Newcastle buy out

[Warning_Hazard 156]

 

[Warning_Hazard 156]

 

[different level 1,056]

1 hour ago, Warning_Hazard said:

Then you asking these questions is a bit weird because newcastle are a huge club in terms of everything but silverware, Theyre bigger than spurs.

They set the pace in 94 and were top 4 for ages with a huge following.

Closet rival is sunderland and before ashley turned up they were a quality side

Well, we have extremely different criteria for what can be considered a big club. And no, I don't think a couple of top 4 finishes in the mid 90s and early 2000s are good enough. 

Edited October 7, 2021 by different level

[Jap Si. 50]

1 minute ago, different level said:

Well, we have have extremely different criteria for what can be considered a big club. And no, I don't think a couple of top 4 finishes in the mid 90s and early 2000s are good enough. 

They are big traditional English club haven't got big following abroard but will soon have although they can't buy anyone till Jan and could be bottom of the league so will have work cut out.

[different level 1,056]

1 hour ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

Newcastle has a pretty decent sized fan base. After the late 90s run they had, you now have foreign fans. It is now where near Man Utd, Chelsea, City, or Arsenal, but you do see Newcastle kits in the US. They have a nice stadium. The price was a lot better than taking over a top 6 club. It will be easy for them to build a brand if they put the money into the team.

I understand all that, I just find much more sense those foreign investors to be more interested in clubs like Everton (extremely successful prior the creation of the Premier League, decent side, they have famous rivals), Leicester (recent success, they got worldwide attention following their 15/16 shock title win) if the top 6 clubs are excluded. Also if it doesn't have to be a Premier League team you have clubs from famous European cities who are already well known and successful like Lazio, Roma, Sevilla.

Edited October 7, 2021 by different level

[NikkiCFC 7,580]

2 hours ago, laura90 said:

We just don't have unlimited funds nor smart board nor good transfer policy. The last is very poor from 2017 onwards. That is sad state of affairs at this club that may lead to the same situation that Arsenal is going trough. Awful transfer will cost us and we are selling talents to make funds for them. It will be done differently at Newcastle, City, United and possible Liverpool .In foreseeable future not this season.

To even have chance to compete we need to be run with more capable people.

Would not change people who run Chelsea for anyone else in the world! They are doing amazing job, what are you talking about?

[Warning_Hazard 156]

15 minutes ago, different level said:

Well, we have have extremely different criteria for what can be considered a big club. And no, I don't think a couple of top 4 finishes in the mid 90s and early 2000s are good enough. 

Newcastle would be the biggest best club bulgaria have ever produced if they were over there

You asked why and I gave you the facts, Watch the video i posted above and take it from Amanda Staveley herself as to why newcastle!

 

Edited October 7, 2021 by Warning_Hazard

[different level 1,056]

6 minutes ago, Warning_Hazard said:

Newcastle would be the biggest best club bulgaria have ever produced if they were over there

You asked why and I gave you the facts, Watch the video i posted above and take it from Amanda Staveley herself as to why newcastle!

 

It's very nice of you to notice my flag and put out an argument which is completely out of context and has nothing to do with the topic. You seem to be getting way too defensive for no real reason unless you like Newcastle and are getting ready to switch teams. Either way I'm far more familiar with English football than my country's domestic league and I don't recognise any of your stuff as facts. My question was almost rhetorical.

[Warning_Hazard 156]

15 minutes ago, different level said:

It's very nice of you to notice my flag and put out an argument which is completely out of context and has nothing to do with the topic. You seem to be getting way too defensive for no real reason unless you like Newcastle and are getting ready to switch teams. Either way I'm far more familiar with English football than my country's domestic league and I don't recognise any of your stuff as facts. My question was almost rhetorical.

Switch clubs? wtf? you literally asked why did they buy newcastle and ive posted a video of the new person in charge of the club and given you some off the cuff facts about newcastle as a club, They also have a bigger stadium than we do.

Defensive? im using exclamtion points?!

I have a ST and was trying to make a point as you were belittling a decent club thats now also the richest in the world!

[Blue Armour 4,164]

5 hours ago, NikkiCFC said:

Would not change people who run Chelsea for anyone else in the world! They are doing amazing job, what are you talking about?

