It'd be better than Ashley or some of the awful guys we've seen. There can be no complaints on fsg at all
Agree with all that. FSG have been exactly what we needed after H&G. FSG will forever have a legacy with our club for getting the stadium work done.
Completely agree. I've come to the opinion that the view that its easy to make money out of Premier League teams was one they held - and this summer and the subsequent realisation that all that money has not bought us success and that they will need to spend more for that to happen, will have changed that view. I also think they would sell if they could make a minor return on their investment (unlikely) or at least break-even, or even reduce future losses by selling and not chucking more money down the bottomless pit! I don't see us as a sound investment at all. United were/are a cash cow that we don't compete with, Arsenal have worked themselves into a unique position of bigger clubs, and Chelsea and City have experienced massive losses which will take some time to recoup. FSG don't have the capital that Roman and the Arabs do.
The only problem with this is ANYONE buying into sports isn't exactly doing it for reasons of great profit Let's face it if you had 200 mil to invest there's a million better ways to get a return on it However given their sports emphasis as a group it's the ancillaries that make the return for them
Nobody should compare to Chelsea in particular that was 90% ego there to go do that but now it's a totally different beast and really a big big club driving on City are different in I've no idea if it's ego or what but there's money going in to basically never come back so is it purely patriotic showing of that countries name on a global stage or what? In any event utd and arsenal are and will be richer than lfc so in the end being in 4th on any given season relies on on fing up!
If FSG have reached a cross roads regarding investment, they can go one of three ways. 1) sell up and wash their hands of the club. They won't do this if they can't get a return on their investment though. 2) invest more to get to the promised land. This would make number one near on impossible in the future unless we somehow became super successful. 3) take the Randy Lerner route. He invested at first before realising Villa wouldn't break into the top for and opted to make cut backs instead to make them self-sustaining and hopefully one day profitable. FSG have already made us self-sustaining bar the stadium, we could be profitable but like at Villa, the team would suffer.
Not necessarily. They may just wish to cut their losses. If their forecast says way more red before it goes black then they may just choose to sell up.
It's capital expenditure deemed necessary to generate the playing results that ultimate generates your revenue. If they'd cut the annual spend on wages and fees back to a level where you broke even, then where would you be now? The simple facts are that you've been blowing £50m a year, so your assertion that they've created something that is already self sustaining is false.
No mate it's more accurately called an uniformed opinion. When you use words like "patently" then it is advisable to back the contention up with fact - this you distinctly fail to do! Why use tools such as ROCE when they are virtually meaningless in the analysis of clubs right across Europe? Add to that any owner of any commercial/industrial organisation of whatever size who does not have an exit strategy would be an idiot!
Other than the fact that some of it is write offs? But then that's not as good a one liner at blowing 50 mil a year? Frankly..... Nobody much cares as if you buy into football and you think about profit you are gunning to fail
So ROCE is of no consequence to any football investor? Hahaha, ok mate Love the way you called me out for suggesting that their chosen profit route was an exit strategy and then you agree with me when you realise you've made a **** of yourself again.
From what we all seem to hear, Qatar is running out of oil and gas quicker than most of the middle-east and through various government/royal subsidiaries are using that revenue to make provisions for life after oil, with fingers in a lot of pies including football clubs, banks, retail chains, property, all sorts. Wouldn't surprise me if clubs like PSG, City, sponsorship of Barca etc are just loss leaders to gain wider profile and fingers in other pies.
Well that's what happens when you pump it all up and sell it! I do find on some level such as say Dubai airport etcetc they are diversifying but well in the end it comes back to the question of why and I feel there is some element of being the best but after that you'd wonder seeing 200 mil out into a training facility... Really need a 7k stadium for u21s? Yes to be the best etc etc but one feels is not like abramovichs initial ego trip
Tbh I know people that have lived out in Qatar and they speak about this like from what tends to be common knowledge and perception out there based on what the government is doing. All of this money IS coming from Qatar's finance ministry but I forget the name of it. They own investments all over the world in major companies. I think Sainsburys is one? What MITO says about Dubai, the airport, and the massive property & construction boom of the last two decades, the investment in their business parks, was all done to plan for post-oil era to get big business over there. Especially technology companies. The airport, the tallest building in the world, the palm islands, the new property being sold to foreigners was all about that. Then the property bubble burst lol, but they still keep going.
There you go again! What I actually said was that ROCE was not, is not and never will be as long the club market remains as is, the prime critical evaluating element. You really should stop trying to play games you're not very good at it! As for FSG's strategy only a nincompoop like you can try and turn a comment that should apply to any business as an attempt to identify an FSG strategy. Just stop fool!
