So here's a thought. FSG have probably quadrupled their initial investment. However, any more poor results and the valuation will decrease, especially as right now, European football is factored into our price. They can pocket over £100m from the sale of one player and then sell up. There'll probably not be a better time to exit for a long time. There's been very little talk from the owner for a long time. What price that we are sold in the next few months?
Doubtful tbh. It's cheaper buy a club like newcastle. Get more or less the same revenue from prem and less costs. If you've 500mil to spend then why not.
Am not sure. There are few clubs left like ours, with the pedigree we have, that are not owned by super wealthy owners. In global support terms, we must be in the top 10 clubs in the world, even despite our poor showing in the last decade. You can't buy that kind of brand equity easily.
What's pedigree really got to do with it? Chelsea? City? They had none. You can build that brand very quickly. I think we grossly over estimate the impact of far eastern support. You win on pitch everyone is looking at you. Like.... What global brand.. and I mean global is pinned on lfc? Western union? STANDARD CHARTERED? Compare to city... Etihad basically use them as their brand showcase. They are a club entirely dedicated to the brand of qatar. Chelsea were Samsung and now Yokohama tyres. The trend of sleeve sponsors is these guys are getting big deals from far East tyre companies It seems to me if you put the winning team together you get the global brand. The question must be why spend 1bil to get lovren at al when you can spend 200mil to buy out like Ashley and have 800mil to buy talent. Sadly though... Newcastle are more likely to be sold as Blackburn, Leeds etc than to find a city type owner.
Our owners seem quite happy with the strength of our "global brand", and why not, they sit on the money it brings in and make the club self sustaining on matchday, merchandise, player sales and TV money. They will never totally finance us because were part of a franchise and just one of 4 horses in their stable, their thoroughbred will always be the Boston Red Sox.
They imo wont sell cos we are a cash cow. Even if it's not a direct feed like the glaziers their access to markets is impossible for their small time baseball famranchise otherwise
City and Chelsea have been bought and had a massive amount of money pumped into them in order to create a winning team. Chelsea have been a success no doubt but is their brand bigger than ours? Perhaps, but even if so, it's not massively bigger. City are still CL virgins and have often struggled to fill their stadium despite having the best players and coach in the country. That's not a big brand to me (yet). I do generally agree with you though, our brand is in its final throes. No success and under investment compared to the aforementioned means that it's getting to the stage of 'now or never'.....that's why I think it might just happen. Otherwise, I really do fear for our future.
IF Newcastle were to get a sugar daddy owner and if Everton progress(new owner, new stadium)added to Spurs with new ground and better matchday income and naming rights etc we'll be going backwards, unless our owners change their strategy and start to speculate to accumulate. Not holding my breath on the issue tbf.
Apart from a blip under Rafa from 2005-2008ish we have been stagnating since the start of the millenium, perhaps even earlier than that. It is more obvious now as there is more competition - City, Chelsea, even Spurs.
Perhaps, but let's be honest, it's loose change to some of the super wealthy out there. The trick is getting one interested!
Yeah, and if a couple of other clubs get the type of financial boost Chelsea and then City got or even a half of it we will be pushed further down the pecking order in financial terms, our popularity is based on our historical successes but our owners can't live off that forever, but they're not showing enough commitment to us winning trophies for me, they seem happy enough though.
Some of them were born into it, some of them had oil in their baby bottles instead of milk, some used moneyball and bought LFC.
I would not quite go that far back mate. 1990s were blighted by players who didn't care enough and some very poor decision making on purchases but 2001 was massive. We were a regular in cl places. 2007 was a cl final.. then 2008 and the financial crash happened. I blame parry and Moore's for what happened more than g&h tbh. Imo since then we have thrown away chance after chance to improve. Imo we are badly run as a footballing entity and that's why we do what we do. All the attribute are there for a real CEO and chairman and technical director to build a world class organisation but we just dont. We appoint a video game marketeer as CEO. We appoint a gobshite as technical director and our chairman never crosses the Atlantic. That's the reality. The truth is I envy spurs having Daniel levy controlling everuthing. I don't agree with some of his strategy but he's built the right way while fsg have floundered about at the same time. Lfc need to change from the top down imo.
