Serious takeover talk

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
Guinness Guzzler said:
I've never understood this mind. People often say that someone who is rich has donated just to avoid tax. How does that work though? I mean, I get that it comes off your taxable income, so you pay less tax, but surely if you give £1,000,000 to a charity, its only saved you the tax you'd have been charged on that £1m (400k for someone in 40% tax bracket). So the donation looks more generous than it is in terms of how much they've paid to make it, but they're still 600k worse off than if they simply hadn't made the £1m donation and had paid the 400k tax. I'm sure I'm missing something here but it's always confused me!
Click to expand...

Even at 98% tax...... if you earn £100, you’re still £2 better off!!:emoticon-0102-bigsm
 
marcusblackcat said:
No money does not define a person

Not sure how many "rich" people I know as that term is objective - My uncle does not think he is "rich" - but he is worth in excess of £2m

From my experience, very few people do things selflessly - rich people even less so - you don't have to see an ulterior motive to know it's there. We all want to try to pay as little to the government as we can - that's not me saying these rich people don't do good for the charities - just that they will make money out of it.
Click to expand...

So is your issue with the amount of tax rich people pay?

Or their generosity?

I'm not having a go, just intrigued.
 
Dancingstripes said:
So is your issue with the amount of tax rich people pay?

Or their generosity?

I'm not having a go, just intrigued.
Click to expand...
I have no issue with any of it. It’s more the people that think “he gives x to charity so which means he’s selfless” they rarely are!! If there’s a way to keep money out of the government’s pocket then damn right I’d do it!!!
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
I've never understood this mind. People often say that someone who is rich has donated just to avoid tax. How does that work though? I mean, I get that it comes off your taxable income, so you pay less tax, but surely if you give £1,000,000 to a charity, its only saved you the tax you'd have been charged on that £1m (400k for someone in 40% tax bracket). So the donation looks more generous than it is in terms of how much they've paid to make it, but they're still 600k worse off than if they simply hadn't made the £1m donation and had paid the 400k tax. I'm sure I'm missing something here but it's always confused me!
Click to expand...
It’s more the people who “give their time” to charity (bono for instance)! I’m not a rich man but my accountant has always said there are far more advantages in giving to charity than in spending on an item! I don’t know how it all works.

I do know that these people who “work fir nothing” (take Bono fir instance and the gig he “doesn’t get paid fir”) make millions in “non tax” from doing it! I also know that, at the top of every charity, there’s a very rich person in charge!

im all fir keeping money out of “the mans” picket... then again I work in the public sector so not paying them technically could mean not paying me!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guinness Guzzler
Bob Murray been doing interviews with BBC and ITV today and although he didn't say it in so many words, I got the impression he's not impressed with Donald and Methven. He said from what he'd heard the Americans would have been perfect for the club and they wanted a full takeover and he wasn't impressed with just a small transaction, like say I got the impression he wasn't impressed with Donald/Methven.
 
  • Like
Reactions: East Durham
Smithy78 said:
Bob Murray been doing interviews with BBC and ITV today and although he didn't say it in so many words, I got the impression he's not impressed with Donald and Methven. He said from what he'd heard the Americans would have been perfect for the club and they wanted a full takeover and he wasn't impressed with just a small transaction, like say I got the impression he wasn't impressed with Donald/Methven.
Click to expand...
World record for the amount of impressions. Only joking
 
I don’t give to any big charities now not since I found out how much their salaries are one charity was on the box saying give £3 and it could keep a child alive for a month and then I looked at the bloke who runs it salary and found he alone committed about a 12,500 kids to an early death every year.
 
rooch 3 said:
I don’t give to any big charities now not since I found out how much their salaries are one charity was on the box saying give £3 and it could keep a child alive for a month and then I looked at the bloke who runs it salary and found he alone committed about a 12,500 kids to an early death every year.
Click to expand...
Yet quite happily vote for a Tory government which has seen off 17000 adults up to date.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danny Foctor
Smithy78 said:
Bob Murray been doing interviews with BBC and ITV today and although he didn't say it in so many words, I got the impression he's not impressed with Donald and Methven. He said from what he'd heard the Americans would have been perfect for the club and they wanted a full takeover and he wasn't impressed with just a small transaction, like say I got the impression he wasn't impressed with Donald/Methven.
Click to expand...

Mmmmm. Personally, while there might be something in this interpretation of Bob's remarks, (which I haven't heard mind), I'd think that with men such as these Americans, if they really "wanted" a takeover, then a takeover is what they would have had. Possibly, it's they themselves who prefer to dip a toe into the water first.

But have they gone to such a huge amount of effort, some of it in the public domain, to just dabble with a bit of a loan, or to sit permanently on the periphery? Maybe. Maybe that's all they'll want, though if so it will remain forever a mystery to me as to why they would ever have bothered in the first place.

It's also possible that Bob, who I have plenty of time for by the way, knows not much more than us!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sheep Farmer and Smithy78
If the club was a complete basket case the yanks would have and could have just walked away.
It may not be massive money by their standards but it keeps us comfortable and a bit more for this and next season.
They clearly see some potential, and this gets a toe in the door.
Why people see only negatives in this baffles me. There are only upsides to this. The money is in the bank, ours to use.
I personally feel that donald wasn't ready to walk away yet ( which could for many reasons ). They are there if and when he does.
The moaning Minnies need to do one. They have no evidence or even rational negative hypothesis for what is going on, but they keep giving us incessant insights to their miserable outlook on life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bank of England 2, Owld Feller and Nacho
FulwellBri said:
If the club was a complete basket case the yanks would have and could have just walked away.
It may not be massive money by their standards but it keeps us comfortable and a bit more for this and next season.
They clearly see some potential, and this gets a toe in the door.
Why people see only negatives in this baffles me. There are only upsides to this. The money is in the bank, ours to use.
I personally feel donald wasn't ready to walk away yet ( which could for many reasons ). They are there if and when he does.
The moaning Minnies need to do one. They have no evidence or even rational negative hypothesis for what is going on, but they keep giving us incessant insights to their miserable outlook on life.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can blame Donald for wanting to stay on, it's a great opportunity. Him and Methven negotiated well with the Americans over three months or more, passed a forensic examination of our finances and got them to invest with a view to the long term. Happy days.

We were never going to be the league one Man City it doesn't work like that. Sustainability has to be thought of unless the owners are ludicrously rich and don't really give a ****.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bank of England 2, Porterfield73 and Smug in Boots
Sid said:
In addition to investing in the club's infrastructure the money will also go towards fixing a lift at the academy and the speakers at the stadium.

Christ, it doesn't sound good that we couldn't afford to fix a lift without investment.

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/spo...n-sunderland-investment-relationship-17219574
Click to expand...

And the speakers, I assumed that was laziness. About time like it's been annoying me for ages.

From the comment about Sunderland not having to pay anything back to FPP it's clear that they will be getting more involved in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sid and Bank of England 2
Sid said:
In addition to investing in the club's infrastructure the money will also go towards fixing a lift at the academy and the speakers at the stadium.

Christ, it doesn't sound good that we couldn't afford to fix a lift without investment.

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/spo...n-sunderland-investment-relationship-17219574
Click to expand...
Young athletes shouldn't need to use a lift.
I think though that was methven dampening expectations on how money might be spent
He wont want rival clubs thinking we have multi million pound ' war chest'.
Seriously though I really believe we have a good enough squad. Maybe a freebie and a loan or 2 should be enough to get us over line.
PP's main job is ridding the squad of the negative stench left behind by ross.
 
Interesting bits I hadn't heard before (I probably missed them):

"Sunderland won't ever have to pay any money back."
"that will allow them to see how the club progresses, and how things pan out for the club with that money behind it."

'the trio... don't have any shares for their investment.'
'Newcastle United's need for a new training facility saw them walk away from that potential deal'
'With Chelsea and Watford they were put off by the need to build a new stadium'

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/spo...n-sunderland-investment-relationship-17219574
 
  • Like
Reactions: DELETED ACCOUNT 1234, Robertson, Montysoptician and 1 other person
HeatonMackem said:
Interesting bits I hadn't heard before (I probably missed them):

"Sunderland won't ever have to pay any money back."
"that will allow them to see how the club progresses, and how things pan out for the club with that money behind it."

'the trio... don't have any shares for their investment.'
'Newcastle United's need for a new training facility saw them walk away from that potential deal'
'With Chelsea and Watford they were put off by the need to build a new stadium'

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/spo...n-sunderland-investment-relationship-17219574
Click to expand...

How many ****ing clubs were they after
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back