christiffa25 Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 The cynic in me does wonder at there not being a peep of a takeover in over a decade of searching 24/7, but now that Kenwright is rumoured to be seriously ill not one, but two!, potential buyers are found relatively easily. One would almost think they hadn't been looking until now... . It's the new TV money mate. It's that huge, it now makes us a very good money making investment even if they did naff all to take us forward. Which to me is a worry! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christiffa25 Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 I'd imagine the Americans plan would be to buy now, invest to build a stadium then sell for profit. Working the same way as we are now in regards to transfers etc. Can't see them here for the long run to make us title contenders or anything like that unfortunately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogsy Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 So saying they did take us over , that would probably be in the summer? How long till we get a new stadium do you think(if they are serious), by the time they find a site, planning, and then building, two seasons away? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 The point is they have been bleating about Kenwright and the board for years and have accused them of being crooks and liars , so what have they got to lose even if the potential new owners are crooks ? They have laughed when people said be careful what you wish for and now suddenly that's exactly what they are preaching , so yeah I find it a touch hypocritical Who in particular? Personally I feel that for so many years we have had stories of "no buyers", then due to unfortunate circumstances and and a "must sell" situation we now have a buyer waiting in the wings with some dubious previous history. Maybe it's just a coincidence... Pretty much what Romey said really. However, Bills health means out of respect I will leave it at this... Let's hope he gets better, enjoys retirement and watches us go from strength to strength. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makis Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Can't think of any unless you count Kroenke as one. He only owns part of Arsenal, tho. Well, Glazers have been succesful despite that all, but I'd say the juggernaut that is Manchester United's marketing has been the reason, not the Glazers. Lerner at Villa, Ellis at Sunderland, the RS debacle with two owners, Cardiff, Fulham, Millwall, QPR. Not a particularly good list that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shukes Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 So, basically, unless they accept any crook as a buyer they are hypocrites? Are they crooks? From what I have read they are solid business men and improved the last club greatly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makis Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Are they crooks? From what I have read they are solid business men and improved the last club greatly. They might well transfer the 200 million loan onto the club and then use club's income to pay it off. Which would mean very limited funds for any managers for the next decade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shukes Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 That's true but just speculation. They did work hard to get in good investment for the last club and build a stadium. They left them in a better situation than when they brought them. If they brought us, funded a new stadium then sold us....would that be so bad? Again just speculation as we don't know any of thier plans. All I know is that we need investment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFC-Paul Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 (edited) All if's but's and maybe's Although the list of American investment doesn't bode well this is a different era the money in the game has risen exponentially and I'm one for not tarnishing all with the same brush When the Arabs took over City and Abramovich Chelsea nearly every post or word spoken was its a play thing they will run them into mass dept and once they are board they will scarper.... Hasn't happened the point is we have no clue what plans these men have as no body did back then or if it will even come off We need investment simple and if there was a rich Arab out there they would have been in for us by now the fact is with the stadium issue us owning very little we are not as appealing as some would hope Although Kenwright is ill I doubt he would snap the first suitors hand off without putting the clubs best interests first, as much as I've slated the man in the past for lack of momentum and so on he deserves credit in that regard They have very little play in terms of asset stripping we own practically nothing as it stands and the players as previously stated are not part of the bid as such the likely scenario IMO is if they do come in is build a new stadium increase revenue streams and turn us into a much more appealing investment I really can't see them coming in doing us over staying at the old girl and just milking the new money that's coming in Edited February 9, 2016 by EFC-Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Of course the players aren't part of the bid but I fail to see how that means they couldn't or wouldn't sell them to make a quick wedge of money. I'm not saying that's what they'd do but just because they're not included in the £200m price tag means absolutely nothing in that regard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFC-Paul Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Of course the players aren't part of the bid but I fail to see how that means they couldn't or wouldn't sell them to make a quick wedge of money. I'm not saying that's what they'd do but just because they're not included in the £200m price tag means absolutely nothing in that regard. I know that mate I was just putting it out there as some posts seemed to say otherwise if you get my drift Your right though they could well do that I just cant see it happening theres far more money to be made if a clubs successful pushing for Europe etc then there would be asset stripping it then doing a runner If we owned a modern stadium training facilities etc then I'd be slightly more worried but the way it stands they would more than likely go down the route I stated above.... Hopefully Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 