Newcastle takeover???

I'm not too sure of the details of PSG & UEFA but UEFA did discount Man City's commercial deals down to market rates, which was why City breached FFP back in 2014. And this one month ban is one step further, they're banning all commercial agreements with related parties, not simply discounting them. What regulation they put into place later and how strict they'll be with it remains to be seen.
 
No, those deals were done prior to this rule being passed. Also I'm not sure whether Moshiri owns enough of USM to make it a related party in regards to any possible future deals.
 
BaZ87 said:
No, those deals were done prior to this rule being passed. Also I'm not sure whether Moshiri owns enough of USM to make it a related party in regards to any possible future deals.
Click to expand...
Nice movement of the goalposts there, so basically this rule is just to stop Newcastle united troubling the status quo, not a chance this holds up in court
 
woppy101 said:
Nice movement of the goalposts there, so basically this rule is just to stop Newcastle united troubling the status quo, not a chance this holds up in court
Click to expand...
Rules and regulations are created and evolve all the time and the reason for them being created or amended is often because of something that's gone on before. You cannot punish somebody for breaking a rule that didn't exist in the past, you can only make sure it doesn't happen again.

As for the "stop Newcastle troubling the status quo" comment, the fact that this rule is supported by all clubs across the League would suggest that's not the case, unless of course you believe Leicester, Everton etc don't want to compete at the top of the table. All that is happening is loopholes are being tightened to prevent any club from breaking the rules around FFP. The only people that would be against this happening are those that intend to cheat the rules.
 
There are ways round FFP TBH as Man City have proved it time and again, not that I want ways round FFP anyway. Look at Everton they have spend almost £500m and have only been troubled by FFP rules this year.
Newcastle are profitable but still basically have no commercial income because sports direct is plastered all over the stadium, which can now be grown with new sponsorship which I’m sure will pay more than £1m a year SD is currently paying (well below the current going rate for a PL club) I don’t want Newcastle to cheat the system, TBH I would prefer us to follow the Leicester model and build properly, it’s going to be nice to actually go into a season with a little bit of hope again with the ability to try for a cup run instead of the mandate from the owners to finish at least 17th and get out of the cups as soon as possible.
 
There are ways around FFP to an extent but this was one of the ways that the PL now aim to block.

As for Everton, you need to look back at a post of mine from a year or so ago regarding how transfers are recorded on a clubs accounts. Spending £100m doesn't cost a club £100m in year one, the cost is spread over the life of the player's contracts. Even without dodgy sponsors, Newcastle could spend a lot for a few seasons before it begins to add up. For example Newcastle could spend £200m this season and it would only cost the club £40m per season (+ wages) assuming those players signed 5 year contracts. The problem comes when they spend big for 2, 3 or 4 seasons because that £40m per season becomes £100m+ per season even when you've stopped spending.
 
BaZ87 said:
There are ways around FFP to an extent but this was one of the ways that the PL now aim to block.

As for Everton, you need to look back at a post of mine from a year or so ago regarding how transfers are recorded on a clubs accounts. Spending £100m doesn't cost a club £100m in year one, the cost is spread over the life of the player's contracts. Even without dodgy sponsors, Newcastle could spend a lot for a few seasons before it begins to add up. For example Newcastle could spend £200m this season and it would only cost the club £40m per season (+ wages) assuming those players signed 5 year contracts. The problem comes when they spend big for 2, 3 or 4 seasons because that £40m per season becomes £100m+ per season even when you've stopped spending.
Click to expand...
Yep totally agree, that’s where getting the right players in comes into play, I would also hope that our commercial revenue would have expanded after 3-4 years, Everton have wasted a lot of money so are now struggling a bit with FFP, they also have the problem of the lack of hospitality at Goodison and also they couldn’t expand the commercial revenue as it was already maxed out.

I wonder how long it will be before we see younger players ie 24-25 year old singing 6/7/8 year contracts with clubs to give a bit leeway over FFP
 
I have heard Newcastle tried to sack Bruce today, but the other 18 clubs blocked it, apparently it’s not in the league’s best interests that we appoint a new manager :p:p:p:p:p
 
Martin Samuel's is a buffoon. Why is taking money from Saudi worse than from some white American guys? Probably because those white American's haven't butchered journalists, torture and execute 100s of people per year, nor have they supported and facilitated wide spread piracy of PL content.
 
Martin Samuel has been one of the biggest cheerleaders of man city's owners, it's no surprise he will happily take oil money to cheer on another human rights abusing country. The guy is a *****.
 
I don't get some Newcastle fans.

You are allowed to be happy that Ashley is gone, happy you have rich owners, but please don't try and justify the Saudis in any way - why would you even try...
 
Robbo said:
I don't get some Newcastle fans.

You are allowed to be happy that Ashley is gone, happy you have rich owners, but please don't try and justify the Saudis in any way - why would you even try...
Click to expand...

This pretty much, just take it for what it is but don't try and defend it.
 
But that was the purpose of the takeover. By buying Newcastle and the promise of spending a bit of money Saudi have got an army of football supporters that will go to battle for them. We're going to hear lines about how nobody complained when Saudi invested in Uber but I've never seen somebody get into an Uber with a tea towel on their head or a MBS face mask.
 
Precisely. There's a world of difference between utilizing a company out of relative necessity and actively going to bat for them. So bizarre to me how people don't see the difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom