PIF, PCP, and RB Sports & Media

[et tu brute]

3 hours ago, nbthree3 said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12029555/IN-MONEY-Newcastle-set-bank-10m-Amazons-documentary.html

 

Newcastle are set to bank more than £10m from a highly lucrative fly-on-the-wall documentary series with Amazon Prime, due to be aired ahead of next season.

It is understood the club are banking a similar amount to Manchester City for allowing Amazon to film behind the scenes at St James’ Park. Sources confirmed the deal is worth eight figures.

The four-part series, due to be aired in August, will focus on the club and its owners as they reached their first cup final in 24 years and likely Champions League qualification.

It is also believed that major transfer deals such as the £45m January signing of Anthony Gordon from Everton will feature.

The club’s ongoing HMRC investigation and a rumoured Premier League investigation into their ownership structure are less likely to be covered.

HMRC investigation is done and dusted with no further action.

[r0cafella]

Given our new deal is rumoured to be for only 2 years that tells me we are supremely confident of getting even more next time. 
 

I wonder if they are tempted to buy our Castore given the extra unexpected revenue from a likely ECL appearance. 

[TheBrownBottle]

3 hours ago, Ace said:

🤦‍♂️

 

Who said anything about them being bad at business. Take away Lewis’s contact book and there isn’t a company willing to overpay for Spurs. 
 

I don’t doubt spurs have more followers on those things even when you take into account bought/bots etc. but it’s not the be all and end all you make it out to be. 
 

When Leverkusen got to the champions league final did it make them a bigger club than the likes of Dortmund/Schalke/Stuttgart a few years later, did it bollocks.

 

Spurs have had the sky 6 media machine working for them for years and your big claim to their greatness is social media. 

The implication is that if we haven't managed to get the sponsorship in that Spurs have, then we must be run by complete muppets, as according to you the Spurs' marketability is simply a gigantic fraud and therefore we should easily be attracting the same sort of sponsorship deals.

 

The 'Spurs have bought followers on twitter' thing is tin foil hat territory - it's just plain odd. 

 

Here's Spurs's league record over the past 10 years: 4th; 7th; 6th; 4th; 3rd; 2nd; 3rd; 5th; 6th; 5th; 6th.  That 7th place finish is the only time since 2009 they've finished outside the top six.  They also reached a Champions League Final during that time - though they've been in the CL in 5 of the last 8 seasons.

 

Newcastle's record during that period: 11th; 12th; 13th; 13th; 10th; (1st in Second Division); 18th; 15th; 10th; 16th.  Having really rich owners doesn't trump performance on the pitch - Spurs have consistently finished in the top six positions for over a decade. 

 

The Leverkusen comparison is a ludicrous one; Spurs were a member of the 'Big Five' when the PL breakaway happened in 1992.  They've been a big club since the '50s at a minimum - when I was a kid in the late 80s-90s Spurs were England's most successful cup side of all time.  Leverkusen are not the German equivalent of Spurs.  Spurs are a very similar size club to use - as is a lot of their history.  So close that we sit 5th in the all-time attendance averages for the football league in England - Spurs sit in 4th.

 

My claim to their 'greatness' isn't social media - you're being utterly disingenuous.  For what it's worth, the 'Big Six' shite is a bit of a misnomer anyway - there is no fixed number to it.  It's been a Big Four, Big Five and Big Six at various points in my lifetime - with Man Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool the only permanent fixtures - and there is no reason that it couldn't be a 'Big Seven' with us in there (like Serie A's sette sorelle - 'Seven Sisters').

 

We're still playing catch-up with these clubs after a decade and a half of neglect by Ashley.  This season has been incredible for us - but it should be noted that it would represent a pretty normal one for Spurs in the past decade, and a failure for the clubs who we truly aspire to compete with.  It is going to take years to catch up fully with some of these clubs - next season we could just as easily drop several places (which no-one should worry about or gan radge over).