I'm hoping that the American connection goes the way of Spurs and the NFL ties : http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000500560/article/nfl-tottenham-hotspur-ink-10year-stadium-partnership http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11675/9906697/tottenham-announce-partnership-with-nfl-to-host-two-games-a-year If we could get the first NFL franchise up north using our stadium, the income for the club and surrounding areas could be massive! I imagine it would also help pay towards the build of a new stadium too. Lowensda 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makis Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 That's true but just speculation. They did work hard to get in good investment for the last club and build a stadium. They left them in a better situation than when they brought them. If they brought us, funded a new stadium then sold us....would that be so bad? Again just speculation as we don't know any of thier plans. All I know is that we need investment. Padres turned into the worst team in the league while they owned the club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sibdane Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Padres turned into the worst team in the league while they owned the club.They were also probably the worst team in the league before they took over. They actually came close to winning a championship under their ownership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Padres turned into the worst team in the league while they owned the club. wasn't it his divorce under californian law that created the issue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanmckenzieismagic Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 (edited) They could be even worse crooks for starters. And you are simply putting every anti-board person in the same group which is frankly so ridiculous that I don't know if I should laugh or be angry that I even replied to such stupidity. When have I even intimated that? There are plenty of people who are anti-board who are quite capable of rational thought, I am referring to the knobheads who get all abusive if you have the audacity to have a different opinion to them. It wasn't long ago that if you mentioned the phrase " be careful what you wish for " then you instantly got labelled " a happy clapper " My problem with the Buffon Union isn't really with the people at the top its more to do with the neanderthal goons that tended to follow them Edited February 9, 2016 by duncanmckenzieismagic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markjazzbassist Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Lerner had a go, but was unlucky that he fell for MONS reputation. Since then the Prem has grown too rich to compete at the top and he has tried to manage his losses and sell. Villa are now relegation bound. Glazers mounted the club with debt and basically got the club for free. Without Uniteds huge revenue streams this type of takeover would kill most clubs. Liverpool were saved from one disastrous takeover, and currently have Jordan Henderson as captain. Has there been many successful takeovers from the US? Stan Kroenke at Arsenal. They have a new stadium that's paid for and have little to no debt for a club their size. They've done very well. But you're right they are the outlier, makis named a bunch of other teams that have all tanked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeQuince Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Padres turned into the worst team in the league while they owned the club. I don't know how familiar you are with baseball. So, I'll break it down like this: it is very, very, very difficult to make the postseason and the teams he put together did it several times in his tenure. Things also change quickly. My team, the Detroit Tigers had a record-breaking losing season in 2003. Then, 3 years later, with the same owner and general manager, they went to the World Series. We've had solid seasons and shit seasons since then. One year the team looks inspiring, the next year someone else passes them by. Everybody has someone to blame. Ownership is the simple solution for fans. http://m.mlb.com/news/article/36813722/ As this link shows, there's also a totally different perspective on what Moores did for the Padres and San Diego during his ownership. You can never really be sure about trusting the loudest segment of the fan base when it comes to talking about owners. If people only listened to vocal fans' assertions about Kenwright, they would think he was the great Satan. We know that his ownership of the club isn't a single narrative. efc1111, chicagoblue and MikeO 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 I don't know how familiar you are with baseball. So, I'll break it down like this: it is very, very, very difficult to make the postseason and the teams he put together did it several times in his tenure. Things also change quickly. My team, the Detroit Tigers had a record-breaking losing season in 2003. Then, 3 years later, with the same owner and general manager, they went to the World Series. We've had solid seasons and shit seasons since then. One year the team looks inspiring, the next year someone else passes them by. Everybody has someone to blame. Ownership is the simple solution for fans. http://m.mlb.com/news/article/36813722/ As this link shows, there's also a totally different perspective on what Moores did for the Padres and San Diego during his ownership. You can never really be sure about trusting the loudest segment of the fan base when it comes to talking about owners. If people only listened to vocal fans' assertions about Kenwright, they would think he was the great Satan. We know that his ownership of the club isn't a single narrative. Interesting take on it that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 When have I even intimated that? There are plenty of people who are anti-board who are quite capable of rational thought, I am referring to the knobheads who get all abusive if you have the audacity to have a different opinion to them. It wasn't long ago that if you mentioned the phrase " be careful what you wish for " then you instantly got labelled " a happy clapper " My problem with the Buffon Union isn't really with the people at the top its more to do with the neanderthal goons that tended to follow them It was only seconds ago that anyone who wasn't at the top of the buffoon union who followed them was a neanderthal goon. Personally