Bournemouth takeover

[Stoned Rose]

View attachment 56092

@kaz7 is somewhat more hirsute than I’d envisaged.

 

[domalino]

It's often missed that the "hateful 8" was actually 9 because Newcastle joined Arsenal, Burnley, Chelsea, Leicester Liverpool, Manchester United, Tottenham and Wolverhampton Wanderers in signing the letter. So, at the time, only 3 American and the rest a mix of British, Chinese, Thai and Russian.

We have worked as a block with the Big 6 regularly on such things as not signing up to an owners charter post super league, pushing for a bigger share of international TV rights, voting against the away fan ticket cap of £30....
always it's about money and we are as bad/greedy as the rest of them trying to grab what we can.

Also, a few days before the Super League news dropped, there were ECA meetings to discuss the new CL format and revenues. Woodward and Soriano were the PL representatives and were resisting the UEFA proposals . Simply we wanted a bigger share of the ££.

I broadly agree with your last paragraph as well. After the 2014 FFP settlement there was genuine disquiet with the G14 boys because in their eyes we got away with it. 2 of the 3 red shirts strongly lobbied UEFA and it culminated with the new UEFA rule effective from 15/16 which allowed more owner investment for any new boy and, directly aimed at us, the effective 30% cap (of total income) on sponsorship income originating from abu Dhabi based companies. We played ball and presumably have stuck to it ever since. Why wouldn't we? It suited us because our other revenues were growing naturally so as they increased we could also increase the sponsorship money if needed and the 30% cap was not going to impact us. Also no messing about with court cases and mainly onside with the G14 boys. Until Der Spiegel came along in November 2018....

The unspoken truth is that the Glazer family has benefitted incredibly from the rise of Manchester City.

When Abu Dhabi invest in Manchester City they are investing in English football and the glazer family own a significant stake in that business.

Newcastle will do the same, which is why PIF were waived in.

 

[TheBlueDune]

It would mean 9 clubs with significant American ownership.

And 14 needed to vote for changes in premier league rules.
Only 5 non-American needed.
End of relegation?
Salary cap?

 

[Impeccable One]

If there's going to be hotdogs and cheerleaders at least choose good quality sausages and cheerleaders

If there’s good quality cheerleaders, I’ll bring my best sausage

 

[Impeccable One]

What other flavours are there? :)

Mackerel ?

 

[Devil's Advocate]

The unspoken truth is that the Glazer family has benefitted incredibly from the rise of Manchester City.

When Abu Dhabi invest in Manchester City they are investing in English football and the glazer family own a significant stake in that business.

Newcastle will do the same, which is why PIF were waived in.

Very much so,

Brand Premier League has grown massively over the last 10 years and we are an integral part of that under the guise of Big 6 competiveness. PL TV revenues have tripled since Aguero 9320 and a big part of that is the rapid rise in international TV rights. Like night following day the huge worldwide TV exposure helps generate increased commercial deals for all the big clubs.
Then you have the knock-on impact on asset values.

So, yes a Big 7 will accelerate it further. It will be slower for Newcastle though because of PL financial rules rather than UEFA. Interesting though that the main outcry and resistance to Newcastle was from the middle clubs and not the usual suspects.

 

[idahoblues]

When Scotland and Norn iron go their own way you guys can become our 51st State, I’ll put a word on for you.
One thing, you have to drop those ridiculous accents

 

[bluethrunthru]

Inevitable when the pound is at almost parity with the dollar - English clubs in a rich competition looking like a good return on investment to American owners

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

"United, Liverpool, Spurs and Burnley all put pen to paper together in the letter to CAS (along with 4 other non-American clubs).​

Spurs are not American owned now or then and Burnely were not American owned at the time. So including them in a cabal of Americans seems pretty stupid to me. Newcastle and Everton also signed, not owned by Americans either.

So it had nothing to do with being American then, and everything to do with being the teams who would benefit from us being out of Europe.

United Liverpool and Arsenal were the main three clubs from this country who worked towards the set-up of the Super League.​

And City, Chelsea and Spurs jumped right in with them.

As for the 2017 photo, it just proves my point. The chairmen of 3 teams met before a PL vote. It wasn't all the American owners in the league and the vote was lost by the big 6 because the American owned Crystal Palace, Swansea City and Bournemouth voted against it. They aren't a voting bloc just because they have the same passports.


Also I don't think the Glazers or Stan Kroene are "Anti-emritati" at all. Have you ever heard the Glazers speak badly about any Arab owners? Or even oil money? Have you ever heard Ed Woodward go on a rant about it? Have you ever heard Kroenke say anything about them? Gazidis?



They obviously don't like the competition, but I don't think there is any grounds for calling them anti-emirati, and frankly they could have done a lot more since 2008 to stop new big money owners coming into the league or bringing in spending controls that would have hurt us more.

Have you ever heard the Glazer's speak up about any issue?

 

[warringtonblue]

And 14 needed to vote for changes in premier league rules.
Only 5 non-American needed.
End of relegation?
Salary cap?

You also need to consider that other clubs at the lower end of the premier league may vote in favour of scrapping relegation if they are on the right side of it