Come here to laugh at Nu-Castle

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Jenny Talia said:
I don't see how the Premier League can take the political issues on board.
If the UK government has maintained relations with Saudi Arabia then is the Chairman of the Premier League, whoever that is, supposed to make foreign policy?
Click to expand...
Exactly, as he's said
"I write in reply to your letter on April 20 concerning the putative takeover of Newcastle United FC by a company based in Saudi Arabia.
You will appreciate that these matters are often subject to media speculations but at their heart are due processes required by UK law and by the Premier League's own rules, which can't be conducted in public and on which we can't comment.

However, I can assure you that these processes go beyond those required by UK company Law and they are applied with equal rigour to every single prospective purchase of a Premier League club."
 
This Fish said:
Exactly, as he's said
"I write in reply to your letter on April 20 concerning the putative takeover of Newcastle United FC by a company based in Saudi Arabia.
You will appreciate that these matters are often subject to media speculations but at their heart are due processes required by UK law and by the Premier League's own rules, which can't be conducted in public and on which we can't comment.

However, I can assure you that these processes go beyond those required by UK company Law and they are applied with equal rigour to every single prospective purchase of a Premier League club."
Click to expand...

Exactly, for a company outside football you wouldn’t expect a takeover to be blocked because the buyers were Saudi Arabia. Subsequently it’s hard to justify blocking it in this instance.

The only difference is it’s high profile nature but that’s not justification.

I’m not in favour but you can’t be selective
 
This takeover is everything that is wrong with football today..

People talk about history and grass roots.. What have a bunch of foreigners, who know nothing about football got to do with the North East or Newcastle?
They have ridiculous amounts of money gained from people suffering and now want to use that money to buy sporting success.

Enjoy your Ill gotten wealth but remember you are selling 130 years of history and 130 years of what Newcastle United are all about all for a bit of fake success.
 
When this goes through there will be 4 Premier League clubs with only British owners: Brighton, Burnley, Norwich and Spurs.
The first 3 could realistically go bankrupt if football does shut down for the season.
We could be the last man standing.
 
Jenny Talia said:
Can't be arsed to dig into who owns 4 or 5 per cent of Burnley and Norwich so OK, maybe we are already the last man standing.
Click to expand...


Brighton main owner owns 75%. Other 25% made up of other investors/shareholders
Burnley main owners own 78% Other 22% made up of other investors/shareholders
Norwich main owners own 68%. Other 32% made up of other investors/shareholders.
 
SouthStand Billy said:
Brighton main owner owns 75%. Other 25% made up of other investors/shareholders
Burnley main owners own 78% Other 22% made up of other investors/shareholders
Norwich main owners own 68%. Other 32% made up of other investors/shareholders.
Click to expand...
But if a single investor made up more than say 10 per cent of the residual shareholding it would be very easy to find that information with a quick google. An investor with a significant holding would almost certainly have a representative on the Board for example. So I think it is likely that the "other" percent is made up of multiple small investments.
I have no idea what your point is here, but hey ho.
 
Jenny Talia said:
But if a single investor made up more than say 10 per cent of the residual shareholding it would be very easy to find that information with a quick google. An investor with a significant holding would almost certainly have a representative on the Board for example. So I think it is likely that the "other" percent is made up of multiple small investments.
I have no idea what your point is here, but hey ho.
Click to expand...

You said only 4 clubs are all British owners .. I pointed out West Ham also are but due to 10% American they are not.. but the 4 you mentioned also have other investors which are not British so West Ham are as much under British ownership as the others are.:mourfacepalm:

Wikipedia will only have the names of the shareholders they know of, the figures I posted shows the outstanding percentage of unknown investors..
The only difference is they know who owns the other 10% of West Ham shareholders.
 