 

I can't fucking stand Spurs, just for the record.  But the idea that their position in English football is being propped up by twitter bots and Joe Lewis's contact book is fucking crackers.

 

 

Edited April 30, 2023 by TheBrownBottle

[r0cafella]

Why are we talking about spurs? Yes they see Mike’s ahead of us like most other clubs due to 14 years of neglect and mismanagement. 

[Ace]

6 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

The implication is that if we haven't managed to get the sponsorship in that Spurs have, then we must be run by complete muppets, as according to you the Spurs' marketability is simply a gigantic fraud and therefore we should easily be attracting the same sort of sponsorship deals.

 

The 'Spurs have bought followers on twitter' thing is tin foil hat territory - it's just plain odd. 

 

Here's Spurs's league record over the past 10 years: 4th; 7th; 6th; 4th; 3rd; 2nd; 3rd; 5th; 6th; 5th; 6th.  That 7th place finish is the only time since 2009 they've finished outside the top six.  They also reached a Champions League Final during that time - though they've been in the CL in 5 of the last 8 seasons.

 

Newcastle's record during that period: 11th; 12th; 13th; 13th; 10th; (1st in Second Division); 18th; 15th; 10th; 16th.  Having really rich owners doesn't trump performance on the pitch - Spurs have consistently finished in the top six positions for over a decade. 

 

The Leverkusen comparison is a ludicrous one; Spurs were a member of the 'Big Five' when the PL breakaway happened in 1992.  They've been a big club since the '50s at a minimum - when I was a kid in the late 80s-90s Spurs were England's most successful cup side of all time.  Leverkusen are not the German equivalent of Spurs.  Spurs are a very similar size club to use - as is a lot of their history.  So close that we sit 5th in the all-time attendance averages for the football league in England - Spurs sit in 4th.

 

My claim to their 'greatness' isn't social media - you're being utterly disingenuous.  For what it's worth, the 'Big Six' shite is a bit of a misnomer anyway - there is no fixed number to it.  It's been a Big Four, Big Five and Big Six at various points in my lifetime - with Man Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool the only permanent fixtures - and there is no reason that it couldn't be a 'Big Seven' with us in there (like Serie A's sette sorelle - 'Seven Sisters').

 

We're still playing catch-up with these clubs after a decade and a half of neglect by Ashley.  This season has been incredible for us - but it should be noted that it would represent a pretty normal one for Spurs in the past decade, and a failure for the clubs who we truly aspire to compete with.  It is going to take years to catch up fully with some of these clubs - next season we could just as easily drop several places (which no-one should worry about or gan radge over).

 

I can't fucking stand Spurs, just for the record.  But the idea that their position in English football is being propped up by twitter bots and Joe Lewis's contact book is fucking crackers.

 

 

 

Think you need to learn to read rather than jacking it to mighty spurs pal.

 

Bet you believe Man U and Liverpool are huge because of their ‘support’ too. 🤦‍♂️
 

It’s strange that you find things so black and white, someone says it’s not perfect so they think the people doing it are muppets no in between.

 

Also me pointing out that your reliance on social media is stupid because you can buy followers must mean that only spurs do it. Learn to look for the grey. 🤦‍♂️

 

Leverkusen are a great comparison they also had a 10 year spell with only 1 finish outside the top 6 while reaching a champions league final, were a consistent top half team before that as well. 
 

We aren’t talking about the other clubs we are talking about spurs. Top 4 is a great season for them and their achievements despite good management have came off the back of years of investment. Yet still they are significantly the little brother of the sky 6.

 

They have everything going for them and that’s all they can be. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ben]

Great debate BTW 

[TheBrownBottle]

48 minutes ago, Ace said:

Think you need to learn to read rather than jacking it to mighty spurs pal.

 

Bet you believe Man U and Liverpool are huge because of their ‘support’ too. 🤦‍♂️
 

It’s strange that you find things so black and white, someone says it’s not perfect so they think the people doing it are muppets no in between.

