with the financial constraints. The team has the 7th biggest budget, and 7th usually gets Europe. The gap to the teams above has already been massively reduced - which also means the gap to the teams below has also increased 

[Newcastle Fan]

I actually like that we are doing thing sustainably, less so when we don't sign anyone useful in the window but that's more on the management than the owners. we have come a long way from the Ashley days without having to bend any rules or put the club at any risk.

[Minhosa]

1 hour ago, Stifler said:

There is no press embargo per se, but the directors at the club are apparently doing interviews with the media over the international break. People assume it is stadium related, because of how the report is supposed to be imminent, however they could be doing it for something else.

Thanks @Stifler

[macphisto]

All this talk of sustainable, organic growth and buying youngsters is a pipedream. Which club has ever done that and stayed at the top for any length of time? The last possible team would be Forrest under Clough and even then did they challenge much for the league after they won it?

 

Yes, there is a place for unknowns and young players but we still need to splash the cash on big buys if we ever want to get remotely close to the self-declared aims of the owners. 

 

[Dr Jinx]

It was never a vanity project. Saudis 2030 thing doesn’t include Newcastle as a feature.. it’s about their own league.

 

I think they’ll have a value in mind of hitting before they sell. 3bn maybe. We’re halfway there.

 

*que the Bon Jovi puns 

[The College Dropout]

Likewise if you have the 7th (and maybe 8th) highest budget - it’s not a travesty in management to finish as low as 8th.  
 

7th doesn’t guarantee you European football. So for Europe to be the aim we need to aim to finish 6th or win a cup. 
 

IMO that’s too high a minimum requirement.  Of a 25 man squad, 12 are not top 6 quality. It’s not reasonable to expect that team to finish 6th.  Even with Guehi it’s a full backup team well below the standard. 

[Turnbull2000]

2 hours ago, Doctor Zaius said:

Really

 

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.

 

I thought PIF had an interest in Clearlake or some other Chelsea connected organization? It could be possible that PIF are actively supporting Chelsea as well.

[The College Dropout]

36 minutes ago, macphisto said:

All this talk of sustainable, organic growth and buying youngsters is a pipedream. Which club has ever done that and stayed at the top for any length of time? The last possible team would be Forrest under Clough and even then did they challenge much for the league after they won it?

 

Yes, there is a place for unknowns and young players but we still need to splash the cash on big buys if we ever want to get remotely close to the self-declared aims of the owners. 

 

Spurs and more recently Liverpool. 
 

Around the time we faltered under Shepherd Spurs started signing a bunch of youngsters.  Carrick £3m > £16m. Bale £10m > £100m. Modric £15m > £40m.  Berbatov. Keane.  Walker. I can keep going. 
 

Liverpool used the Torres money on multiple players including Suarez. Coutinho & Suarez funded the final conquering side. 
 

We can’t splash the big cash as much as 6 other teams.  It will require over performance or their under performance to get continued top 6 finishes. So I don’t understand how we can win if we go big money signing for big money signing without tremendous luck.  

 

 

Edited September 3 by The College Dropout

[macphisto]

37 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Spurs and more recently Liverpool. 
 

Around the time we faltered under Shepherd Spurs started signing a bunch of youngsters.  Carrick £3m > £16m. Bale £10m > £100m. Modric £15m > £40m.  Berbatov. Keane.  Walker. I can keep going. 
 

Liverpool used the Torres money on multiple players including Suarez. Coutinho & Suarez funded the final conquering side. 
 

We can’t splash the big cash as much as 6 other teams.  It will require over performance or their under performance to get continued top 6 finishes. So I don’t understand how we can win if we go big money signing for big money signing without tremendous luck.  

Liverpool was not organic growth, yes they traded well in recent years to get over the line and win European Cups and the League but they never went more than a few years without winning a trophy, appearing in cup finals or Champions League football. 