Considering how poorly run some of the other top clubs are, you can only agree.

[Magic Lamps 11,449]

The big difference to City who were purchased by a Abu Dhabi  owned private equity group with the sole purpose of funding football clubs and the infrastructure around them is that Newcastle was purchased by the PIF aka a sovereign wealth fund which mainly invests in stocks, bonds and real estate. It is huge, 500b but only a fraction will be allocated to bankrolling that club. So Neecastle fans celebrating their richest club in sports are a ging prematurely.

city have a substantial fixed budget separated from the VAE state finances but the Saudi‘s commitment to Newcastle within their state fund Could  well fluctuate with the oil price . Overall Saudi Arabia is involved in much more capital intensive stuff than the smaller Emirates and football is not quite as vital to their perception in the west. SA hold way more political power so they might not be as hellbent on leveraging their ownership for sportswashing. 

[ZAPHOD2319 3,873]

It seems like the owners of PSG and City are real football fans. Both post on social media about their teams and football in general. Not sure if the Prince of SA is the same? What I have read is they don't plan on spending just for the sake of spending but to take their time and build the team on a sustained club budget. I bet that budget is more than what NC currently has.

[Warning_Hazard 156]

2 hours ago, Magic Lamps said:

The big difference to City who were purchased by a Abu Dhabi  owned private equity group with the sole purpose of funding football clubs and the infrastructure around them is that Newcastle was purchased by the PIF aka a sovereign wealth fund which mainly invests in stocks, bonds and real estate. It is huge, 500b but only a fraction will be allocated to bankrolling that club. So Neecastle fans celebrating their richest club in sports are a ging prematurely.

city have a substantial fixed budget separated from the VAE state finances but the Saudi‘s commitment to Newcastle within their state fund Could  well fluctuate with the oil price . Overall Saudi Arabia is involved in much more capital intensive stuff than the smaller Emirates and football is not quite as vital to their perception in the west. SA hold way more political power so they might not be as hellbent on leveraging their ownership for sportswashing. 

No true at all.

PIF is the literal bank account for saudi to invest outside of their country to diversify away from oil so when it runs out they still have oil tankers full of money floating about globally.

The £320billion is a small chunk of change to these people whos wealth isnt even reported.

Saudis have trillions and trillions.

Theyve already spent 1.3 billion to buy newcastle 1bn of which went to qatar.

[milka 3,308]

 

[Jap Si. 50]

35 minutes ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

It seems like the owners of PSG and City are real football fans. Both post on social media about their teams and football in general. Not sure if the Prince of SA is the same? What I have read is they don't plan on spending just for the sake of spending but to take their time and build the team on a sustained club budget. I bet that budget is more than what NC currently has.

I don't think tweeting makes them fans they didn't invest for the love of football or Man City.

[Fulham Broadway 16,392]

Halal the lads !

[Fulham Broadway 16,392]

As fans of our club we mostly dont give a flying fuck where the cash came from. Buyers, and the FA know this. Loyalty of fans is the ideal smokescreen to launder cash/ make more profit.

We all know that the billions to buy profit vehicles  football clubs all comes from dodgy sources/unpleasant regimes - be it exploitation, privatisation of peoples utilities, theft or tax avoidance.

What really is laughable is how the footballing authorities pretend to have morals, the 'fit and proper persons' scrutiny. Fuck off with yer hypocrisy !

[Magic Lamps 11,449]

58 minutes ago, Warning_Hazard said:

No true at all.

PIF is the literal bank account for saudi to invest outside of their country to diversify away from oil so when it runs out they still have oil tankers full of money floating about globally.

The £320billion is a small chunk of change to these people whos wealth isnt even reported.

Saudis have trillions and trillions.

Theyve already spent 1.3 billion to buy newcastle 1bn of which went to qatar.

No, you are wrong and also, once again, completely missed the point.

PIF is not a bank account. Unlike a bank account it does no consist exclusively of cash but as I said mostly in stocks, bonds and real estate.

Those trillions and trillions are not the budget to bankroll Newcastle. They won't dedicate their entire state wealth to buy players for Newcastle. Even if they could, it is not the priority of the PIF. They will make considerable investments, but they will not go and spend 1bn in the next window.