Stripped for action (Sunday Telegraph Article 29.04.07)

[mrmojorisin75]

all the whining on here about getting shepherd out and a new board in, yet yanks aren't good enough?  eh?

 

the only alternative would be a "ray ranson style" consortium bid that would raise the cash to buy out the current owners and take on the debt we have but then would likely have to make steady progress year after year due to the fact that cash would not be as free-flowing as it would be from a huge yankee buyer

 

we've 3 options/hopes as i see it: stick with the fat man status quo, get a new owner who's in the same cash leagues as the fat man (therefore it'll be a long haul ahead), or hope for a hugely rich yankee or someone to come in and throw cash at the place and get us challenging

 

i'd actually be for option one or two personally, but if it were the fat man or equivalent the we'd need a change of attitude within and without the club that acknowledges we're not able to challenge the top four and likely won't be able to challenge spurs/villa or whoever else is taken over unless we think long term and take the short term hit

 

as long as we continue down this route of thinking a top four challenge is a couple of players away then we'll continue in the hire & fire, boom & bust, doom & gloom everyone wants away from....

 

[Martin Lol]

"guaranteed fan bases"

 

That's what worries me. The Glaziers have already shown that they purely there for the money and couldn't give a s*** about the fans. A huge season ticket price increasethis season has been followed up by a 15% rise for next season despite the majority of clubs either lowering or freezing their ticket prices. Ok, so Fat Freddy may well raise our ticket prices again but it seems a cert with the money men of America.

 

Newcastle fans are in exactly the same position as Spurs'.  We too have been hit with a season ticket price increase, which is all the more galling after the most successful on field season in quite a few years, £5m coming in from the Puma sponsorship deal and £8.5m coming from Mansion.  And in spite of all that, the season ticket still goes up.  The reason, in Spurs' case ( and probably in for Newcastle too) is simple.  The share issue guaranteed by Enic expires in September, any shares not bought will be purchased by Enic for 16p per share.  The current share price is over £1.  Buying those shares will takes Enic's shareholding to approximately 52%.

 

No doubt in my mind that after September (maybe soon after) Levy will be selling up and moving to the States.  Before he bought Chelsea, Abramovich was interested, before he bought Villa, Lerner was interested.  What I found interesting in the Telegraph article was the talk of associations between USA moguls and Easter Europeans.  In the past few months there has been mention of a couple of Americans but the last year/18 months, the most regular name that keeps cropping up is Vagit Alekperov.  Been to matches at WHL on a number of occasions and also has extensive business interests in USA as well. 

 

But what if he bought Spurs and Belgravia (for example) bought Newcastle?  All that would happen is that all the top clubs would all be owned by moguls and not every team can be the winners.  It may sound good in the short term but I'm depressed by the long term outlook for the game in general here.

 

 

 

Very true. The other side of the coin is that you dont want to be left behind if it means additional funds overall for investment.

 

But surely the problem comes when only a handful of clubs are mega-rich, doesn't it?

 

If everyone's got a billionaire owner wouldn't that mean increased competition and therefore a more interesting league?

 

At the moment no-one other than Chelsea, Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool have a chance of winning the league and they've even got the cups sewn up as well this year. That's a really boring situation for the rest of us, but if Villa, Spurs and us were added to that group, surely that's got to make it better, not worse.

 

If 3 or 4 teams were added to the big 4, then yes, I'd agree the league would be more competitive and be better for it.  I think the problem arises when most clubs (or all) are owned by billionaires and, unlike American sport such as the NFL, one of them misses out on the gravy train by getting relegated.  That's when I can see owners possibly cutting their losses and pulling out, leaving the club potentially in a crisis situation.

 

I know that is an extreme scenario but I wouldn't say it was impossible.

[Parky]

"guaranteed fan bases"

 

That's what worries me. The Glaziers have already shown that they purely there for the money and couldn't give a s*** about the fans. A huge season ticket price increasethis season has been followed up by a 15% rise for next season despite the majority of clubs either lowering or freezing their ticket prices. Ok, so Fat Freddy may well raise our ticket prices again but it seems a cert with the money men of America.

 

Newcastle fans are in exactly the same position as Spurs'.  We too have been hit with a season ticket price increase, which is all the more galling after the most successful on field season in quite a few years, £5m coming in from the Puma sponsorship deal and £8.5m coming from Mansion.  And in spite of all that, the season ticket still goes up.  The reason, in Spurs' case ( and probably in for Newcastle too) is simple.  The share issue guaranteed by Enic expires in September, any shares not bought will be purchased by Enic for 16p per share.  The current share price is over £1.  Buying those shares will takes Enic's shareholding to approximately 52%.

 

No doubt in my mind that after September (maybe soon after) Levy will be selling up and moving to the States.  Before he bought Chelsea, Abramovich was interested, before he bought Villa, Lerner was interested.  What I found interesting in the Telegraph article was the talk of associations between USA moguls and Easter Europeans.  In the past few months there has been mention of a couple of Americans but the last year/18 months, the most regular name that keeps cropping up is Vagit Alekperov.  Been to matches at WHL on a number of occasions and also has extensive business interests in USA as well. 

 

But what if he bought Spurs and Belgravia (for example) bought Newcastle?  All that would happen is that all the top clubs would all be owned by moguls and not every team can be the winners.  It may sound good in the short term but I'm depressed by the long term outlook for the game in general here.

 

 

 

Very true. The other side of the coin is that you dont want to be left behind if it means additional funds overall for investment.

 

But surely the problem comes when only a handful of clubs are mega-rich, doesn't it?

 

If everyone's got a billionaire owner wouldn't that mean increased competition and therefore a more interesting league?

 

At the moment no-one other than Chelsea, Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool have a chance of winning the league and they've even got the cups sewn up as well this year. That's a really boring situation for the rest of us, but if Villa, Spurs and us were added to that group, surely that's got to make it better, not worse.

 

If 3 or 4 teams were added to the big 4, then yes, I'd agree the league would be more competitive and be better for it.  I think the problem arises when most clubs (or all) are owned by billionaires and, unlike American sport such as the NFL, one of them misses out on the gravy train by getting relegated.  That's when I can see owners possibly cutting their losses and pulling out, leaving the club potentially in a crisis situation.

 

I know that is an extreme scenario but I wouldn't say it was impossible.

 

Diminishing returns.