 

Due to their history since Shankley they have world wide support and significant commercial income; they didn't go from mid table or lower obscurity like the journey we have to make. There was even talk on here, when discussing FFP, that Liverpool's position is down to the money the Moore family initially put into Liverpool in the 70's.

 

What did Spurs win during that period? At best you could say it allowed them to hang onto the coattails of the top 5 with a few Champions League campaigns. That's not the stated aims of our owners. Were Spurs ever serious contenders for the title during that time? 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 3 by macphisto

[WilliamPS]

3 minutes ago, macphisto said:

Liverpool was not organic growth, yes they traded well in recent years to get over the line and win European Cups and the League but they never went more than a few years without winning a trophy, appearing in cup finals or Champions League football. 

 

Due to their history since Shankley they have world wide support and significant commercial income; they didn't go from mid table or lower obscurity like the journey we have to make. There was even talk on here, when discussing FFP, that Liverpool's position is down to the money the Moore family initially put into Liverpool in the 70's.

 

What did Spurs win during that period? At best you could say it allowed them to hang onto the coattails of the top 5 with a few Champions League campaigns. That's not the stated aims of our owners. Were Spurs ever serious contenders for the title during that time? 

 

 

 

 

 

Spurs should have won the PL the year Leicester did, they bottled it. But I think that was the year they were definite contenders 

[timeEd32]

41 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Likewise if you have the 7th (and maybe 8th) highest budget - it’s not a travesty in management to finish as low as 8th.  
 

7th doesn’t guarantee you European football. So for Europe to be the aim we need to aim to finish 6th or win a cup. 
 

IMO that’s too high a minimum requirement.  Of a 25 man squad, 12 are not top 6 quality. It’s not reasonable to expect that team to finish 6th.  Even with Guehi it’s a full backup team well below the standard. 

 

Totally get the possible disconnect you're talking about and I know Eales has again said Europe is the goal, but we don't know that everyone isn't a bit more realistic in private. I'd also like to think that if PIF does expect consistent top 6 that someone other than Eddie would be blamed based on how the summer went.

 

If none of that is true then Eddie basically made a rod for his own back by finishing 4th.

[The College Dropout]

By organic growth I simply mean maximising revenues and league finishes without FFP hacks. 
 

Spurs qualified for 4 straight CLs. If we do that we’ll challenge for the title because our owners ambition and what that would mean for revenues.
 

Spurs wage budget to revenue is one of the lowest in the league.  They are not trying to win the league or trophies. 
 

But are we going to £70m signings our way to sustained Europe? While our revenue is £100m short of Spurs? Spurs wouldn’t even sign a £70m CB. 

 

 

Edited September 3 by The College Dropout

[timeEd32]

6 minutes ago, macphisto said:

Liverpool was not organic growth, yes they traded well in recent years to get over the line and win European Cups and the League but they never went more than a few years without winning a trophy, appearing in cup finals or Champions League football. 

 

Due to their history since Shankley they have world wide support and significant commercial income; they didn't go from mid table or lower obscurity like the journey we have to make. There was even talk on here, when discussing FFP, that Liverpool's position is down to the money the Moore family initially put into Liverpool in the 70's.

 

What did Spurs win during that period? At best you could say it allowed them to hang onto the coattails of the top 5 with a few Champions League campaigns. That's not the stated aims of our owners. Were Spurs ever serious contenders for the title during that time? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

After the time period TCD is referencing Spurs played in a LC final, finished 3rd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and then made a CL final and another LC final. They could have won multiple trophies. They are actually a very good example of how you can do just about everything right and still fall short. There will always be an element of the right players with the right manager at the right time. But they've set themselves up to be in the mix every year.

[SteV]

3 hours ago, Stifler said:

There is no press embargo per se, but the directors at the club are apparently doing interviews with the media over the international break. People assume it is stadium related, because of how the report is supposed to be imminent, however they could be doing it for something else.

That’ll be what Hope alluded to at the end of his post match video on Sunday then.