Unpopular opinion - FFP shouldn’t be a thing. People should be able to invest in whatever they want.Ridiculous how clubs can cheat their way around ffp rules.
Ashley plastered Sports Direct round their stadium for years and nobody was botheredThey've got a new shirt sponsor for £25m a season. Company barely existing a few months ago, just a holding page for a website, and now a website that doesn't work
Must just be a coincidence that said sponsor is owned by the clubs owners
How is this shit allowed?
Unpopular opinion - FFP shouldn’t be a thing. People should be able to invest in whatever they want.
What should happen is that clubs shouldn’t be given loans. If an owner wishes to invest it should be by way of gifts
I don't have a problem with whatever way clubs fund themselves as rules will always be bent, I do however have a big problem with parachute payments, you take the risk and take it on the chin when relegated.Unpopular opinion - FFP shouldn’t be a thing. People should be able to invest in whatever they want.
What should happen is that clubs shouldn’t be given loans. If an owner wishes to invest it should be by way of gifts
Not unpopular here... it's the only way most clubs have grown in the past, after all!Unpopular opinion - FFP shouldn’t be a thing. People should be able to invest in whatever they want.
What should happen is that clubs shouldn’t be given loans. If an owner wishes to invest it should be by way of gifts
Really? Think there was plenty of Newcastle supporters that weren't too keen on it. Surely you can see the difference between someone using a club they own for cheap advertising and the current owners paying massively over market value.Ashley plastered Sports Direct round their stadium for years and nobody was bothered
What I mean is Ashley plastered SD all over Newcastle’s ground when he was their owner and no one else was really bothered - their current owner have links to their new shirt sponsor and all of a sudden it’s a disgraceReally? Think there was plenty of Newcastle supporters that weren't too keen on it. Surely you can see the difference between someone using a club they own for cheap advertising and the current owners paying massively over market value.
I don't really fancy being bankrolled by oppressive dictatorships, arms dealers or people traffickers tbh.Like it or not we’d absolutely love to come into the money Newcastle have
I shall not pretend I wouldn't enjoy wealthy owners but I've always found Man City particularly distasteful. Even taking away the moral background of the owners, the way they can destroy competition while breaking rule after rule and get away with it... the thing that irks me the most is that they've basically just become a plastic, tourist club. Would genuinely hate that.I don't really fancy being bankrolled by oppressive dictatorships, arms dealers or people traffickers tbh.
Tbf those rules are there to protect the status quo and ensure other dubious monied owners have their 'Investments' protected. I don't care if owners pump as much as they like in, the source is maybe an issue.I shall not pretend I wouldn't enjoy wealthy owners but I've always found Man City particularly distasteful. Even taking away the moral background of the owners, the way they can destroy competition while breaking rule after rule and get away with it... the thing that irks me the most is that they've basically just become a plastic, tourist club. Would genuinely hate that.
Newcastle and City can suck it.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
Not many billionaires are going to be squeaky clean are they but obviously some are significantly worse characters than others.Tbf those rules are there to protect the status quo and ensure other dubious monied owners have their 'Investments' protected. I don't care if owners pump as much as they like in, the source is maybe an issue.
Although I look down the list of football club owners and it's a struggle to find many who are ethical and principled!
I don't really fancy being bankrolled by oppressive dictatorships, arms dealers or people traffickers tbh.
100% - the only reason the likes of United, Real Madrid etc complain is becuase it’s making it more difficult the more teams that can financially compete with themTbf those rules are there to protect the status quo and ensure other dubious monied owners have their 'Investments' protected. I don't care if owners pump as much as they like in, the source is maybe an issue.
Although I look down the list of football club owners and it's a struggle to find many who are ethical and principled!
Man United who are now spreading their cheeks for Qatari ownership by the way*100% - the only reason the likes of United, Real Madrid etc complain is becuase it’s making it more difficult the more teams that can financially compete with them
Not for me Alex, and I would imagine, a good number of our fans would not want to be bankrolled by a country with a poor human rights record, although some fans would not be bothered. I quite like my club being well run, and not taking some dodgy sovereign wealth fund money. Newcastle taking shed loads of money from a country that hacked to pieces a dissenting journalist, is beyond the pale for me.What I mean is Ashley plastered SD all over Newcastle’s ground when he was their owner and no one else was really bothered - their current owner have links to their new shirt sponsor and all of a sudden it’s a disgrace
Everyone is a human rights expert until it happens to their club, or there is a World Cup in Qatar or the F1/Boxing takes place in Riyadh - Like it or not we’d absolutely love to come into the money Newcastle have
Exactly this.Not for me Alex, and I would imagine, a good number of our fans would not want to be bankrolled by a country with a poor human rights record, although some fans would not be bothered. I quite like my club being well run, and not taking some dodgy sovereign wealth fund money. Newcastle taking shed loads of money from a country that hacked to pieces a dissenting journalist, is beyond the pale for me.
And as someone above said - successive governments and royals have been best mates with them for years.Not for me Alex, and I would imagine, a good number of our fans would not want to be bankrolled by a country with a poor human rights record, although some fans would not be bothered. I quite like my club being well run, and not taking some dodgy sovereign wealth fund money. Newcastle taking shed loads of money from a country that hacked to pieces a dissenting journalist, is beyond the pale for me.
Now seems to have surfaced that the PIF is also an investor in Clearlake Capital, majority owner of Chelsea. Surely can’t be allowed?
And as someone above said - successive governments and royals have been best mates with them for years.
why should our football club be above all that? I’d welcome a sheikh with open arms
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?