I think they served their purpose well - "a means to an end" like Chris Samuelson (remember him). They brought the spotlight on some things that needed addressing however crass the means of doing so AGM's etc etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lowensda Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 I don't know how familiar you are with baseball. So, I'll break it down like this: it is very, very, very difficult to make the postseason and the teams he put together did it several times in his tenure. Things also change quickly. My team, the Detroit Tigers had a record-breaking losing season in 2003. Then, 3 years later, with the same owner and general manager, they went to the World Series. We've had solid seasons and shit seasons since then. One year the team looks inspiring, the next year someone else passes them by. Everybody has someone to blame. Ownership is the simple solution for fans. http://m.mlb.com/news/article/36813722/ As this link shows, there's also a totally different perspective on what Moores did for the Padres and San Diego during his ownership. You can never really be sure about trusting the loudest segment of the fan base when it comes to talking about owners. If people only listened to vocal fans' assertions about Kenwright, they would think he was the great Satan. We know that his ownership of the club isn't a single narrative. Wow. That paints him in an entirely different light to what i've read so far. Thanks for posting Joe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makis Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 I don't know how familiar you are with baseball. So, I'll break it down like this: it is very, very, very difficult to make the postseason and the teams he put together did it several times in his tenure. Things also change quickly. My team, the Detroit Tigers had a record-breaking losing season in 2003. Then, 3 years later, with the same owner and general manager, they went to the World Series. We've had solid seasons and shit seasons since then. One year the team looks inspiring, the next year someone else passes them by. Everybody has someone to blame. Ownership is the simple solution for fans. http://m.mlb.com/news/article/36813722/ As this link shows, there's also a totally different perspective on what Moores did for the Padres and San Diego during his ownership. You can never really be sure about trusting the loudest segment of the fan base when it comes to talking about owners. If people only listened to vocal fans' assertions about Kenwright, they would think he was the great Satan. We know that his ownership of the club isn't a single narrative. Baseball is the most boring sport in the world, so I'm not familiar with it at all. I've been to a match and I understood why yanks are so fat. Eating unhealthy food and drinking large quantities of beer is the only way to make that experience bearable. My info on Padres came from an article written by a fan but unfortunately I can't find it anymore, but here's another: http://sidespin.kinja.com/the-padres-suck-heres-why-472930403 chicagoblue 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shukes Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Read that again...same that was posted earlier. So he brought them, rehoused then, brought success, then sold them for ten times what he brought them for..after securing a lucrative TV deal... Sounds terrible ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makis Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 He also took a lot of the TV money with him. He had the right to do it, mind, but I bet Everton fans would be pissed if he did the same here. This guy was also said to be one of the greediest CEO's in USA by Forbes. And of course the new stadium was paid with public money - something that is not going to happen with Everton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFC-Paul Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 The stadium was partly funded by the local authority wasn't it although maybe the majority of it? As Shukes has said on paper when you take the anti American investment glasses off they "could" do a similar thing here which if they did would only make us more investable a sort of win win both ends At the end of the day we have no clue if it'll come off or what they'd have in mind so I'll just play it by ear for now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 He also took a lot of the TV money with him. He had the right to do it, mind, but I bet Everton fans would be pissed if he did the same here. This guy was also said to be one of the greediest CEO's in USA by Forbes. And of course the new stadium was paid with public money - something that is not going to happen with Everton.but he wouldn't be able to take the TV money with him under FA rules, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shukes Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 but he wouldn't be able to take the TV money with him under FA rules, right? Yes, UK law is a little different when it comes to asset stripping I'm led to believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
London Blue Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Only id he did what Yes, UK law is a little different when it comes to asset stripping I'm led to believe. Only if he did what the Glaziers and that Tawt at Blackpool did and pay themselves millions. Even then they wouldn't be able to take all of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 Im with D:ream on this. Things can only get better. So what if they are in it for a bit of profit. If they come in, build a stadium, sell on, we still get a new stadium. They need the results to create the profit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanmckenzieismagic Posted February 9, 2016 Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 It was only seconds ago that anyone who wasn't at the top of the buffoon union who followed them was a neanderthal goon. Personally I think they served their purpose well - "a means to an end" like Chris Samuelson (remember him). They brought the spotlight on some things that needed addressing however crass the means of doing so AGM's etc etc I wouldn't have gone that far myself , but I do agree that they have some right dickheads following them. You only have to think back to some of the Buffoonisms that came out, like " happy clapper" to realise what arrogant tits they are MikeO and Matt 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.