madras Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 2 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: FMV is the most blatant attempt at restricting our revenue streams and is nothing more than cartel like behaviour. The cartel clubs especially collectively shat themselves when we were taken over being fully aware of PiF’s portfolio of businesses they could call on to sponsor us. This should be the first restriction that is legally challenged and removed. It was the timing of it that made it NUFC specific. Emergency meeting to bring in rules straight away. How long did it take to stop Chelsea's 8yr contracts FFP dodge and did it come in straight away ? How long will it take to stop the loan with obligation FFP dodge ? It won't happen while it benefits them. I'm happy in a way that when we get there we won't have done a Man City or Chelsea but naturally I'm also impatient and want it as soon as possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 I despise this version of football, I really fucking do. 01/02 was absolute peak Barclays and we'll never see the likes of that again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 4 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said: I despise this version of football, I really fucking do. 01/02 was absolute peak Barclays and we'll never see the likes of that again. It's always been about who had the most money with very few exceptions. Just now the numbers are eye watering and obscene. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 28 minutes ago, madras said: It's always been about who had the most money with very few exceptions. Just now the numbers are eye watering and obscene. Yeah but at least there used to be a modicum of hope and the winner wasn't a foregone conclusion. Man City have been cack by their standards but are obviously going to win it again. There should be another couple of clubs splurging on worldies pushing them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 12 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said: Yeah but at least there used to be a modicum of hope and the winner wasn't a foregone conclusion. Man City have been cack by their standards but are obviously going to win it again. There should be another couple of clubs splurging on worldies pushing them. Dunno like, I remember Liverpool in the 70s and early 80s Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamPS Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 The race course itself has a separate members owned golf club through half of it so if it was on the race course they’d need to pay off the golf club and am sure one of the (presumably hundreds of) members would have leaked it? Parklands golf club is directly owned by the racecourse so that seems more likely Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, madras said: It was the timing of it that made it NUFC specific. Emergency meeting to bring in rules straight away. How long did it take to stop Chelsea's 8yr contracts FFP dodge and did it come in straight away ? How long will it take to stop the loan with obligation FFP dodge ? It won't happen while it benefits them. I'm happy in a way that when we get there we won't have done a Man City or Chelsea but naturally I'm also impatient and want it as soon as possible. It won't have been "natural". It's the same driving force as City & Chelsea that is capped by FFP. We'll use some of the same mechanisms they both now use to maintain their advantage - esp. build one of the best academy's in world football, sign the best youngsters in world football, sell them at massive profits. That wouldn't have been natural. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrRaspberryJam Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Just now, The College Dropout said: It won't have been "natural". It's the same driving force as City & Chelsea that is capped by FFP. We'll use some of the same mechanisms they both now use to maintain their advantage - esp. build one of the best academy's in world football, sign the best youngsters in world football, sell them at massive profits. That wouldn't have been natural. You fancy Newcastle to do the business the morra big man? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 minute ago, MrRaspberryJam said: You fancy Newcastle to do the business the morra big man? Yep - we have too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrRaspberryJam Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Just now, The College Dropout said: Yep - we have too. Botman, Bruno & Isak. If our spine is on form then I think we'll do it. Not sure whether it'd be best to but Joelinton CM or LW? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infatuation Junkie Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 12 hours ago, Charlies said: Harbottle park in NE6, or the old ground site nearby. You heard it here first Benson road. Grace street. Scarborough road. Cleadon street. Cullercoats street. Canterbury street. Building a stadium on harbottle field isn’t going to cut it being so close to possibly the most deprived area of the city. The owners want corporate visitors to not see deprivation. Want them to see a lush environment with high towers and thriving business. It simply won’t happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghandis Flip-Flop Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 3 minutes ago, Infatuation Junkie said: Benson road. Grace street. Scarborough road. Cleadon street. Cullercoats street. Canterbury street. Building a stadium on harbottle field isn’t going to cut it being so close to possibly the most deprived area of the city. The owners want corporate visitors to not see deprivation. Want them to see a lush environment with high towers and thriving business. It simply won’t happen. You’re presuming that the owners aren’t intending to do similar to the Man City owners to that deprived area of the city. Was the fact that Newcastle is ripe for redevelopment not part of the appeal? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 16 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: It won't have been "natural". It's the same driving force as City & Chelsea that is capped by FFP. We'll use some of the same mechanisms they both now use to maintain their advantage - esp. build one of the best academy's in world football, sign the best youngsters in world football, sell them at massive profits. That wouldn't have been natural. It'd more organic than near bankrupt one day then signing worldies a day later. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 25 minutes ago, madras said: Dunno like, I remember Liverpool in the 70s and early 80s Then the 90’s it was Man U then City and Chelsea………it’s always been about money and all relative to the decades the money was spent in. The only constant was the 4-6 teams at the top. Now we’re in the hands of extremely wealthy owners they don’t like it……..fucking tough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Just now, madras said: It'd more organic than near bankrupt one day then signing worldies a day later. I get what you mean but it's not "organic" IMO. Brighton is organic, Villa is more-so organic than us. We will have leveraged an oil-rich state for success no matter how we look at it. Chelsea was such an interesting one. Aye they were almost bankrupt but finishing in the CL (organically) saved them. They had a pretty successful 10-year period prior to that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 7 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: I get what you mean but it's not "organic" IMO. Brighton is organic, Villa is more-so organic than us. We will have leveraged an oil-rich state for success no matter how we look at it. Chelsea was such an interesting one. Aye they were almost bankrupt but finishing in the CL (organically) saved them. They had a pretty successful 10-year period prior to that. Nothing organic about success in football, the capital came in at large quantities for all big clubs just at different times. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 (edited) 14 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: I get what you mean but it's not "organic" IMO. Brighton is organic, Villa is more-so organic than us. We will have leveraged an oil-rich state for success no matter how we look at it. Chelsea was such an interesting one. Aye they were almost bankrupt but finishing in the CL (organically) saved them. They had a pretty successful 10-year period prior to that. Chelseas American CEO (Buck ?) Said they were days from going bust until Abramovic came in, Villa's owners put money in, Ashley did as well..... what's organic ? The Lake District is more natural than the centre of London but still massively man made. Edited January 5 by madras Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 (edited) 16 minutes ago, madras said: Chelseas American CEO (Buck ?) Said they were days from going bust until Abramovic came in, Villa's owners put money in, Ashley did as well..... what's organic ? The Lake District is more natural than the centre of London but still massively man made. They would've gone bust had they not beaten Liverpool on the last day of the season to get into the CL. Qualifying for the CL kept them from going bankrupt this is well documented. Abramovic turned up weeks later but the Liverpool match was the first big moment. https://www.chelseafc.com/en/news/article/beating-liverpool-in-2003 Wealthy owners in football have a long history as we both know. While Villa owners are investing money, it's not the same as us. Teams owned by oil-rich countries - is something else entirely. In Europe, there are only 3. Us, City & PSG. No matter how we slice it, we are closer to those 2, than Aston Villa or Brighton. While we have their backing. Villa are not in the same stratosphere of potential as us. Our main shirt sponsor is essentially owned by our Owners, as are another few sponsors. Villa's owners can't do that. We'll have bought our way to success very sheer force. Any parameter to stop us or slow us down, we'll find other ways. The stadium and academy alone will give us better revenues in 7 years. At a high-level - yes all teams buy their way to success. Agreed. That doesn't make our success organic because we can't spend like PSG. Edited January 5 by The College Dropout Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, The College Dropout said: I get what you mean but it's not "organic" IMO. Brighton is organic, Villa is more-so organic than us. We will have leveraged an oil-rich state for success no matter how we look at it. Chelsea was such an interesting one. Aye they were almost bankrupt but finishing in the CL (organically) saved them. They had a pretty successful 10-year period prior to that. Villa has had huge sums poured in. Tony Bloom has put over half a billion quid into Brighton. Without Bloom’s massive capital injections, Brighton would likely be where they normally are - the third tier. Villa’s owners pumped in a third of a billion in non-repayable share issues. Imagine if Leeds or Sheff Wed had a similar investment. There’s nothing ‘organic’ about either of them. Brighton is far, far less organic than NUFC - there is far more argument that huge investment has them well above their ‘natural’ status. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianSwan Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 (edited) Newcastle MUST grow, unimpeded by FFP, otherwise it's a waste of time for them. The Saudi's will have to get creative with sales/ loans to Newcastle from the Saudi Pro League. Edited January 5 by BrianSwan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 The irony is that the PL becoming such a global brand,backed by Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool as the poster boys, is what attracted the oil money and state funds to the league and upsetting their applecart. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 We can go back & forth on this Newcastle forum about this. But in the real world, people will attribute our success to the Saudi state ownership's financial might. It's going to be deserved. So we need to be honest about ourselves and with each other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 2 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said: The irony is that the PL becoming such a global brand,backed by Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool as the poster boys, is what attracted the oil money and state funds to the league and upsetting their applecart. I also think Abramovic was great for the PL brand. That "big 4" was great for the PL. Wenger, Ferguson, Mourinho, Benitez. For the previous decade, it was Man U + 1 and English clubs were largely off it in the European Cup / Champions League. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianSwan Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 (edited) Mahrez, Laporte and Milinković-Savić from the Saudi Pro League and Newcastle become a top 4 team again. All other multi club models have benefited from each other, why wouldn't Newcastle? Edited January 5 by BrianSwan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, The College Dropout said: They would've gone bust had they not beaten Liverpool on the last day of the season to get into the CL. Qualifying for the CL kept them from going bankrupt this is well documented. Abramovic turned up weeks later but the Liverpool match was the first big moment. https://www.chelseafc.com/en/news/article/beating-liverpool-in-2003 Wealthy owners in football have a long history as we both know. While Villa owners are investing money, it's not the same as us. Teams owned by oil-rich countries - is something else entirely. In Europe, there are only 3. Us, City & PSG. No matter how we slice it, we are closer to those 2, than Aston Villa or Brighton. While we have their backing. Villa are not in the same stratosphere of potential as us. Our main shirt sponsor is essentially owned by our Owners, as are another few sponsors. Villa's owners can't do that. We'll have bought our way to success very sheer force. Any parameter to stop us or slow us down, we'll find other ways. The stadium and academy alone will give us better revenues in 7 years. At a high-level - yes all teams buy their way to success. Agreed. That doesn't make our success organic because we can't spend like PSG. Chelsea..... it was a lot closer than made out https://www.theguardian.com/football/2005/oct/17/newsstory.sport9 Villa is the same as us, they can only put in so much before FFP and the Sela deal was FMV. Given the profile of the club and Champions league most would reckon we could've got similar value from someone not at all connected with Saudi, as our other deals have been. Potential is purely that at the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now