Geordie_once_removed Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 7 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said: Germany is the model for broken modern football. Bayern’s complete dominance is absolutely ludicrous, and FFP has enshrined their position. At the top level for sure. But for a yoyo club it's fun. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingArthur Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 7 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said: ‘Do we want to win the Premier League within five to ten years? Yes’. Takeover day. Now, of course there is an extended timescale to that - but I would’ve expected to see the bare minimum (new training ground + sponsorship, academy etc) done to date. Not a peep, which means that any benefits gets pushed further back. I would’ve expected maximising all commercial income strands possible. So far we’ve done the basics. I would’ve expected plans for either a new stadium or significant improvement to the existing - diddly squat (yes, before anyone says, I know that the club is undertaking a feasibility study. These don’t tend to take two and a half years). Superb management by Howe and some astute signings in year 1 made it look like this was all part of the plan. I think we will be a top 4 club at the end of this decade if PIF stay on. We do not know what plans they have for the stadium anyway, but certainly there are some plans. You don't buy a team for 300 million without a plan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 34 minutes ago, KingArthur said: I think we will be a top 4 club at the end of this decade if PIF stay on. We do not know what plans they have for the stadium anyway, but certainly there are some plans. You don't buy a team for 300 million without a plan. Not seeing it at present, unless something truly significant occurs. You absolutely can spend that much in football without a plan, easily - look at Boehly’s Chelsea or Man Utd over the last decade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 The next 12 months are huge in terms of PIF. We really need progress on commercial deals, stadium, training ground etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 10 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: The next 12 months are huge in terms of PIF. We really need progress on commercial deals, stadium, training ground etc. can I add social media content to this too pls, look at Man City’s YouTube. It’s incredible for fans and getting (nice plushy PR) insights into the club. I want it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouldy_uk Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 Just our bloody luck that we become the richest (on paper) club on the planet, but aren’t allowed to bloody spend it. Saudis will probably dick off just before the rule gets removed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingArthur Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 45 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: Not seeing it at present, unless something truly significant occurs. You absolutely can spend that much in football without a plan, easily - look at Boehly’s Chelsea or Man Utd over the last decade. Yes, but Man Utd have been trying to spend as to remain as a top club and still they are making profit for the owners. Chelsea owners are idiots. Saudis are not idiots. FFP rules might change many times during these few years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J7 Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 Staveley is probably going to have to come out and saying something about how the 5 year thing is unrealistic now. I mean to anyone with the slightest bit of knowledge and isn’t acting in bad faith, it clearly is and we know why. It’s a bit pathetic for some journalists and some fans holding her to it tbh. Idiots like Simon Bird are jumping at the bit to go on the attack. A training camp in UAE is already a ‘jolly’. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 Couldn’t give a single fuck what journalists like Bird say about us in opinion pieces. Hard facts about our spending etc are worth reading up on, hearing some sensationalist bollocks from people with agendas is a waste of everyone’s time Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 12 minutes ago, KingArthur said: Yes, but Man Utd have been trying to spend as to remain as a top club and still they are making profit for the owners. Chelsea owners are idiots. Saudis are not idiots. FFP rules might change many times during these few years. The PIF is headed by a man who paid $500m for a painting which may not have actually have been painted by Leonardo, which he keeps on a yacht and therefore susceptible to damage from sea air. I’m willing to suggest that idiocy is a pretty standard trait in terms of the Saudi govt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 13 minutes ago, JJ7 said: Staveley is probably going to have to come out and saying something about how the 5 year thing is unrealistic now. I mean to anyone with the slightest bit of knowledge and isn’t acting in bad faith, it clearly is and we know why. It’s a bit pathetic for some journalists and some fans holding her to it tbh. Idiots like Simon Bird are jumping at the bit to go on the attack. A training camp in UAE is already a ‘jolly’. It’s hardly pathetic to hold someone to account for statements they’ve made. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: The PIF is headed by a man who paid $500m for a painting which may not have actually have been painted by Leonardo, which he keeps on a yacht and therefore susceptible to damage from sea air. I’m willing to suggest that idiocy is a pretty standard trait in terms of the Saudi govt. The real problem with you is that we’re owned by the Saudi’s……..comes through loud and clear in your posts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 2 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: The real problem with you is that we’re owned by the Saudi’s……..comes through loud and clear in your posts. Yeah, I don’t like it at all. I haven’t hid that at any point. Being owned by one of the vilest regimes on the planet isn’t a good news story. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 Forest find out their punishment today apparently, would assume we are interested onlookers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 4 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said: Forest find out their punishment today apparently, would assume we are interested onlookers. Mustn’t be bad news as it hasn’t been leaked to Ornstein yet Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 9 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: Yeah, I don’t like it at all. I haven’t hid that at any point. Being owned by one of the vilest regimes on the planet isn’t a good news story. More generally, state ownership is bad for football. I think it's also probably fair to say whether your happy on the progress that has been made to date will depend on where you want us to go and how quickly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 1 minute ago, Jack27 said: Mustn’t be bad news as it hasn’t been leaked to Ornstein yet It will surely be a minimum of 6 points deducted? Weren’t their charges worse than Everton’s ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 Also, interested to see how the independent regulator changes the landscape. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abacus Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 There aren't many industries where owners aren't allowed to invest what they like in a business. It comes with the risk that it doesn't pay off, or that the company goes bust. Going bust is sad for the employees and suppliers but a fact of life. Clearly football clubs are different, as they are cultural assets and important to communities too and as you'd affect the rest of the league. So, normally, you'd think it would be enough just to ensure those owners can guarantee that they can cover any liabilities for the foreseeable future, and let them get on with it. I do see the issue here which is this would allow the richest owners who could invest and provide those guarantees to dominate a league. But that's always been the case. It's just that right now the oil states are the richest of all and so could if they chose to financially dominate the league. But again, I can't see how that is different to how it's always been or how you can effectively legislate to prevent one set of owners to financially dominate but keep another set where they are forever (who have got there themselves from previous spending and/or their historical reputation), due to the fear that a bigger fish will come along and threaten their dominance. Whatever you think of the respective ownerships themselves, that can't be right. If gotten rid of, the fear could be that this drives away existing owners who can't or won't compete (like the Glazers, what a shame), or dissuades anybody else from coming in and trying. But FFP as it stands will also dissuades anybody else from coming in and trying, so I don't see what problem it actually fixes even if you are a neutral who supports it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mighty__mag Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) 6 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said: COVID was prior to the takeover Think it was during the late aftermath, people were still isolated etc, remember Howe missing his first home game. I was also thinking it would have been harder to attract work, plus those who you'd need to get the things in place you speak of further up, would also have had contracts on hold that would need completing before taking on more. You gotta consider the knock on effect, especially those huge redevelopment projects, they take years anyway, pushing work further back. Edited March 18 by mighty__mag Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Ahmed Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 20 hours ago, The College Dropout said: The problem with his fee is that it’s a the higher end of his potential value. We didn’t get any type of ‘distress sale’ discount. Like Maddison is probably a £60m-70m talent available for £45m. Maddison only had a year left on his contract, that was the 'distress sale' discount Barnes had 2 years left, if he only had a year we would have gotten him for less Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macphisto Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 4 hours ago, r0cafella said: Pif got us for a great price by most valuation metrics. It was a great price based on what we can be not on what we were under Ashley. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 1 hour ago, JJ7 said: Staveley is probably going to have to come out and saying something about how the 5 year thing is unrealistic now. I mean to anyone with the slightest bit of knowledge and isn’t acting in bad faith, it clearly is and we know why. It’s a bit pathetic for some journalists and some fans holding her to it tbh. Idiots like Simon Bird are jumping at the bit to go on the attack. A training camp in UAE is already a ‘jolly’. Simon Bird is an absolute whopper and unsurprisingly anti-Saudi given he writes for The Mirror. He’s largely been ‘Mr Irrelevant’ for years as part of the North East press pack. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBG Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 1 hour ago, TheBrownBottle said: It’s hardly pathetic to hold someone to account for statements they’ve made. It's also easy to use the short end of the timescale against them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 26 minutes ago, Geordie Ahmed said: Maddison only had a year left on his contract, that was the 'distress sale' discount Barnes had 2 years left, if he only had a year we would have gotten him for less `That's fine. My point is - we paid for a player at the peak of his value. We need to sign players that we could potentially double their value. Only Bruno has done that. Gordon probably gone up 50% in value this season alone.. 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