What's new

Newcastle buyout

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hakkz

Svensk hetsporre
Jul 6, 2012
8,196
17,270
I don't think the issue is finding a new superstar it's giving them the time to develop. Look at Ndombele this year, you have a majority of fans who want him out despite him clearly being talented. Or Sessegnon who is just a kid in his first season for us but people already writing him off. We simply wouldn't give any players long enough to settle and develop into a talent so the whole thing is pointless.

Well yeah, but fuck the fans' opinions. Being a "selling club" is one thing, that probably affects how other club view us in negotiations etc but giving chances to talented youngsters that we have scouted and believe in is another thing, imo ofc.
 

elfy

Well-Known Member
Jan 1, 2013
1,493
6,631
If this goes through the arrogance of the geordies will be over and above anything we have seen before. let us remember that this is a fan-base that already believes they are a big club.

To be fair, I have a few Newcastle supporting mates and on the whole I don't find them arrogant or delusional like some fans I could mention.

In general, I'd call them proper football fans who support their club through good times and bad, and there have been plenty of bad! Kind of like City fans were before they won the ownership lottery (now I find them intolerable)
 

Hakkz

Svensk hetsporre
Jul 6, 2012
8,196
17,270
To be fair, I have a few Newcastle supporting mates and on the whole I don't find them arrogant or delusional like some fans I could mention.

In general, I'd call them proper football fans who support their club through good times and bad, and there have been plenty of bad! Kind of like City fans were before they won the ownership lottery (now I find them intolerable)

Well, you answered it yourself.
 

Amo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2013
15,795
31,480
what's the difference between a billionaire from England and one from the Middle East? Never understood the crying over the riches of club owners or complaining how clubs do it wrong, anyone who owns a club is only in it for financial gain, hell whoever just bought Newcastle will watch more matches than our current owner in the Bahamas does

How many has Joe Lewis had beheaded in the middle of Tottenham High Road then.
 

Metalhead

But that's a debate for another thread.....
Nov 24, 2013
25,356
38,298
To be fair, I have a few Newcastle supporting mates and on the whole I don't find them arrogant or delusional like some fans I could mention.

In general, I'd call them proper football fans who support their club through good times and bad, and there have been plenty of bad! Kind of like City fans were before they won the ownership lottery (now I find them intolerable)
I'd second that and I live and work in the city so I'd say I'm pretty well placed to know.
 

vegassd

The ghost of Johnny Cash
Aug 5, 2006
3,356
3,330
On the minutes it says little correlation which he signed off on. Unless direct is from a different interview?

In any case you’re confusing direct with immediate. Obviously you wouldn’t expect Newcastle to win the league next season but they could give it a good go at silverware if they bought enough top end players. in any case even If they do take 2/3 years to win titles that is a direct result of spending.

Leicester was a freak and sheff U are 3/4 of a way through a good season, that’s it, where everyone apart from the top 3 have been very inconsistent. I have doubts they can sustain that when the PL novelty wears off and if they don’t invest. A little like Bournemouth maybe. What are the numbers that back it up?
I don't want to turn this thread into yet another ENIC debate, but from the minutes here (https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-news/thst-meeting-with-the-spurs-board-report) Levy uses "little correlation" and then not a "direct correlation" between spending and winning. What you said in your post was "Levy says spending money doesn’t correlate with success" which isn't really a fair reflection of what he says.

In relation to Newcastle they could end up being a perfect guinea pig for this idea of the correlation between spending and success. I would say they if they spend a crap load of money on players then they will probably improve their chance of winning games... but that's all.

The correlation stuff is really about how you would predict who is going to win what. If Newcastle spend more than any other club if/when the new owners arrive does that mean they are going to win anything? Of course not. If they spend more than everybody for 5 years in a row does it mean they will win anything? Of course not.

What they will have the ability to do (subject to FFP) will be to pick (almost) any manager in the world and then supply him with (almost) exactly the players that he wants. The challenge is to make those first decisions carefully because it won't be an overnight transformation and there are already some very big dogs in the fight.

Throwing money at a problem is generally the easiest way to solve it but rarely the best. In a sporting environment especially there is an X factor and a slice of fortune required to achieve success, which means that whilst there is a correlation between spending and success it isn't concrete enough for us to think that Newcastle will definitely win things if they are taken over by the Saudis.
 

kendoddsdadsdogsdead

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2011
2,140
3,574
I don't want to turn this thread into yet another ENIC debate, but from the minutes here (https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-news/thst-meeting-with-the-spurs-board-report) Levy uses "little correlation" and then not a "direct correlation" between spending and winning. What you said in your post was "Levy says spending money doesn’t correlate with success" which isn't really a fair reflection of what he says.

In relation to Newcastle they could end up being a perfect guinea pig for this idea of the correlation between spending and success. I would say they if they spend a crap load of money on players then they will probably improve their chance of winning games... but that's all.

The correlation stuff is really about how you would predict who is going to win what. If Newcastle spend more than any other club if/when the new owners arrive does that mean they are going to win anything? Of course not. If they spend more than everybody for 5 years in a row does it mean they will win anything? Of course not.

What they will have the ability to do (subject to FFP) will be to pick (almost) any manager in the world and then supply him with (almost) exactly the players that he wants. The challenge is to make those first decisions carefully because it won't be an overnight transformation and there are already some very big dogs in the fight.

Throwing money at a problem is generally the easiest way to solve it but rarely the best. In a sporting environment especially there is an X factor and a slice of fortune required to achieve success, which means that whilst there is a correlation between spending and success it isn't concrete enough for us to think that Newcastle will definitely win things if they are taken over by the Saudis.

so would you say the correlation is more than a little or indirect even? if so we both agree and dare I say disagree with Levy.

I would say it was a reasonable reflection and certainly fairer than going the other way with not being concrete.

Surely the guinea pig was Man City, Chelsea even Blackburn when the premier league took off and money started coming in. Even Man Utd spent a lot of money through their revenue to supplement the great youth team that they brought through. Before that football was more an even competition, of course money still played a part but the gap was a hell of a lot smaller between clubs. Yes, of course it has to do with player identification, scouting, management etc but all those things come with more investment.

Yeah I don’t really want to have a ENIC debate tbh and I’ve never been one to chastise them for not spending massive amounts(not sure why you think that about my post history) I just want them to recognise when the opportunity is there with a teams cycle, then act. There has been great opportunities to build on good foundations over the years and they’ve hid.
 

vegassd

The ghost of Johnny Cash
Aug 5, 2006
3,356
3,330
so would you say the correlation is more than a little or indirect even? if so we both agree and dare I say disagree with Levy.
I think there is some correlation there for sure, and maybe a lot of it comes down to nuance. For example, I would regard the phrase "the team that spends the most wins the most" as being ridiculous, but something like "the teams (plural) who spend the most over a sustained period tend to dominate".

So from Newcastle's perspective they will likely need to spend as much as the big players over the course of a number of years just to get themselves in the mix. It doesn't mean that they will necessarily win things themselves, but they will be giving themselves a more equal chance to the big 6.

As for directness that depends heavily on the metric being used I think. For the sake of this argument I just looked back over the last 4 complete seasons to compare top 5 wage bills versus the top 5 finishing places... essentially can you predict where a team will finished based on how much they spend on players. Of those 20 positions (top 5 for 4 seasons) there are only 4 correct predictions. That for me is why it's not a direct correlation.

I don't think that disagrees with what Levy said. He didn't say there was no correlation - he said there was not a direct correlation. There is certainly some correlation but it's more of a trend (in my opinion) and not something I think fans should get too worried about honestly.

Surely the guinea pig was Man City, Chelsea even Blackburn when the premier league took off and money started coming in. Even Man Utd spent a lot of money through their revenue to supplement the great youth team that they brought through. Before that football was more an even competition, of course money still played a part but the gap was a hell of a lot smaller between clubs. Yes, of course it has to do with player identification, scouting, management etc but all those things come with more investment.
Chelsea definitely opened up the avenue of pay to win in my view, and were probably a big reason for the rising fascination about money. They also probably redefined the idea of success to an extent - previously if a team that wasn't United, Arsenal or Liverpool won a cup that was a great success. Nowadays it feels like you need to be winning doubles or trophies in consecutive seasons to be called successful. That's certainly the yardstick by which City are being measured.

That Blackburn team is a great example of an old school, balls out philosophy. It was a flash in the pan but back then it felt like an amazing thing. I think a problem facing Newcastle now will be that the landscape has totally changed. You have the traditional 3 (Utd, Ars, Liv) plus the sugar daddies plus little old us to compete against - both on the pitch and in the transfer market - and they will be measured against a very high bar.

So that's what I meant about being a guinea pig for the pay to win philosophy. My hope would be that if the league has more than one sugar daddy team they will be able to take points off each other and maybe allow the more tactical/passionate teams a shot at some glory. But that's me being quite optimistic!!
 

Metalhead

But that's a debate for another thread.....
Nov 24, 2013
25,356
38,298
There is more to this than just the human rights element (which sadly but realistically won't mean a thing), specifically the issue that a member of the Saudi royal family owns Sheffield United.
 

Lighty64

I believe
Aug 24, 2010
10,400
12,476
1 worrying thing is about this potential take over, I'm sure I read or heard it somewhere that due to covid-19 UEFA intend to relax FFP for 2 years as clubs owners might have to invest more to cover the losses or be able to strengthen. these owners could go absolutely crazy for the next 2 years if the case and not be punished by FFP
 

TC18

Lurker
Jan 27, 2011
529
1,699
If I were Newcastle, I’d just spend whatever it takes to get you up there challenging knowing that it will result in a 2 year ban from the Champions League and a fine. If they get the right people behind the scenes it won’t make much of a difference.

That’s if the owners plan on using it as it’s play toy.

However, I wonder why they weren’t interested in us, which makes me think maybe they aren’t looking to spend huge amounts of money.

