Retained List (51 Viewers)

[shmmeee]

Don’t wanna have to watch my club play out of Coventry again. I know it’s silly but by owing it we can at least control our own destiny (or at the very least get a long long lease).

In reality even with a moustache twiddling villian owner in Wasps, a bumbling and angry council and a bumbling and angry ownership, we still ended up back in Cov because the club and the stadium have a codependent relationship. No one else brings that footfall and there’s no realistic chance of another 30k stadium being built in the city.

 

---

[shepardo01]

They're sniffing round a championship club. Millwall evidently then they came out and said not them

Read somewhere about Sunderland (if they went up)

 

[Skybluedownunder]

I wish. Saudi takeovers don't happen to clubs like us unfortunately

Surely we’ve gotta be more appealing than fucking Milwall


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sky Blue Goblin]

In reality even with a moustache twiddling villian owner in Wasps, a bumbling and angry council and a bumbling and angry ownership, we still ended up back in Cov because the club and the stadium have a codependent relationship. No one else brings that footfall and there’s no realistic chance of another 30k stadium being built in the city.

Yeah completely get that, but it should never of happened and the only way to guarantee it imo would be to own the stadium.

It’s a silly worry but I do wonder what would have happened to us if Notts won instead of us.

 

[Sky Blue Goblin]

Surely we’ve gotta be more appealing than fucking Milwall


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

London is an appeal all on its own tho. Plus haven’t they got planning permission to do up their stadium?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Comes at a price though roughly £5m a year and Doug can’t afford that forever

Which makes the whole conversation around ST price increases seem more ridiculous. If you lose millions a year, you need to do something to mitigate those losses. Particularly when the expectation of the owner is to plough in more money for players and other operational costs.

It’s all well and good the owner pandering to fans and indefinitely freezing prices but if the losses become more extreme and we go the way Derby did with Morris… I’d rather not.

 

[clint van damme]

Read somewhere about Sunderland (if they went up)

Given they've tried to take the moral high ground over Newcastles Saudi ownership the mental gymnastics would be glorious

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Given they've tried to take the moral high ground over Newcastles Saudi ownership the mental gymnastics would be glorious

It would for about 6 months, then everyone would forget and they’d be in a position to establish themselves in the Prem.

 

[Evo1883]

Which makes the whole conversation around ST price increases seem more ridiculous. If you lose millions a year, you need to do something to mitigate those losses. Particularly when the expectation of the owner is to plough in more money for players and other operational costs.

It’s all well and good the owner pandering to fans and indefinitely freezing prices but if the losses become more extreme and we go the way Derby did with Morris… I’d rather not.

Too high and people won't all buy , so there has to be balance

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Too high and people won't all buy , so there has to be balance

Agreed, but as our old friends at Wasps found out, make the product too cheap, you devalue the product.

The people who locked themselves in with the PL package should be ‘rewarded’ with the gap closed from the regular ST to the PL package for their vote of faith.

£400 for a ST for a playoff challenging team is great value. Right now, a ST costing £500-600 isn’t unreasonable. A £600 ST works out at £26.08 a game which would be a ‘cheap’ ticket for an away day.

To avoid confusion, I’m not suggesting the prices should be hiked up 50% because that isn’t a good business plan. The club has gained new customers so has to focus on retention. A ST for next season costing somewhere between £450-500 is reasonable.

 

[SBT]

You don’t want us owned by multi billionaires that would take us straight to the premier league?

You want the club to become an advert for an authoritarian Muslim state? Alhamdulillah!

 

[Colin Steins Smile]

On any Saudi investment into another football club, there are a few things to question. The Saudi Public Investment Fund [PIF] in effect owns NUFC & funds 4 clubs in the Saudi League. Hence, I question whether it's the PIF looking to buy another club in England, as they'll be a conflict of interest with NUFC.
The alternative buyer from Saudi could be an individual and that is fraught with risks, as many clubs have previously found out that their owner is not as wealthy as initially thought.

 

[Grendel]

You want the club to become an advert for an authoritarian Muslim state? Alhamdulillah!

The reality is if the club succeeded no one would care - some will pretend to - but they will just still go anyway

 

[SBT]

The reality is if the club succeeded no one would care - some will pretend to - but they will just still go anyway

I assume you would be appalled?

 

[SBAndy]

Championship clubs and at least one team in the Premier League are trying to lure Saudi Arabian billionaire Turki Alalshikh into investment, according to a report.

Sky Sports journalist Kaveh Solhekol says clubs are turning to Saudi in a bid to strike it rich and help them win promotion to the Premier League. Alalshikh, with an estimated wealth of $2.8 billion, has a number of business interests and has transformed the sport of boxing by putting on a host of incredible shows in the Middle East.

Preferred Alki David tbh.

 

[Shannerz]

some will pretend to

Some might, some will care, and act accordingly.

You do not speak for all.

 

[fatso]

Some might, some will care, and act accordingly.

You do not speak for all.

I think that's why he used the word "some"

But, you know, I'm only guessing that "some" doesn't in fact mean "all"

I'd imagine if we got to the play off final next year, we'd still have a mad scramble for tickets, regardless of Saudi owners or betting company sponsors or alcohol producers sponsoring us, or some dodgy sports clothing retailer owning our ground.

 

[Shannerz]

I think that's why he used the word "some"

But, you know, I'm only guessing that "some" doesn't in fact mean "all"

The whole quote. I've highlighted the relevant bit for you.

"The reality is if the club succeeded no one would care - some will pretend to - but they will just still go anyway."

hth.

 

[fatso]

The whole quote. I've highlighted the relevant bit for you.

"The reality is if the club succeeded no one would care - some will pretend to - but they will just still go anyway."

hth.

He's probably right tbf.

Ethics never stopped us signing Marlon King. And I only remember 1 person saying they wouldn't attend again. (Not that I'm saying it's right, but in reality it soon blows over)

 

[Trueskyblue20]

The reality is if the club succeeded no one would care - some will pretend to - but they will just still go anyway

I would definitely care as I really like the fact we are one of few British owned clubs now.

I hate Sportswashing and some of these state owned clubs.

 

[Shannerz]

He's probably right tbf.

Ethics never stopped us signing Marlon King. And I only remember 1 person saying they wouldn't attend again. (Not that I'm saying it's right, but in reality it soon blows over)

He's not.

He might be right that the majority wouldn't care (there's no 'might' about that, unfortunately), but not that no-one would, or that of those voicing disapproval, that it would be insincere.

Speaking for myself only, I could not with good conscience put money into a club with links to one of the most despotic, illiberal regimes on the planet. Whoever this club being linked is, I hope to fuck it's not us.

 

[procdoc]

I don’t give a toss about the politics, if a Saudi billionaire wants us I wouldn’t give a shit

 

[Warwickhunt]

He's probably right tbf.

Ethics never stopped us signing Marlon King. And I only remember 1 person saying they wouldn't attend again. (Not that I'm saying it's right, but in reality it soon blows over)

And the person who wouldnt go again she then promptly screwed the club over via the council maligned view of the club and SISU

 

[KenilworthSkyBlue]

A tiny proportion of the fanbase would be bothered. Vast majority would still turn up week after week.

Newcastle fans aren't at all bothered.

Nottingham Forest is owned by the Greek equivalent of the Godfather whose rap sheet is longer than a giraffes neck. Again, they're not at all bothered.

Why would ours be so different?

 

[JimmyHillsbeard]

And the person who wouldnt go again she then promptly screwed the club over via the council maligned view of the club and SISU

I didn’t attend a game where Marlon King played for us. His signing was an absolute disgrace.

 

[Shannerz]

A tiny proportion of the fanbase would be bothered. Vast majority would still turn up week after week.

Fwiw, I don't judge fans for not boycotting; football support is ingrained over decades, you can't switch off love for a club any more than you can for a person. Football supporters also can't be blamed for who owns their clubs.

What stuck in the craw with Newcastle was just how much they embraced it.

Edit: Sorry, I think I misinterpreted your post slightly. Ours would certainly be no different.

 

[KenilworthSkyBlue]

You say it as if it's a good thing.

Fwiw, I don't judge fans for not boycotting; football support is ingrained over decades, you can't switch off love for a club any more than you can for a person. Football supporters also can't be blamed for who owns their clubs.

What stuck in the craw with Newcastle was just how much they embraced it.

It's neither here nor there really it's just highlighting human nature and what's realistic in the context of the discussion.

You're entitled to take whatever position you want but the fact is the vast majority won't care and that's been proven from several case studies.

Like you said the wider footballing community was in uproar while Newcastle fans were dancing around in Arabic attire.

 

[Senior Vick from Alicante]

Fans represent a place, a history and a spirit of association to both which is embodied on the pitch through the team and managers. Owners don't, they're on the outside of it all operating in different circles. They're drivers are completely different to ours, it's the networking amongst the powerful, the status of ownership and the doors it unlocks. To 99% of fans the two worlds only collide when bad owners slip through the net. If Saudi or Qatar's money produced better results then those same fans still only represent the same place and histories they always have they just get to possibly celebrate success more often.

 

[Grendel]

I assume you would be appalled?

Well I would still go. I wouldn't give it much though in truth.

 

[SBT]

Well I would still go. I wouldn't give it much though in truth.

I find that slightly hard to believe.

Personally I wouldn't want the club ownership to become enmeshed in any political project. And that goes for Dale Vince's vegan burgers as much as it does for some Saudi tycoon's petro-utopia. Doubt it would stop me going, but I've given plenty of thought to a random Finnish hedge fund owning the club over the years, I imagine I'd do the same if it was someone who "represents prejudice and atrocity".

 

[Shannerz]

It's neither here nor there really it's just highlighting human nature and what's realistic in the context of the discussion.

You're entitled to take whatever position you want but the fact is the vast majority won't care and that's been proven from several case studies.

Like you said the wider footballing community was in uproar while Newcastle fans were dancing around in Arabic attire.

Yeah, sorry, edited post; realised after posting you weren't passing comment on your own thoughts, rather speaking more generally.

 

[Grendel]

I find that slightly hard to believe.

Personally I wouldn't want the club ownership to become enmeshed in any political project. And that goes for Dale Vince's vegan burgers as much as it does for some Saudi tycoon's petro-utopia. Doubt it would stop me going, but I've given plenty of thought to a random Finnish hedge fund owning the club over the years, I imagine I'd do the same if it was someone who "represents prejudice and atrocity".

Being serious though it is a very difficult situation in truth.

The identity of the club would disappear and I guess selling your soul to the devil is not the most desirable of outcomes. The reality is though football sold its soul in 1992.

I would not want it to happen but if it did and I still went and supported I cannot claim to object much really.

Thaksin Shinawatra was probably the most corrupt individual to own a football club in the UK. People would chant his name if he was successful. Even Oysten was lauded briefly at Blackpool. Hypocrisy rules.

​

 

[Shannerz]

The reality is though football sold its soul in 1992.

Way before then in fairness. World Cups in Italy in 1938 and Argentina in 1978 are just the immediately obvious ones. Football administrators generally never had much of a social conscience.

It's just so blatant now, though. Infantino will crawl up the arse of every autocrat he meets.

 

[Grendel]

Way before then in fairness. World Cups in Italy in 1938 and Argentina in 1978 are just the immediately obvious ones. Football administrators generally never had much of a social conscience.

It's just so blatant now, though. Infantino will crawl up the arse of every autocrat he meets.

The Premier League is - as Brian Glanville said - the Greed is Good League. It is purely about swelling its bloated stomach while the rest of the football clubs go hungry. Nothing can be done about it now. Personally I enjoy the Championship with packed crowds and excitement but we would all take 17th in the Premier League every time regardless who owned the club if it could be a reality

 

[blunted]

Not overly concerned about owning it

Hugely concerned over:

Does Mike Ashley want to own the club and if so what is he willing to do to leverage this?

Does the club have enough leverage in the fact of what you are saying to ensure a long term licence at a rate that enables us to compete at the highest possible level?

My fears exactly