Mike Ashley -- Irrelevant Cunt

[Rayvin 5217]

8 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

Spurs would also be a much, much more expensive prospect. 

 

London club, legitimate title challengers, young vibrant squad, top class manager, famous club, wealthy club, brand new stadium, and so on.

 

Plus, would whomever owns Spurs really want to sell right now? If they do I'm convinced it would be for an absolutely eyewatering amount.

 

Maybe but you have to factor in how much money it will take to move us from where we are, to roughly where Spurs are. That said, you would need to compare against what she would need to spend on Spurs to take them up a level too. The thing is, they're not far off being able to do that anyway. They could hit that level without significant further investment. We probably can't. So the price of our club is likely to be £400m + £250m to make us real challengers, possibly more. If the price of Spurs is £650m, then she already has a club at the level that we would aspire to be at.

Edited October 6, 2017 by Rayvin

[Dr Gloom 21912]

it seems she knows how important it is to win hearts and minds, so she couldn't be more different from ashley in that sense. 

[David Kelly 1244]

8 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Maybe but you have to factor in how much money it will take to move us from where we are, to roughly where Spurs are. That said, you would need to compare against what she would need to spend on Spurs to take them up a level too. The thing is, they're not far off being able to do that anyway. They could hit that level without significant further investment. We probably can't. So the price of our club is likely to be £400m + £250m to make us real challengers, possibly more. If the price of Spurs is £650m, then she already has a club at the level that we would aspire to be at.

I'm sure their valuation of Spurs has previously been mentioned as more than that actually.

 

Edit:  Forbes had them valued at over £800m in June.

Edited October 6, 2017 by David Kelly

[Rayvin 5217]

Fair enough actually - in that case, is around £300m investment enough to guarantee we'll be at the same level as them? It can't be £400m because like for like, you would always go with the club that actually has the status, for the same cost, versus the one that -could- have the status.

Edited October 6, 2017 by Rayvin

[Tom 14011]

10 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

it seems she knows how important it is to win hearts and minds, so she couldn't be more different from ashley in that sense. 

 

"You don't know how cruel we can be" 

[The Fish 10855]

16 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Maybe but you have to factor in how much money it will take to move us from where we are, to roughly where Spurs are. That said, you would need to compare against what she would need to spend on Spurs to take them up a level too. The thing is, they're not far off being able to do that anyway. They could hit that level without significant further investment. We probably can't. So the price of our club is likely to be £400m + £250m to make us real challengers, possibly more. If the price of Spurs is £650m, then she already has a club at the level that we would aspire to be at.

 

I was thinking about the level would could feasibly attain with a sudden influx of cash. Realistically I think the best we could do is not necessarily  usurping a team in the "Top 6", but extending it to a "Top 7". Seven teams competing for the Champions League and Europa spots.

 

We're seeing the decline of Arsenal from legitimate title contenders to a side that competes for the CL spots, Liverpool are a ways short of a title challenge too. The other four sides  are legit title challengers at the minute but it's not inconceivable that one or two of them have a bad season, and Liverpool or Arsenal push into that group of four. Were we to be amongst that group, we could too.

 

If we keep a top class manager, and dramatically improve our playing squad over the next few years, we could conceivably join Arsenal and Liverpool as a team that are capable of taking advantage of a team suffering from poor performances, bad luck with injuries, or losing key men to Barcelona/Real Madrid. I mean, ffs, Alan Pardew managed to steal a 5th placed finish with a decent Premier League side. What could Benitez do with a talented side?

 

To become legitimate title challengers would surely take us as long as it took Man City, and would cost the same, adjusted for the inflated market. But in all honesty, to take us from where we are, to being able to go toe-to-toe with the weakest of that group would surely be the aim, right?

[Rayvin 5217]

7 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

I was thinking about the level would could feasibly attain with a sudden influx of cash. Realistically I think the best we could do is not necessarily  usurping a team in the "Top 6", but extending it to a "Top 7". Seven teams competing for the Champions League and Europa spots.

 

We're seeing the decline of Arsenal from legitimate title contenders to a side that competes for the CL spots, Liverpool are a ways short of a title challenge too. The other four sides  are legit title challengers at the minute but it's not inconceivable that one or two of them have a bad season, and Liverpool or Arsenal push into that group of four. Were we to be amongst that group, we could too.

 

If we keep a top class manager, and dramatically improve our playing squad over the next few years, we could conceivably join Arsenal and Liverpool as a team that are capable of taking advantage of a team suffering from poor performances, bad luck with injuries, or losing key men to Barcelona/Real Madrid. I mean, ffs, Alan Pardew managed to steal a 5th placed finish with a decent Premier League side. What could Benitez do with a talented side?

 

To become legitimate title challengers would surely take us as long as it took Man City, and would cost the same, adjusted for the inflated market. But in all honesty, to take us from where we are, to being able to go toe-to-toe with the weakest of that group would surely be the aim, right?