Last edited:
SouthStand Billy said:
You said only 4 clubs are all British owners .. I pointed out West Ham also are but due to 10% American they are not.. but the 4 you mentioned also have other investors which are not British so West Ham are as much under British ownership as the others are.:mourfacepalm:

Wikipedia will only have the names of the shareholders they know of, the figures I posted shows the outstanding percentage of unknown investors..
The only difference is they know who owns the other 10% of West Ham shareholders.
Click to expand...
It's cobblers, but whatever. Life's too short.
 
SouthStand Billy said:
Not really, valid points against your claim there are 4 clubs with ALL British owners..
Click to expand...
OK, if you insist.

1. Wikipedia says all Burnley shareholders are local.
2. Brighton publish a full list of shareholders. Nobody other than Bloom owns more than 1.5 per cent, the other Directors are all British. It is possible that among the people with shareholdings of fractions of one per cent there is somebody with a foreign passport, but if you think that has any relevance you are even more pedantic than you seem.
3. Norwich Board of Directors are all British, so if there are any shareholders that own more than a tiny fraction of the shares they do not exercise any influence at all in the club.

By any normal definition these clubs are all British owned. Together with us that makes 4.

4. The minority shareholder at West Ham is represented on the Board. He represents a US company that owns 10 per cent, he is American, his name is Albert Smith, and he is a billionaire. He has a meaningful input into decisions at the club.

Nothing personal, but I think my enjoyment of the forum will improve with you on ignore.
 
Jenny Talia said:
OK, if you insist.

1. Wikipedia says all Burnley shareholders are local.
2. Brighton publish a full list of shareholders. Nobody other than Bloom owns more than 1.5 per cent, the other Directors are all British. It is possible that among the people with shareholdings of fractions of one per cent there is somebody with a foreign passport, but if you think that has any relevance you are even more pedantic than you seem.
3. Norwich Board of Directors are all British, so if there are any shareholders that own more than a tiny fraction of the shares they do not exercise any influence at all in the club.

By any normal definition these clubs are all British owned. Together with us that makes 4.

4. The minority shareholder at West Ham is represented on the Board. He represents a US company that owns 10 per cent, he is American, his name is Albert Smith, and he is a billionaire. He has a meaningful input into decisions at the club.

Nothing personal, but I think my enjoyment of the forum will improve with you on ignore.
Click to expand...

Being on the board of Directors doesn't mean you are an owner..
Wikipedia also says that Karren Brady was responsible for the greatest football migration ever,

My life will change forever if you put me on ignore I am sure..

Oh and :harrysmile:
 
Last edited:
Jenny Talia said:
When this goes through there will be 4 Premier League clubs with only British owners: Brighton, Burnley, Norwich and Spurs.
The first 3 could realistically go bankrupt if football does shut down for the season.
We could be the last man standing.
Click to expand...
Including West ham ,Palace , Spurs,Brighton, Burnley, Norwich ( Newcastle) are pretty shit under British owners dude. That lot ain't got squidly diddly chance .They all win fuck all.
It looks like foreign owners are the way to go if you want to win trophies , thank you for highlighting brother.
 
Chester/ Yukon said:
Including West ham ,Palace , Spurs,Brighton, Burnley, Norwich ( Newcastle) are pretty shit under British owners dude. That lot ain't got squidly diddly chance .They all win fuck all.
It looks like foreign owners are the way to go if you want to win trophies , thank you for highlighting brother.
Click to expand...
National pride but no trophies.
 
Chester/ Yukon said:
Including West ham ,Palace , Spurs,Brighton, Burnley, Norwich ( Newcastle) are pretty shit under British owners dude. That lot ain't got squidly diddly chance .They all win fuck all.
It looks like foreign owners are the way to go if you want to win trophies , thank you for highlighting brother.
Click to expand...

"West ham ,Palace , Spurs, Brighton, Burnley, Norwich, Newcastle."

Of course we're not at all conspicuous as part of a list boasting that calibre of yo-yo shitness.

.....Maybe if we got owners like Everton, Southampton, Bournemouth or maybe Watford we could expect to be rinsing the trophies instead.

Maybe we would be in love with our owners as much as the Gooners are.

#TenuousDigs. :pochunimpressed:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom