• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Football Thread 2012/13 |OT| The Beautiful Game

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tim the Wiz

Banned
50m net spend, huh? That's about 35m left - considering the transfers of Kagawa, Powell and Park. Hmm, do we really need to blow it all on Moura? Lays some doubt on us being in for Baines.

Clegg said:
Trying to look on the brightside.

The IPO is successful and we reduce debt by £75m. We have a decent season and at least make the CL QF. Revenue increases and debt is paid down a bit more.

The Chevrolet deal is, in fact, as large as Reuters are reporting. We use that money to at least partially pay down more of our debt and reduce the interest bill.

#graspingatstraws
Click to expand...

Ugh. Yeah, that's all we can hope for.
 
C

Carbonox

Member
Meier said:
Wanyama I believe. City were supposedly interested in him about 6-8 weeks ago but nothing has come of it. I think a £10-11 valuation was mentioned for him. I know Celtic paid less than £1m.
Click to expand...

I wanted Newcastle to get him before we got Bigirimana. Now I'm content with Bigirimana. Class player and a capable heir to Tiote's throne.
 
C

Clegg

Member
Am I right in thinking that the IPO has been fully underwritten by the banks?

Wouldn't that mean the Glazers will still get their money, regardless of interest from investors?
 
P

PaulLFC

Member
Arnie said:
Forgot to add that.

It's the thoughts of the club, that we'd only accept an offer that's so great it'd be tough to refuse because of the good it could do to the squad overall.

I've read a lot of reactionary moaning and whining about that on RAWK, but as I see it, that's what running a football club is: turning over your prized assets at their peak and using that to invest and improve. If we hadn't spunked the Torres money up the wall it would've been considered one of the greatest transfer moves in history, but unfortunately for us Mike Ashley scooped that award on the same day.

I love Agger, and Skrtel, but if an offer comes in that's exceptional, and we'll hold City out for a huge offer because we know they've got the money, then we'd be mad to say no. They're both 27, both in their peak, and both worth a lot of money. As long as it's reinvested wisely then we'll do well.
Click to expand...
If it does come to that, then I hope we hold out for a ridiculous price and don't give one or both of them away too cheaply - our negotiation skills haven't exactly been brilliant in recent times, except for Torres that is.
 
G

GorillaJu

Member
Arnie said:
Forgot to add that.

It's the thoughts of the club, that we'd only accept an offer that's so great it'd be tough to refuse because of the good it could do to the squad overall.

I've read a lot of reactionary moaning and whining about that on RAWK, but as I see it, that's what running a football club is: turning over your prized assets at their peak and using that to invest and improve. If we hadn't spunked the Torres money up the wall it would've been considered one of the greatest transfer moves in history, but unfortunately for us Mike Ashley scooped that award on the same day.

I love Agger, and Skrtel, but if an offer comes in that's exceptional, and we'll hold City out for a huge offer because we know they've got the money, then we'd be mad to say no. They're both 27, both in their peak, and both worth a lot of money. As long as it's reinvested wisely then we'll do well.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If City want to buy one of our prized assets, then we're going to get a big payday from it, and I'd expect Rodgers to be able to reinvest all of that in the squad. We may lose one of the best defenders in the league, when fit, but we could get a perfectly decent CB to replace him at half what we sell him for, then still have the other half to sort out our attacking issues.
 
Y

Yen

Member
Arnie said:
Forgot to add that.

It's the thoughts of the club, that we'd only accept an offer that's so great it'd be tough to refuse because of the good it could do to the squad overall.

I've read a lot of reactionary moaning and whining about that on RAWK, but as I see it, that's what running a football club is: turning over your prized assets at their peak and using that to invest and improve. If we hadn't spunked the Torres money up the wall it would've been considered one of the greatest transfer moves in history, but unfortunately for us Mike Ashley scooped that award on the same day.

I love Agger, and Skrtel, but if an offer comes in that's exceptional, and we'll hold City out for a huge offer because we know they've got the money, then we'd be mad to say no. They're both 27, both in their peak, and both worth a lot of money. As long as it's reinvested wisely then we'll do well.
Click to expand...

Agree with all of this, but Skragger have at least 5 more years at their peak. Would want a hefty sum for ether, or both, of them.
 
A

Arnie

Member
odd_morsel said:
Exactly. If City want to buy one of our prized assets, then we're going to get a big payday from it, and I'd expect Rodgers to be able to reinvest all of that in the squad. We may lose one of the best defenders in the league, when fit, but we could get a perfectly decent CB to replace him at half what we sell him for, then still have the other half to sort out our attacking issues.
Click to expand...

Yenrot said:
Agree with all of this, but Skragger have at least 5 more years at their peak. Would want a hefty sum for ether, or both, of them.
Click to expand...

Agree.

I hope we look at Sakho for PSG, he's a brilliant defender and we could get him for a cut price considering their current situation.
 
J

Jeff Albertson

Member
Willkiller said:
Venkys seem like they'd be a good fit. Jeff would be happy too. Everyone's a winner!
Click to expand...

rao.jpg
 
T

Tim the Wiz

Banned
Jensen said:
I think the sponsorship they are referring to in that article is the 'Official Automobile Partner'.

edit: Actually I'm not entirely sure what the article is referring to but they definitely will be on the shirt after the Aon contract expires.
Click to expand...

LA Times said:
Reuters and the Wall Street Journal said sources familiar with the situation reported Ewanick’s departure was tied to not properly vetting and reporting the financial details about Chevrolet’s sponsorship of Manchester United.

Among the criticisms of the transaction was that the sponsorship did not appear to include Chevrolet’s name on the jerseys of the soccer club’s players. Unlike the major American sports, advertising is a prominent feature of soccer uniforms, giving the sponsors what are essentially kicking and running billboards for television cameras and photographers.
Click to expand...

The article's speculating why that exec got fired. It could be the terms of the deal with United, as mentioned above, where the company's name doesn't appear on the jersey (but just the logo?), and it goes on to name a few other possibilities.

Arnie said:
I thought the atmosphere regarding United's financial stability looked grim last night, tonight it's like Chernobyl.
Click to expand...

United's stable, even if the debt is toxic to proper reinvestment. The Glazers are lying twerps, though. And the pressure on them shouldn't let up for a second.
 
G

GorillaJu

Member
Really looking forward to Clint Dempsey putting on a Liverpool shirt. He'll be so fucking good as a Rodgers player. Good technical skill, works his ass off and very physical. Will be great on the left wing.
 
V

Vivalaraza

Member
Jensen said:
I think the sponsorship they are referring to in that article is the 'Official Automobile Partner'.

edit: Actually I'm not entirely sure what the article is referring to but they definitely will be on the shirt after the Aon contract expires.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's saying that the logo will only be on the shirt, not the name beneath it?

Dunno tbh, just a guess.
 
A

Arnie

Member
Omi said:
Welcome Andy Carroll, please enjoy your stay in East London.
Click to expand...

He won't agree. I've got a suspicion that the only reason we've accepted is to spark Newcastle into action. If they appear with a concrete bid above the £15 million then I believe Carroll will be back in Newcastle.
 
O

Omikron

Member
Arnie said:
He won't agree. I've got a suspicion that the only reason we've accepted is to spark Newcastle into action. If they appear with a concrete bid above the £15 million then I believe Carroll will be back in Newcastle.
Click to expand...

Probably. But it is amusing.
 
C

Clegg

Member
From the original draft of the IPO:

IPO prospectus: the level of debt and interest is negatively affecting our ability to compete, we will use the proceeds of the IPO to bring debt levels down to more manageable levels.
Click to expand...

And now all we get is £75m off the debt and £4.4m a year off in interest.
 
K

Kyoufu

Member
Arnie said:
He won't agree. I've got a suspicion that the only reason we've accepted is to spark Newcastle into action. If they appear with a concrete bid above the £15 million then I believe Carroll will be back in Newcastle.
Click to expand...

lol that's not how Ashley operates. We'll never get into a bidding war. Especially not with the likes of West Ham, especially not over the likes of Andy Carroll.

I think the problem you're facing right now is Carroll doesn't want to go to West Ham, otherwise their deal would be good for you.
 
A

ATF487

Member
Clegg said:
Am I right in thinking that the IPO has been fully underwritten by the banks?

Wouldn't that mean the Glazers will still get their money, regardless of interest from investors?
Click to expand...

Depends on what sort of offer they do. If it's a firm commitment, the Glazers will get the share price times the amount of shares they put out; the risk is on the bank. If it's a best offer scenario, they would only get the price that the market is willing to pay.
 
Y

Yen

Member
Kyoufu said:
lol that's not how Ashley operates. We'll never get into a bidding war. Especially not with the likes of West Ham, especially not over the likes of Andy Carroll.

I think the problem you're facing right now is Carroll doesn't want to go to West Ham, otherwise their deal would be good for you.
Click to expand...

West Ham owners are a bunch of cowboys who have neither sense nor money.
 
P

PaulLFC

Member
ATF487 said:
Depends on what sort of offer they do. If it's a firm commitment, the Glazers will get the share price times the amount of shares they put out; the risk is on the bank. If it's a best offer scenario, they would only get the price that the market is willing to pay.
Click to expand...
Well then if the bank's read that prospectus, they surely can't be stupid enough to make a firm commitment.
 
G

GQman2121

Banned
odd_morsel said:
Oh, God. The people of Tampa paid for 100% of the Bucs' new stadium, and then had to pay Glazer to use it?! Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Here in the US, it's looked upon as a privilege to have an NFL team. There's only 32 cities with teams, so tax payers are more than willing to bend over backwards to do whatever is asked of them to bring a team to the area. The idea is that jobs, tourism and the NFL's profit sharing will help offset the initial cost.

Hell, here in Baltimore, we had to promise to build a new stadium before stealing another city's (Cleveland) entire organization. Shit is cutthroat here.
 
A

Awesome Animals

Member
GQman2121 said:
Here in the US, it's looked upon as a privilege to have an NFL team. There's only 32 cities with teams, so tax payers are more than willing to bend over backwards to do whatever is asked of them to bring a team to the area. The idea is that jobs, tourism and the NFL's profit sharing will help offset the initial cost.

Hell, here in Baltimore, we had to promise to build a new stadium before stealing another city's (Cleveland) entire organization. Shit is cutthroat here.
Click to expand...

Yea, the city of Baltimore can fuck off. And there aren't enough nasty things in the world I can wish upon Art Modell. That mother fucker deserves the worst death imaginable.
 
A

Arnie

Member
Kyoufu said:
lol that's not how Ashley operates. We'll never get into a bidding war. Especially not with the likes of West Ham, especially not over the likes of Andy Carroll.

I think the problem you're facing right now is Carroll doesn't want to go to West Ham, otherwise their deal would be good for you.
Click to expand...

Nobody's suggesting a bidding war, as if West Ham and Newcastle will be scrapping over Carroll, but we know Andy only wants to return to Newcastle and we know Newcastle are very interested in Andy; all accepting the West Ham bid does is tell Newcastle that we're ready for serious offers now.

Tomorrow should be a huge day, with Ba's contract clause coming to a close.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Football Thread |OT14| Only Wilbury's belly is smoother than BAAAYEEERNs season
396 397 398 399 400
20K
656K
Timurid replied
Football Thread |OT13| This title has been fixed
393 394 395 396 397
20K
690K
Blue Lou replied
  • Locked
Football Thread 2012/13 |OT2| @agent_89: My sources tell me the season has started
400 401 402 403 404
20K
836K
Messi replied
  • Locked
Football Thread |OT11| Campaign: Save a donkey in Colombia
395 396 397 398 399
20K
704K
pulga replied
Football Thread |OT12| Kicked the Ballboy Like Stan Hit Ulrika
395 396 397 398 399
20K
678K
Meus Renaissance replied
Top Bottom