• 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/Sportwashing

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Great MES said:
The thing is I can honestly see them running the mags similar to Ashley. Decent scouting network, self sufficient and not many daft transfer fees ( apart from no Joe Linton's). The only difference is that they will probably build a new academy and tidy sjp up. Where we can see that is sensible, the mags will just want to spend spend spend on big names. I think they're going to be in for a shock.
Click to expand...
But spending on big names doesn’t always work. Top players are already minted and will always want to live in the big cities. London, Manchester, Liverpool, Paris, Madrid.
 
Sea to Shining Sea said:
This could be a major problem for SAFC. If they significantly invest in NUFC in the near future and we remain scrabbling about in the third division or half way up the second tier then we have a problem with attracting future supporters. 1992 - 1996 was a tough old time for SAFC to compete with them and a generation was lost (smaller towns and villages in the coalfields, wider Co Durham and on borderlines became increasingly black and white).

We really do need to get out of this division this season and be very competitive and even aiming to be promoted from the division above ASAP.
Click to expand...

It won't matter what league we're in, even if we were in the PL, unless we were competing at the top it's unlikely we'd ever be able to compete against that sort of wealth, the same goes for any club in fact.
 
garyswc said:
Man Utd have spent north of £1B during the 8 years since they last won the title. The mags turnover is about a quarter of United's so even if they wanted to hoy that kind of money at the team the PL won't allow it. The PIF business is to create enduring future economic benefits not too piss money up the wall.
Click to expand...
I think it’s the best thing to happen for those who want to see them relegated, they’ll peddle Bruce immediately and replace him with a foreign no mark who will embark on an adventurous playing style and it’ll end up relegating them.
 
Goes to show that if a child cries long enough they'll get some sweets in the end. They are the spoiled brats of football.

Got to worry about Bruce now, sacking him wont be enough for them, he'll be lucky not to be bumped off ;).
 
Barnsley said:
Our owners are stinking rich. Combined, they make Sunderland's owner look relatively poor.

However, we have long since come to realise that 'owner wealth' doesn't always translate to a spending spree, or a period punching above your historical weight.

It did take some time to sink in. On our forum, one particularly vocal fan was insisting until fairly recently that the big money would soon be pumped into the club. Hold onto your hats, because the train's about to depart the station!

It never left the station, and it ain't ever leaving no station.

And for all the Saudi riches, there's no guarantee that Newcastle won't just continue to tread water, on a fairly modest budget.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The main aim was to buy an elite sports asset in England, the right of passage, cleansed reputations and ethical validation.
 
gipetto said:
It won't matter what league we're in, even if we were in the PL, unless we were competing at the top it's unlikely we'd ever be able to compete against that sort of wealth, the same goes for any club in fact.
Click to expand...
Just been sent something, and I actually didn't realise the wealth behind them, that has it at 10 times the Man City owner. Not sure if uts accurate mind but it's staggering.
 
0321safc said:
I think it’s the best thing to happen for those who want to see them relegated, they’ll peddle Bruce immediately and replace him with a foreign no mark who will embark on an adventurous playing style and it’ll end up relegating them.
Click to expand...
But even if we got relegated you'd imagine they would just buy their way back up. Even Ashley managed that with his money.
 
Dilligaf60 said:
Correct. I don’t have Facebook and the last time I saw anything involving Disney must be about 25 years ago. Would you mind telling me how that is relevant, or are you trying to imply I’m being hypocritical? In any event I don’t recall mark zuckerberg having someone hacked to death or the CEO of Disney sanctioning a beheading or bombing Yemen. But maybe you know better.
For clarification and the avoidance of doubt, The Saudi regime are rooted in the dark ages still. They may have shiny new modern toys, but nevertheless. They are murdering bastards Plain and simple. Having them as owners of SAFC would be the end of my support for the club.
You clearly don’t give a fuck. Just own it man. Your choice, it’s what you are. No amount of what about Disney or Facebook is going to change that. We heard all this shite when the takeover news broke the first time.
Click to expand...
I don’t argue with any of that. PIF have significant investment in Disney, Facebook, Boeing etc. Just wondering if you boycott them as well.
Good on you for turning your back on the club you love if they are sold to someone with terrible morals.
 
Super Mario said:
No one is a Disney or Facebook "fan" we're just customers paying for a services football clubs are social centres hence why they have charities through the foundation and link in with food banks.
Click to expand...
Not sure what your point is here. We will still have the charities and food banks
 
Sabre Mag said:
But even if we got relegated you'd imagine they would just buy their way back up. Even Ashley managed that with his money.
Click to expand...
Sets you back a year though and falls you down the pecking order of attractive clubs. A lot has been said about the massive wealth, so why do PIF only account for 80% of the takeover rather than 100%?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top