I know we would be worth quite a chunk more, but we have a shiny new multi-purpose stadium with no sponsor, the playing squad isn’t a million miles away compared to Newcastle and they could put money in without having to worry about FFP. Yourve also got the fact that we are based in London and the facilities are some of the best in the world.

If they want to transform Newcastle, they will be needing to spend similar to how much we would cost to buy and it’s going to take them 10 years.

Not that I would be overjoyed by being owned by them.
 

Gb160

Well done boys. Good process
Jun 20, 2012
23,646
93,315
I know we would be worth quite a chunk more
They're buying Newcastle for £300m, it'd probably take circa £2b for enic to cash in their chips.

That's not quite a chunk, that's nearly 7 times as much.
 

Spurs 1961

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
6,665
8,739
If I were Newcastle, I’d just spend whatever it takes to get you up there challenging knowing that it will result in a 2 year ban from the Champions League and a fine. If they get the right people behind the scenes it won’t make much of a difference.

That’s if the owners plan on using it as it’s play toy.

However, I wonder why they weren’t interested in us, which makes me think maybe they aren’t looking to spend huge amounts of money.

I know we would be worth quite a chunk more, but we have a shiny new multi-purpose stadium with no sponsor, the playing squad isn’t a million miles away compared to Newcastle and they could put money in without having to worry about FFP. Yourve also got the fact that we are based in London and the facilities are some of the best in the world.

If they want to transform Newcastle, they will be needing to spend similar to how much we would cost to buy and it’s going to take them 10 years.

Not that I would be overjoyed by being owned by them.


A way cheaper option to buy and will a little investment build. A manager like Poch would build without having to pay huge fees
 

Metalhead

But that's a debate for another thread.....
Nov 24, 2013
25,356
38,298
They're buying Newcastle for £300m, it'd probably take circa £2b for enic to cash in their chips.

That's not quite a chunk, that's nearly 7 times as much.
Absolutely. If a sovereign wealth fund don't see us as an investment then it's hard to see who would. Getting outside investment like the Amazon deal, if it comes off is the way forward.
 

Frozen_Waffles

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2005
3,760
9,505
Unfortunately there are some rather high profile precedants in play. The time to tell them to fuck off was when Mansoor bought City.

No, the time was with Roman Abramovic.

As soon as we let this guy in it was pretty much an open invitation for anyone to come in.

Sadly we live in a capitalist world, the only way for this to stop happening is if the people stopped watching the football in protest.

And that is not going to happen. So no real point in saying how outraged we are. Money talks.

It will kill the game eventually, but until then.... Dickov or De Bruyne?
 

Frozen_Waffles

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2005
3,760
9,505
On a side note, I always thought Newcastle were an ideal club to buy. Ok idiot MA has messed it up but they are a big club with a huge fan base in the north east and a good sized stadium.

Excellent potential, they are just missing the worldwide exposure and a few big signings and they could be huge.

There are a few clubs to watch for big signings this summer.... Everton and wolves spring to mind as well.

If we are not careful we could get lost in mid table again, same with arsenal.
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2012
38,247
104,143
On a side note, I always thought Newcastle were an ideal club to buy. Ok idiot MA has messed it up but they are a big club with a huge fan base in the north east and a good sized stadium.

Excellent potential, they are just missing the worldwide exposure and a few big signings and they could be huge.

There are a few clubs to watch for big signings this summer.... Everton and wolves spring to mind as well.

If we are not careful we could get lost in mid table again, same with arsenal.

The only way this happens is if this pandemic hits us really hard and social distancing laws where people aren't allowed in stadiums continue because that will eventually hit our pockets.
 

shelfboy68

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2008
14,566
19,651
On a side note, I always thought Newcastle were an ideal club to buy. Ok idiot MA has messed it up but they are a big club with a huge fan base in the north east and a good sized stadium.

Excellent potential, they are just missing the worldwide exposure and a few big signings and they could be huge.

There are a few clubs to watch for big signings this summer.... Everton and wolves spring to mind as well.

If we are not careful we could get lost in mid table again, same with arsenal.
Before this season ended abruptly, it looked like the club were heading for somewhere around mid table.
Appreciate that anything could and can happen, but the way we were playing you couldn't see where a win would come from, the defence and keeper were a joke plus where were the goals coming from.
This could be a good investment for Newcastle, certainly they can go past us in time if the club don't get their act together they will be a credible threat I feel.
 
Last edited:

Wheeler Dealer

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2011
6,863
12,282
On a side note, I always thought Newcastle were an ideal club to buy. Ok idiot MA has messed it up but they are a big club with a huge fan base in the north east and a good sized stadium.

Excellent potential, they are just missing the worldwide exposure and a few big signings and they could be huge.

There are a few clubs to watch for big signings this summer.... Everton and wolves spring to mind as well.

If we are not careful we could get lost in mid table again, same with arsenal.
Their fan base ain't really that big. it's concentrated within a 20 mile radius and they benefit from being a one club city. I don't think they will ever leverage global appeal, due to many factor, location being the biggest challenge they face. There are far too many clubs that are miles ahead of them in the PL, which will take time, money and huge investment just to get that bit closer
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top