• 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.

March to June 2020 - NEWCASTLE UTD fc

Status
Not open for further replies.
mag in peace said:
It's alright though because like Britain, you guys are supplying the guns.


Lololololol whatever the fuck that means. Go on then, tell me your opinion.
Click to expand...

My opinion is that there's a lot more to come. Obviously.

So far there isn't enough evidence to suggest you will be man city level investment.

Just applying some balance. There is very little evidence so far
 

Wansbeck Viking said:
Absolutely mate, which is why I said don’t shoot messenger.

I posted it on here as it sounds quite believable, apart from Stavely doing the running of the club, I don’t think she’d have a clue. I can well believe that Ashley will still be involved somewhat with the club, ie, keeping the sponsorship, sports direct logos etc for the time being.
Click to expand...

I don't think he will stay involved with the club, but I do think he might broker a deal abut SP logos and sponsorship
 
Banks said:
Hang on I thought he was desperate to sell because of cv19 😂

There's no consistency man.
Click to expand...
im not the one who said that! louise taylor in the gaurdian said that..i never made such aclaim or endiorsed her for sayig it..its a point that has been made by a lkot of people but not by me!
 
kildaremackem said:
going to have a share..depends after that if they want her to run it..the saudis wont run it themselves..they have a country to run and an oil price war to fight..
Click to expand...

They do have directors for this sort of thing though. And they have people above them too. It's not just one fella using his own time :)

If you think they will own 80% and not be involved you are mistaken.
 
Last edited:
kildaremackem said:
im not the one who said that! louise taylor in the gaurdian said that..i never made such aclaim or endiorsed her for sayig it..its a point that has been made by a lkot of people but not by me!
Click to expand...

I didn't say you did. 😉

I'm highlighting that the positive information is being treated as definite but any doubts are being met with jealousy/rattled.

Let's just see eh 😉
 
Leonard osbourne said:
I don't think he will stay involved with the club, but I do think he might broker a deal abut SP logos and sponsorship
Click to expand...

When the whole purpose of Saudi involvement and PiF is to expand its global brand I'd be surprised if they handed over advertising etc. You could be right as it potentially doesn't matter much to them but I'd be surprised.
 
mag in peace said:
They do have directors for this sort of thing though. And they have people above them too. It's not just one fella using his own time :)

If you think they will own 80% and not be involved you are mistaken.
Click to expand...

You can almost see his clutching at straws to downplay this. I'm embarrassed for him.
 
mag in peace said:
They do have directors for this sort of thing though. And they have people above them too. It's not just one fella using his own time :)

If you think they will own 80% and not be involved you are mistaken.
Click to expand...
of coyurse they will have some involvement..but not day to day..i mean they do own literally hundreds of other investments,..this is a tiny insigifact holding...it wont justify more tha a day or so a month of their time...they for example are major shareholders in the saudi oil company that floated on the stock exchage last year and has a valuation of over £1trn...which do you think tjhey are going to spend more time on..a £300m football club deal..or the £1.7trn thing?
and the there are the vast array of other investments..they are in the stricken sodftbank fund for way more than £300m for example..so thts another one higehr up the list..
 
mag in peace said:
When the whole purpose of Saudi involvement and PiF is to expand its global brand I'd be surprised if they handed over advertising etc. You could be right as it potentially doesn't matter much to them but I'd be surprised.
Click to expand...

Might not be as much as it is now, but I imagine it will be prime spots around the stadium....
 
kildaremackem said:
of coyurse they will have some involvement..but not day to day..i mean they do own literally hundreds of other investments,..this is a tiny insigifact holding...it wont justify more tha a day or so a month of their time...they for example are major shareholders in the saudi oil company that floated on the stock exchage last year and has a valuation of over £1trn...which do you think tjhey are going to spend more time on..a £300m football club deal..or the £1.7trn thing?
and the there are the vast array of other investments..they are in the stricken sodftbank fund for way more than £300m for example..so thts another one higehr up the list..
Click to expand...

Ffs it's not one bloke travelling around the world checking in on his own investments. He will have ppl working for him day to day at the club. They will then report to somebody higher how it's all going and they will likely report to one of his advisors etc. You know how business works right? Mr Tesco doesn't stock all the shelves and work on every til...
 
mag in peace said:
Look at the word you used. Not improbable or unheard of. Also the rumours of her being on the board or director or running the club are in fact rumours.
Click to expand...

That may well be the case. But it's also a fact that shareholders, even 100% shareholders, don't always take or get a seat. It's not a right conferred by the shareholding per se. I was questioning your view that as a 10% shareholder she should get on the board, not whrther in fact she will. If she has a seat, it's because the other shareholders want her to, not as a result of the shares. Where Ashley and Abramovic are concerned, they want to be as distanced as far as possible from the day to day running, although I'd argue their influence makes them shadow directors, as defined by the Companies Act.
 
Banks said:
So far there isn't enough evidence to suggest you will be man city level investment.
Click to expand...
I think youre absolutely right. But then again who has the same level of investment Man City has had? I dont think any club in the world has and dont expect Newcastle to.

However, thats not to say that the level of investment wont be of a level that 99.99% of clubs in the world can only dream of and a more than adequate amount (whilst remaining within FFP rules) to make a difference to a lower table premier league club like Newcastle, and turn them into contenders for a European place in 12-24 months.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
That may well be the case. But it's also a fact that shareholders, even 100% shareholders, don't always take or get a seat. It's not a right conferred by the shareholding per se. I was questioning your view that as a 10% shareholder she should get on the board, not whrther in fact she will. If she has a seat, it's because the other shareholders want her to, not as a result of the shares. Where Ashley and Abramovic are concerned, they want to be as distanced as far as possible from the day to day running, although I'd argue their influence makes them shadow directors, as defined by the Companies Act.
Click to expand...

Never argued any differently. If she wants to and they are happy to she may well sit on the board or even be director. I doubt the latter highly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top