 

It depends how profitable that would be for her and her investors, and what their overall aim is. If they want to build a strong, internationally recognised brand - they need to be duelling with City and Man Utd. We would need to be part of the top 4. If they want a reasonably short term goal of increasing the value of a club and making it a regular European challenger, maybe winning the occasional trophy, then sure, top 7. But with the money behind her, you'd think that she'd want the former. IMO, Everton and Spurs are both technically ahead of us there. Unsure about Wham, although they do at least have that ridiculous stadium.

[The Fish 10855]

19 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

It depends how profitable that would be for her and her investors, and what their overall aim is. If they want to build a strong, internationally recognised brand - they need to be duelling with City and Man Utd. We would need to be part of the top 4. If they want a reasonably short term goal of increasing the value of a club and making it a regular European challenger, maybe winning the occasional trophy, then sure, top 7. But with the money behind her, you'd think that she'd want the former. IMO, Everton and Spurs are both technically ahead of us there. Unsure about Wham, although they do at least have that ridiculous stadium.

 

Aye but that's the point, without the kind of money PSG and Man City have available no team would be able to mount a long term challenge to their supremacy. No new team anyway. Chelsea and Man Utd can, because they're already that rich. But even if Everton or West Ham suddenly are flush with cash they won't dethrone all three of those English clubs. Man City's largesse has them on a par with Man Utd and Chelsea, they haven't surpassed them, not really. Spurs slower growth has them challenging, but, like I say, if they lost Kane/Pochettino to a bigger club they'd most likely regress. 

 

Potential investors won't be so naive as to think that a new club can suddenly blow the others out the water, surely? At best they'll join them at the top table. And that's something I think is possible.

 

Spurs are definitely the most attractive at the minute. Not one of us have a Harry Kane to build a team around, not even close. They've a brand new stadium. But I can't imagine their owner would want to sell now. It'd be like cashing out when you're 3-0 up.

 

Frankly, to mount that kind of assault, all clubs are starting from scratch. The money needed to bring the kind of squad to mount a serious title challenge may be £400m for us, or £350m for Everton, but when you're talking about that much, a £50m difference isn't enough to matter, right? And West Ham? Their squad may have 1 or two good players in it, but it's unbalanced and fractured.

 

Of the other 3 Newcastle have, imo; the best manager, the best stadium, the owner most keen on a sale, and importantly the greatest potential for commercial growth.

Edited October 6, 2017 by The Fish

[Rayvin 5217]

1 minute ago, The Fish said:

 

Aye but that's the point, without the kind of money PSG and Man City have available no team would be able to mount a long term challenge to their supremacy. No new team anyway. Chelsea and Man Utd can, because they're already that rich. But even if Everton or West Ham suddenly are flush with cash they won't dethrone all three of those English clubs. Man City's largesse has them on a par with Man Utd and Chelsea, they haven't surpassed them, not really. Spurs slower growth has them challenging, but, like I say, if they lost Kane/Pochettino to a bigger club they'd most likely regress. 

 

Potential investors won't be so naive as to think that a new club can suddenly blow the others out the water, surely? At best they'll join them at the top table.

Spurs are definitely the most attractive at the minute. Not one of us have a Harry Kane to build a team around, not even close. They've a brand new stadium. But I can't imagine their owner would want to sell now. It'd be like cashing out when you're 3-0 up.

 

Frankly, to mount that kind of assault, all clubs are starting from scratch. The money needed to bring the kind of squad to mount a serious title challenge may be £400m for us, or £350m for Everton, but when you're talking about that much, a £50m difference isn't enough to matter, right? And West Ham? Their squad may have 1 or two good players in it, but it's unbalanced and fractured.

 

Of the other 3 Newcastle have, imo; the best manager, the best stadium, the owner most keen on a sale, and importantly the greatest potential for commercial growth.

 

Don't disagree on us versus Everton and Wham really, but you've outlined a reason why Spurs might sell in your first paragraph. Lose Kane and Pocchetino and they regress. If their owners know this, they might understand how thin the ice they're standing on is. Do any of us really see Spurs cementing themselves? I don't, but I could with the sort of backing we're talking about here.

 

At the end of the day, this is Newcastle United. We're not that lucky. Everything we've achieved, we've had to work for.

[David Kelly 1244]

I don't really see Spurs owners wanting to sell at the moment with a squad and manager capable securing champions league football again this season and next and with another increased deal round the corner.

They may understand the risk of losing Kane and Potch but they are now in a position where they can attract top players.  Maybe not of the same standard as Kane but not that far behind it.  It's not the same as when they lost Bale and didn't know what to spend the money on.  And I don't think they would be concerned about losing Kane for a few years yet anyway.

 

Our problem is not being attractive to a buyer, it's Ashley.  

[Howay 12496]

Aye, there’s also not a whole lot of uptick possible at Spurs. You’d be buying a club that is already close to the top, with a lot of commercial exposure already. A club like NUFC has a lot more room to grow and at 400m or so would be a lot cheaper than Spurs who would likely cost more than double that. I understand the points you’re making Rayvin but it’s similar to questioning why Mansour bought Man City who were a total fucking shambles at the time compared to people further up the table who were more stable etc. Everton would cost a lot more than us as well, and they look shite tbh (that club is also trampy as fuck and if this Staveley is a Liverpool supporter I doubt she’d push to see heavy investment funnel into EFC). 

I definitely agree that we simply don’t have that luck, I’ll beleive it when Messi is wearing a toon top tbh. 

[Rayvin 5217]

7 minutes ago, Howay said:

Aye, there’s also not a whole lot of uptick possible at Spurs. You’d be buying a club that is already close to the top, with a lot of commercial exposure already. A club like NUFC has a lot more room to grow and at 400m or so would be a lot cheaper than Spurs who would likely cost more than double that. I understand the points you’re making Rayvin but it’s similar to questioning why Mansour bought Man City who were a total fucking shambles at the time compared to people further up the table who were more stable etc. Everton would cost a lot more than us as well, and they look shite tbh (that club is also trampy as fuck and if this Staveley is a Liverpool supporter I doubt she’d push to see heavy investment funnel into EFC). 

I definitely agree that we simply don’t have that luck, I’ll beleive it when Messi is wearing a toon top tbh. 

 

I'm mostly trying to mitigate people's expectations so that we don't end up seeing this as the lifeline that will save us from Ashley. We are not blessed enough for this to happen to us. We're just not.

 

[David Kelly 1244]

I don't think many people are actually expecting this to happen though.  Yes we are allowing ourselves to dream a bit of what could happen but the expectation is still that Ashley will fuck us over.

[The Fish 10855]

Yeah that's where I'm at too. It's interesting to speculate, but honestly even if there are wealthy investors keen to pour money into resuscitating the club, Ashley will firmly press the pillow over the sleeping giant's face.

[Rayvin 5217]

7 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Yeah that's where I'm at too. It's interesting to speculate, but honestly even if there are wealthy investors keen to pour money into resuscitating the club, Ashley will firmly press the pillow over the sleeping giant's face.

 

Nice, that's the level of assessment I'm used to. Carry on then.

[Howay 12496]

Charnley can’t even handle sacking Steve McClaren during a disasterous run that made it easy as fuck to sack him. I’ve no doubt Ashley will have him heading up the negotiation team for this possible £400m transaction. 

Edited October 6, 2017 by Howay

[PaddockLad 17243]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/liverpool-takeover-amanda-staveley-price-11303882.amp

 

tbf this has about as much credibility as the shit sky and some notable local journos who should really know better were punting around a fortnight ago. Always (at least) just as likely to have been back in fir lfc than us. If there's anything in this from the mirror  it may appear we've been used as some sort of bizarre smokescreen for her real intentions, fuck knows why though..

[The Fish 10855]

My hopes were never particularly high that we were going to be bought out, as Rayvin says, things that good just don't happen to Newcastle United, but that is still disappointing. If she is brokering a deal for Liverpool, I can't imagine she'll be brokering a deal for Newcastle any time soon.

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

Not sure I believe that. Benitez always cautiously manages expectations and even he hasn't denied it, instead talking theoretically about having more money. Plus fsg aren't willing sellers and don't think LFC fans are particularly unhappy with them.

[The Fish 10855]

Journalists are certainly using more definite language with this rumour than they were with ours.

Edited October 8, 2017 by The Fish

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

So she's gone to an away game as a guest of NUFC related folk and sat with them, then disappeared down the tunnel with a Benitez associate because she wants to buy LFC? Unlikely. It was reported that she was looking at more than one club though so perhaps she's having a last throw of the dice with them before moving on. A billion quid valuation will kill off that anyway though.

 

Likely just the mirror stirring the pot.

Edited October 8, 2017 by TheGingerQuiff

[The Fish 10855]

10 minutes ago, TheGingerQuiff said:

So she's gone to an away game as a guest of NUFC related folk and sat with them, then disappeared down the tunnel with a Benitez associate because she wants to buy LFC? Unlikely. It was reported that she was looking at more than one club though so perhaps she's having a last throw of the dice with them before moving on. A billion quid valuation will kill off that anyway though.

 

Likely just the mirror stirring the pot.

 

Aye, it could be. Similarly, she may have met with the top brass at St James' and been put off by their incompetence/abrasiveness? Is it better to work with competent people and spend a bit more, or try to make a cheaper deal with famously dickish businessmen?

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

Aye she wants to part with £600m extra because Charnley, who'll leave after a sale anyway, is a tit. Bingo.

[The Fish 10855]

1 minute ago, TheGingerQuiff said:

Aye she wants to part with £600m extra because Charnley, who'll leave after a sale anyway, is a tit. Bingo.

£600m for a bigger club, closer to the promised land, with an excellent playing squad, a good manager, and so on.

 

Or trying to strike a deal with Mike Ashley, Justin Barnes and Luke Charnley. The A, B, & C of corporate cunts. Where the goal posts will move during the negotiations, the valuation is already inflated, the club need more investment on the squad, on the facilities etc.

 

fwiw I think Newcastle United are a better proposition for investors than most club in the country, but Liverpool are one of the most famous clubs on the planet and wouldn't need a sizeable investment to actually compete with Man City et al.

[PaddockLad 17243]

31 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Journalists are certainly using more definite language with this rumour than they were with ours.

 

The likes of Caulkin and Douglas should be shot with shit for their dog whistling crap on this like.