Andrew 4737 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 4 minutes ago, Rayvin said: Yeah but I was under the impression that if we go all out this year we'd need to pull it back in next two years in order to avoid being fined. It sounds risky to do much other than simply match other middle of the road teams. I guess I don't know what net spent averages are these days though. Thats true, I still can't imagine this sticking. I was referring mostly to you saying the most immediate problem is getting money in to save ourselves. We can do that. After that it remains to be seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5207 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 Fair. I mean I'm still feeling fairly confident on this now anyway given the discussions that have gone on. Still can't believe they're bothering though, I'd be flabbergasted if Newcastle United actually became a global footballing superpower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobinRobin 11231 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 11 hours ago, Tom said: I would have been absolutely shitting myself at that height I'm shitting myself looking at the photos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howmanheyman 33000 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, RobinRobin said: I'm shitting myself looking at the photos He wasn't bothered, Salma Hayek was having a shower on the other side of the glass. (Hence the dopey grin). Edited October 20, 2021 by Howmanheyman 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10832 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 12 hours ago, Rayvin said: Does anyone think we have serious cause for concern about the cabal play on sponsorship? I'm having a hard time believing that Staveley wouldn't have expected it on some level and the fact she sent Charnley to go and deal with it is actually sort of reassuring in a way, keeps cards close to the chest etc (I doubt Charnley knows anything remotely useful beyond what he was told). I do find it quite depressing though, that this is how the league is reacting to the still fairly slim chance that we might actually someday manage to win something. It wouldn't be such a bullshit new rule if existing sponsorships were subject to it. King Power Stadium, Everton's owners 'sponsoring' the training ground and so on. Also, 'Fair Market Value', who the fuck decides what's fair? If IBM think they want to get in on the ground floor of a project with the potential to get among the top 6 clubs, them spending £30m a year on a shirt sponsorship for the next 5 years is fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 4725 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 These people run a half a trillion fund and have fingers in more pies than Bruce at a wedding buffet. Getting around any rules ain’t going to be an issue. You’ve got to laugh at the “problems” NUFC fans are now discussing compared to a fortnight ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9744 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 I don’t know vat zey mean. Zere vas a lot of fun at my vedding. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essembeeofsunderland 811 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 With the shower of shit we have playing for us in defence,£100m may not be enough to keep us up.Does Ings fancy a move? Ward-Prowse would be a decent signing also.That’s £150m spent In January.How much will we have? Getting rid of TOT and BUJ7 will bring in £30m.There’s always a club or two out there who will pay over the odds for shite players 😉 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4376 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 No surprise to see that cunt from Palace involved. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essembeeofsunderland 811 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 Wouldn’t it be canny if we won the court case and every club,apart from Man City ,had to give us millions in compensation.With that coming in as income,we could possibly add that to our transfer kitty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10832 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 6 hours ago, Andrew said: The problem with those kind of schemes is assuming that just making the team good is the only angle for the money here. PIF want Saudi Airlines or Aramco or whatever on the shirts and on the hoardings. You need the parts of your stuff you want to be seen to be visible if you want to get your sportswashing done. If they can't been seen through NUFC, they won't bother. It needs to be made clear that you can have a sponsorship deal with a pre-existing business partner if it's at 'fair market value'. So, Aramco could sponsor the stadium for X and the new Saudi Airline could sponsor the shirt for Y and as long as a market case can be made for it's valuation, it's allowed. No, Saudi Airlines couldn't sponsor the shirt for £1bn, but they could do £30m a year. That's less than the big 6 get for theirs and if that's the company we're looking to get amongst, it could be argued that it's fair. We're on tv more than everyone bar the top 6, we're now the club with the richest owners on the planet, the global spotlight is going to be on us even when we're not playing because of the very nature of the owners, there are going to loads of stories about signings, managerial changes, investments in facilities. A better mind than I could certainly make a case that it's reasonable given all the above. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10832 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 8 minutes ago, essembeeofsunderland said: With the shower of shit we have playing for us in defence,£100m may not be enough to keep us up.Does Ings fancy a move? Ward-Prowse would be a decent signing also.That’s £150m spent In January.How much will we have? Getting rid of TOT and BUJ7 will bring in £30m.There’s always a club or two out there who will pay over the odds for shite players 😉 Wait, you think Danny Ings and James Ward Prowse are worth £150m for the pair? No chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essembeeofsunderland 811 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 6 minutes ago, NJS said: No surprise to see that cunt from Palace involved. Jordan and Noades were also publicity seeking cunts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essembeeofsunderland 811 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 1 minute ago, The Fish said: Wait, you think Danny Ings and James Ward Prowse are worth £150m for the pair? No chance. Aye.Reet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30475 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 2 minutes ago, The Fish said: It needs to be made clear that you can have a sponsorship deal with a pre-existing business partner if it's at 'fair market value'. So, Aramco could sponsor the stadium for X and the new Saudi Airline could sponsor the shirt for Y and as long as a market case can be made for it's valuation, it's allowed. No, Saudi Airlines couldn't sponsor the shirt for £1bn, but they could do £30m a year. That's less than the big 6 get for theirs and if that's the company we're looking to get amongst, it could be argued that it's fair. We're on tv more than everyone bar the top 6, we're now the club with the richest owners on the planet, the global spotlight is going to be on us even when we're not playing because of the very nature of the owners, there are going to loads of stories about signings, managerial changes, investments in facilities. A better mind than I could certainly make a case that it's reasonable given all the above. And because of synergies it could be argued that the value of the sponsorship to those companies was above the normal market value. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 44652 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 The thing that I've found most alarming about all this is the very notion that 20 football club CEOs are deciding the rules by which clubs in the division are allowed to operate. This shit should be decided independent of the participants in the competition ffs. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 15484 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 7 hours ago, Rayvin said: Even quicker than that we could have him go out to Saudi and deliver football training programs. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10832 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 30 minutes ago, essembeeofsunderland said: Aye.Reet. Ings went for £25m this summer. You're saying he's trebled in value? Ward Prowse is worth more than Hakimi, or Varane? Give your head a fucking good shake and do it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 20038 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 :lol: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTF 7294 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 1 hour ago, The Fish said: It wouldn't be such a bullshit new rule if existing sponsorships were subject to it. King Power Stadium, Everton's owners 'sponsoring' the training ground and so on. Also, 'Fair Market Value', who the fuck decides what's fair? If IBM think they want to get in on the ground floor of a project with the potential to get among the top 6 clubs, them spending £30m a year on a shirt sponsorship for the next 5 years is fair. Ah yes, IBM (Ibrahim Bin Muhammad). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 44652 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 26 minutes ago, wykikitoon said: They'd have been better off just leaving it and hoping it dies off in time. Don't tell a fucking divvy what not to do. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14011 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 Aye A lot of Saudi blokes on twitter, some popular journalists have been saying they find it “endearing” and in no way offensive. So it won’t be going away anytime soon. Whereas if people had kept quiet…. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 3354 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 1 hour ago, The Fish said: It needs to be made clear that you can have a sponsorship deal with a pre-existing business partner if it's at 'fair market value'. So, Aramco could sponsor the stadium for X and the new Saudi Airline could sponsor the shirt for Y and as long as a market case can be made for it's valuation, it's allowed. No, Saudi Airlines couldn't sponsor the shirt for £1bn, but they could do £30m a year. That's less than the big 6 get for theirs and if that's the company we're looking to get amongst, it could be argued that it's fair. We're on tv more than everyone bar the top 6, we're now the club with the richest owners on the planet, the global spotlight is going to be on us even when we're not playing because of the very nature of the owners, there are going to loads of stories about signings, managerial changes, investments in facilities. A better mind than I could certainly make a case that it's reasonable given all the above. The PIF bought Carnival Cruises, the world's largest Cruise company just before the pandemic which now has been all but gutted by the same plague, they would be perfectly within their right to pay an over the odds for sponsorship deal because it's a huge company that needs to rebuild their billion dollar industry. The whole thing is a crock of shite and there is no way jealous clubs can push through a rule that is anti-competition, especially one that only applies to deals in the future but exempts current agreements. Biggest problem for NUFC is these cunts are just going to keep taking pot shots until something sticks. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7019 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 24 minutes ago, Gemmill said: They'd have been better off just leaving it and hoping it dies off in time. Don't tell a fucking divvy what not to do. There's also something a bit off about a bunch of non-Saudi's telling Saudi's what they should find offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayatollah Hermione 13842 Posted October 20, 2021 Share Posted October 20, 2021 40 minutes ago, Kid Dynamite said: There's also something a bit off about a bunch of non-Saudi's telling Saudi's what they should find offensive. That’s just the favourite hobby of middle-class white Guardian readers tbf. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now