 

Also me pointing out that your reliance on social media is stupid because you can buy followers must mean that only spurs do it. Learn to look for the grey. 🤦‍♂️

 

Leverkusen are a great comparison they also had a 10 year spell with only 1 finish outside the top 6 while reaching a champions league final, were a consistent top half team before that as well. 
 

We aren’t talking about the other clubs we are talking about spurs. Top 4 is a great season for them and their achievements despite good management have came off the back of years of investment. Yet still they are significantly the little brother of the sky 6.

 

They have everything going for them and that’s all they can be. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong, they're definitely the 'lesser' of the 'Big (Sky) Six' (more than happy to call them the 'Sky Six' btw - Sky love these 'Big' monikers as a sales-pitch) - the others actually win things!

 

What I meant re Leverkusen is that they are not historically a big club, nor a successful one, nor do they get big attendances.  They're a well-run (and well-back financially - the supposed purity offered up by German football ownership models also has within it two prominent clubs - Bayer Leverkusen and RB Leipzig - who literally have their huge multinational corporate backers in the name.  Though they're still not as successful as PSV - another of the corporate clubs) club which has punched above its weight.

 

I agree that Spurs are basically at the height of what they can be, at least without external resourcing being poured in.  Which would likely be the case for us, too - consistent top five or six finishes would be a well-run NUFC's likely best case scenario, allowing for the club to run under its own steam.  However, the backing the club now has can act like a steroid injection and allow the club to punch its way above that - like Man City or Chelsea.  And once you're winning things for a few years, the reputation is made and the club is truly transformed - Man City and Chelsea are not 'naturally' bigger clubs than Newcastle, Villa, Everton, Leeds ... or Spurs.  Note that my opinion is that NUFC could always have been more than that, but the last 20 years or so have meant that clubs like ours find a different ceiling in the modern game to the one which existed for a century before that.  

 

One thing though, I'm afraid if you're seriously going to suggest that Man Utd and Liverpool are also somehow propped up via the forces of darkness for their 'support' then we're never going to agree on that one  - Man Utd and Liverpool are huge clubs, full stop.  That is truly getting into second gunman on the grassy knoll, jetfuel doesn't melt steel territory ...  

[The College Dropout]

Re: Corporate clubs. Aren’t there a number of German clubs part owned by major manufacturers? 
 

Bayern is 30% owned by some of the biggest Bavarian companies like Audi and Allianz.   
 

Wolfsburg has VW ownership no?

[TheBrownBottle]

1 hour ago, r0cafella said:

Why are we talking about spurs? Yes they see Mike’s ahead of us like most other clubs due to 14 years of neglect and mismanagement. 

Comparisons of NUFC's latest kit sponsorship deal to Spurs'.  Also there seems to be a wider debate around who we replace in a 'Big Six' - which presupposes that there is a Big Six, and that you can't have more than six in an elite group.  I think you can have more; and you can have fewer (which English football has in the past).  The media seem obsessed with who we replace, but what seems more likely is that over the next two or three years they start talking about a 'Big Seven'; the clubs competing regular for European slots and domestic cups.  Once the current phase of our rebuild is over, I can see years c.5-10 post-takeover us moving away from that bracket - and competing consistently for big trophies with other huge clubs.

[TheBrownBottle]

Just now, The College Dropout said:

Re: Corporate clubs. Aren’t there a number of German clubs part owned by major manufacturers? 
 

Bayern is 30% owned by some of the biggest Bavarian companies like Audi and Allianz.   
 

Wolfsburg has VW ownership no?

Yep, Wolfsburg are 100% VW owned.  Clubs in Germany are often linked historically to the big local factory where most were employed - a lot of German towns and cities sprung up around a single employer.

 

The only one I can think of in England with a similar background is Arsenal - though of course they no longer play in Woolwich and aren't funded by the local armaments plant.

[LV]

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Yep, Wolfsburg are 100% VW owned.  Clubs in Germany are often linked historically to the big local factory where most were employed - a lot of German towns and cities sprung up around a single employer.

