• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

NUFC thread 2021.

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Fish said:
These aren't binary things. The Saudis, in an attempt to sportswash could pump money into the club and the city, which is good for the club and the city. At the very same time they are murderous regressive arseholes.

Answer me this, do you use Amazon, own Nike, drink Starbucks, use Hermes, drink Coca Cola? I'm sure you must do business with some of them, can you, at the same time as taking advantage of their speedy delivery, or satisfying taste, think that their corporate practises are abhorrent?

I can.
Click to expand...
Completely Spoetswashed.

Or just a bit dim and a fuckwit?

Or both of the above
 
The Fish said:
These aren't mutually exclusive you dolt. I think Amazon treat their staff appallingly, but I'm still going to give them money every month soI can get shit delivered the next day. I think the damage that Starbucks is doing to India's agricultural land is terrible, but fuck me if I need a coffee on the go, I'll buy one of theirs.

You are making yourself look a liar, or an idiot if you insist on statng that it's not possible to think money going into your club/city is good for your club/city AND the people giving the money are *****.
Click to expand...
Aren't mutually exclusive? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

"I wouldn't support anything they do in the UK, Ermmm apart from own my football club, in the UK, and put money into my club, in the UK and ermm, put money into my City, in the UK, that's ok, but anything else, terrible!"

The only dolt here is you, you absolute nut job.

You have then tried to justify it by asking me if I use Amazon or drink Starbucks as these things 'aren't binary'. I think there's a slight difference mind, but you already know this entirely.
 
Last edited:
sproates33 said:
Mutually exclusive? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

"I wouldn't support anything they do in the UK, Ermmm apart from own my football club, in the UK, and put money into my club, in the UK and ermm, put money into my City, in the UK."

The only dolt here is you, you absolute nut job.

You have then tried to justify it by asking me if I use Amazon or drink Starbucks as these things 'aren't binary'. I think there's a slight difference mind, but you already know this entirely.
Click to expand...
I'm not 'supporting' the Saudis you moron. I never have and never will.
 
The Fish said:
I'm not 'supporting' the Saudis you moron. I never have and never will.
Click to expand...
But you are supportive of them if they take over your football club and put money in?

You said this :-

"I support a takeover and if the Saudis had bought us and pumped money into the club and the area, that's good for Newcastle United and the city."
 
sproates33 said:
I mean, you have already posted saying you would support them taking over the club, like.
Click to expand...
No, I haven't said that. Unless you add a few words and ignore a few others.

We're going around in circles here. You think it's utterly impossible to think two separate things at the same time, and I'm don't.
 
Would the Saudis ‘get’ the city and its people ?? It’s a prerequisite for anybody player/manager/owner who comes to Newcastle !?!?
 
The Fish said:
No, I haven't said that. Unless you add a few words and ignore a few others.

We're going around in circles here. You think it's utterly impossible to think two separate things at the same time, and I'm don't.
Click to expand...
You have posted the following :-

"I support a takeover and if the Saudis had bought us and pumped money into the club and the area, that's good for Newcastle United and the city."

You do realise, the takeover, was by the Saudis, Aye?
 
The Fish said:
No I'm supportive of ->a<- takeover, and would like to see my club and city invested in.
Click to expand...
Ok lets break this down for you a little, your trying to skirt around the point by saying you were supportive of 'a' takeover, despite knowing fine well, the takeover, was by the Saudis.

Would you be supportive of the Saudis buying Newcastle United and putting money into the club?

Yes or no.
 
sproates33 said:
You have posted the following :-

"I support a takeover and if the Saudis had bought us and pumped money into the club and the area, that's good for Newcastle United and the city."

You do realise, the takeover, was by the Saudis, Aye?
Click to expand...
You do realise that seeing the investment into the club and city as a good thing, does not mean I support the Saudis, right?
 
The Fish said:
Are you confusing me criticising the Saudis, with me supporting them? Because if you are, then you really are thick as fuck.
Click to expand...
You've said them pumping money in would be good for the City and club which says to me you support them. I believe you do and are trying badly to backtrack. You f***ing simpleton. Are you on your lunch break at the Centre?
 
sproates33 said:
Ok lets break this down for you a little.

Would you be supportive of the Saudis buying Newcastle United and putting money into the club?

Yes or no.
Click to expand...

By making that question phrased in that way, and demanding a yes/no answer, it makes it impossible for me to answer.
 
Exile 1968 said:
You've said them pumping money in would be good for the City and club which says to me you support them. I believe you do and are trying badly to backtrack. You f***ing simpleton. Are you on your lunch break at the Centre?
Click to expand...
That's your inference and, despite numerous clarifications by me, you still don't get that it's not the case.
sproates33 said:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

What a complete helmet you are.
Click to expand...
I would support investment into my club and city.
I would not support the investor.
 
Last edited:
The Fish said:
These aren't binary things. The Saudis, in an attempt to sportswash could pump money into the club and the city, which is good for the club and the city. At the very same time they are murderous regressive arseholes.

Answer me this, do you use Amazon, own Nike, drink Starbucks, use Hermes, drink Coca Cola? I'm sure you must do business with some of them, can you, at the same time as taking advantage of their speedy delivery, or satisfying taste, think that their corporate practises are abhorrent?

I can.
Click to expand...
This is completely different and was an argument used by buffoons back in the summer when PIF made some stock investments. For example the extent of the holding in Disney was 0.28% and 0.1% in Starbucks and those using these examples to support the PIF purchase of Newcastle know nothing of Corporate Finance. An outright purchase of NUFC, a 129 year old institution, and having absolute control is completely different. If the sale had gone through then everytime there is a Khassoghi type incident, which there will likely be more, the spotlight would have been on NUFC as it is an obvious and public target. Pretend as you might your views are not mutually exclusive. Have a think whether you would want that negative exposure shone on your beloved team, all for a paltry 50m injection each year.
 
jlaws said:
This is completely different and was an argument used by buffoons back in the summer when PIF made some stock investments. For example the extent of the holding in Disney was 0.28% and 0.1% in Starbucks and those using these examples to support the PIF purchase of Newcastle know nothing of Corporate Finance. An outright purchase of NUFC, a 129 year old institution, and having absolute control is completely different. If the sale had gone through then everytime there is a Khassoghi type incident, which there will likely be more, the spotlight would have been on NUFC as it is an obvious and public target. Pretend as you might your views are not mutually exclusive. Have a think whether you would want that negative exposure shone on your beloved team, all for a paltry 50m injection each year.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I wasn't talking about any PIF investment in Starbucks or Disney or whatever, I was talking about the hypocrisy that many people are comfortable with. Disassociating the trainers on their shoes from the practise of the company that made them. The delivery to their door, fromt eh shocking treatment of warehouse staff etc.

We're owned by the owner of Sports Direct, we've been sponsored by loansharks. The negative exposure we rec'd for those is risibly small. Would any 'success' under Saudi ownership have come with asterisks, yes, of course. but the media don't have the stones to actually stand up and be counted on these topics, so it wouldn't come up nearly as much as it should.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top