 

The only one I can think of in England with a similar background is Arsenal - though of course they no longer play in Woolwich and aren't funded by the local armaments plant.

West Ham with Thames Ironworks. Hence the Hammers, Irons etc 

[r0cafella]

19 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Comparisons of NUFC's latest kit sponsorship deal to Spurs'.  Also there seems to be a wider debate around who we replace in a 'Big Six' - which presupposes that there is a Big Six, and that you can't have more than six in an elite group.  I think you can have more; and you can have fewer (which English football has in the past).  The media seem obsessed with who we replace, but what seems more likely is that over the next two or three years they start talking about a 'Big Seven'; the clubs competing regular for European slots and domestic cups.  Once the current phase of our rebuild is over, I can see years c.5-10 post-takeover us moving away from that bracket - and competing consistently for big trophies with other huge clubs.

The kit deal if anything is on the low side but it will all improve given time. 
 

Spurs are the third club of London, we are the biggest club north of Manchester. 

[RodneyCisse]

14 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

The kit deal if anything is on the low side but it will all improve given time. 
 

Spurs are the third club of London, we are the biggest club north of Manchester. 

Feels like it’s all very strategic from the rumours it not being Saudi based.

 

Talk that noon moves off sleeve to the front and a Saudi business Fly Saudia or RIA (when it’s rebranded) takes up that role at a high price than noon.

Which once we’ve had a few season around the top 6 will eventually move to the front and be in line with the rests payments.

[54]

2 minutes ago, RodneyCisse said:

Feels like it’s all very strategic from the rumours it not being Saudi based.

 

Talk that noon moves off sleeve to the front and a Saudi business Fly Saudia or RIA (when it’s rebranded) takes up that role at a high price than noon.

Which once we’ve had a few season around the top 6 will eventually move to the front and be in line with the rests payments.

Oh god, pleas don't let it be Noon on the front, a big yellow box plastered over the chest of the shirt

[Hhtoon]

That £25M may well be the "base" amount with extra payable for champions league. 

Assuming Spurs £40m includes CL and the £25m doesn't, then if we qualify we likely won't be too far apart. 

 

 

Edited April 30, 2023 by Hhtoon

[PauloGeordio]

Either way, big 6, big 7, who’s giving up their seat at the table so we can squeeze a smaller one in to make it 7? We are making strides to take the fucking table. As long as the team keeps performing under Eddie, with his team working their magic, the meteoric rise will happen sooner than planned. The momentum is already there. This is written, the destiny we all knew was there, neglected and unloved under Ashley. “The diamond that just needs polishing”  It’s what they’ve all feared. Our fears came true under Ashley, now we can all dream again. It happen.  A win against Saints today would help! 

 

 

Edited April 30, 2023 by PauloGeordio

[Stifler]

Wasn’t there rumours that Qatar Airways were in talks to be our sponsor?

 

Honestly Fly Emirates would make more sense. They fly out of Newcastle, they sponsor the air traffic control tower, sponsor Durham Cricket Club, and have even sponsored a Metro train.

I know quite a few years ago, before we got Fun88 they were in talks but their deal with Arsenal at the time meant they couldn’t sponsor another English club.

They have got a new deal with Arsenal since, I wonder if that allows for them to sponsor us?

[Whitley mag]

Just now, Stifler said:

Wasn’t there rumours that Qatar Airways were in talks to be our sponsor?

 

Honestly Fly Emirates would make more sense. They fly out of Newcastle, they sponsor the air traffic control tower, sponsor Durham Cricket Club, and have even sponsored a Metro train.

I know quite a few years ago, before we got Fun88 they were in talks but their deal with Arsenal at the time meant they couldn’t sponsor another English club.

They have got a new deal with Arsenal since, I wonder if that allows for them to sponsor us?

Yeah Qatar airways have been in talks, I’d still be surprised especially if they think Man U takeover has legs.

[Stifler]

1 minute ago, Whitley mag said:

Yeah Qatar airways have been in talks, I’d still be surprised especially if they think Man U takeover has legs.

It depends, we may not have an exclusive deal.

[TheBrownBottle]

4 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Wasn’t there rumours that Qatar Airways were in talks to be our sponsor?

 

Honestly Fly Emirates would make more sense. They fly out of Newcastle, they sponsor the air traffic control tower, sponsor Durham Cricket Club, and have even sponsored a Metro train.

I know quite a few years ago, before we got Fun88 they were in talks but their deal with Arsenal at the time meant they couldn’t sponsor another English club.

They have got a new deal with Arsenal since, I wonder if that allows for them to sponsor us?

Yeah, there's a logic to that.  And they can definitely sponsor more than one team.

[PauloGeordio]

5 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Wasn’t there rumours that Qatar Airways were in talks to be our sponsor?

 

Honestly Fly Emirates would make more sense. They fly out of Newcastle, they sponsor the air traffic control tower, sponsor Durham Cricket Club, and have even sponsored a Metro train.

I know quite a few years ago, before we got Fun88 they were in talks but their deal with Arsenal at the time meant they couldn’t sponsor another English club.

They have got a new deal with Arsenal since, I wonder if that allows for them to sponsor us?

Yasir was pictured with Qatari company head presumed in talks re sponsorship in the not to distant past. 

[PauloGeordio]

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Yeah, there's a logic to that.  And they can definitely sponsor more than one team.

As Emirates do

[Stifler]

4 minutes ago, PauloGeordio said:

As Emirates do

Not more than 1 English club though.

[PauloGeordio]

3 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Not more than 1 English club though.

OK, wasn’t sure. Always found it odd they could sponsor a team and the competition that team was competing in: The Emirates FA cup and Arsenal.

[Ace]

3 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Don't get me wrong, they're definitely the 'lesser' of the 'Big (Sky) Six' (more than happy to call them the 'Sky Six' btw - Sky love these 'Big' monikers as a sales-pitch) - the others actually win things!

 

What I meant re Leverkusen is that they are not historically a big club, nor a successful one, nor do they get big attendances.  They're a well-run (and well-back financially - the supposed purity offered up by German football ownership models also has within it two prominent clubs - Bayer Leverkusen and RB Leipzig - who literally have their huge multinational corporate backers in the name.  Though they're still not as successful as PSV - another of the corporate clubs) club which has punched above its weight.

 

I agree that Spurs are basically at the height of what they can be, at least without external resourcing being poured in.  Which would likely be the case for us, too - consistent top five or six finishes would be a well-run NUFC's likely best case scenario, allowing for the club to run under its own steam.  However, the backing the club now has can act like a steroid injection and allow the club to punch its way above that - like Man City or Chelsea.  And once you're winning things for a few years, the reputation is made and the club is truly transformed - Man City and Chelsea are not 'naturally' bigger clubs than Newcastle, Villa, Everton, Leeds ... or Spurs.  Note that my opinion is that NUFC could always have been more than that, but the last 20 years or so have meant that clubs like ours find a different ceiling in the modern game to the one which existed for a century before that.  

 

One thing though, I'm afraid if you're seriously going to suggest that Man Utd and Liverpool are also somehow propped up via the forces of darkness for their 'support' then we're never going to agree on that one  - Man Utd and Liverpool are huge clubs, full stop.  That is truly getting into second gunman on the grassy knoll, jetfuel doesn't melt steel territory ...  

Sky 6 or corrupt 6 will do.

 

That makes more sense, though with City and Chelsea in particular I’m not as sure how well that reputation will hold without a sugar daddy potentially one day.

 

One important thing to remember in Bobbys era we were as high as the 5th biggest in terms of revenue so the potential has been there for us for a while and we’ve kind of had the reverse effect of spurs.

 

Regarding Man U and Liverpool I mean the sky based propaganda that they were just naturally always huge clubs with massive support. They both benefited from benefactors with deep pockets, alongside good management on and off the field and of course elite media promotion.