Shady new sponsorship for Newcastle

[Big Andy]

We don’t need inflated fake sponsorship deals, the club already generates enough on its own. What we need are owners who won’t keep stripping the club of money and resources, and a hard nosed business man like Ratcliffe isn’t that unfortunately.

And you've ascertained this how? ANY owner would be mad to take any money out of the club, it would immediately be a killer of the large amount of goodwill they'd generate from getting the Glazers out of the club. As long as the club is self sufficient, then we don't need the Middle Eastern money.

 

[Big Andy]

It's not, we're looking for about £40m I think.

The sooner football sorts itself out the better. Should be a salary cap. FFP based on revenue is total stupidity.

TeamViewer sponsorship is £47m per year for us.

 

[RoyH1]

UEFA doesn't care as long as there's money in it for them. Leeches like Ceferin just want their cut and as long as Middle Eastern oil is willing to pump money into the system, they don't care. And those that run the PL allow the investigations to mire in endless legalisms that oil states can lawyer their way out of.

We might as well accept that oil money is going to rule the roost for generations to come. The only clumsy attempt to stop that was the Superleague but the hysterical reaction to it means that's dead as well

 

[GazTheLegend]

My personal issue with this sort of shady shit is if you allow the door open a crack to cheat in one way, it's going to be broken down by the number of other clubs that follow suit.

And although it might be the slippery slope fallacy in my own mind, and you have to be careful with that logic, if a clubs willing to cheat in these ways (fake attendance figures, sponsorships, shell companies signing youth players like city did) what OTHER methods are they going to use to cheat? We have already seen how corruptible FIFA and UEFA can be with the world cups in Qatar and Russia. What about actual doping not just financial? Media bribery? Regulatory capture? Do we turn a blind eye to those issues as well, because City only got a 50k fine for their players missing doping tests. Will Newcastle suddenly "miss" them this season too?

I hate cheating with a passion in all its forms, lads, and I am somewhere on the Rorschach spectrum of totalitarianism when I think about what we should do in response to it. The only power we've got as fans is "not to watch" or play the game at all, unfortunately, and I wonder if that indifference will finally catch up to the sport.

 

[stw2022]

The difference between us, City and Newcastle is that regardless of who owns us we won't have to invent sponsorships

 

[The Urban Goose]

No one(those running the game) cares because everyone profits.

Ultimately it's fans who are to blame. As long as we continue to support and throw money at tickets, merchandise and subscriptions, and provide views for sponsors, nothing will change.

For years football has been a huge international money laundering racket but that is sufficiently divorced from our eyes that no-one cares. Now however the oil states are being blatant about their sportswashing and a few people raise objections, and some might even start switching off, but sadly the masses are too wedded to their football clubs that they'll carry on as usual and won't care that their local club is now an offshoot of a corrupt, medieval regime as long as a team with their home town in its name is doing better than another team with someone else's home town in its name.

We fans are fecking idiots and everyone knows it.

 

[Random Precision]

Does FFP consider that as their income for FFP? If yes that is quite ridiculous as it just sound like a way of creating accounting to force a revenue recognition as opposed to equity contribution by owners. As an accountant by profession, I'm surprised that has not been clamped down after city blatantly did that for decade.. FFP should exclude such income and only consider third part income that does not originated from the club majority shareholder.

There is nothing fair about FFP or FMV panels, it would be interesting to see a legal challenge as they could be ruled a restriction of trade.

 

[Steve Bruce]

Or, maybe it’s because they are owned by the same people who own the club? If we are owned by Qatar would you be fine with us getting 250 million a year from a Qatari company that’s owned by the state?

You do realise it's 25m Newcastle are getting, it's 15m less than spurs FFS.

If the deal is market value it's market value. This deal looks to me market value. If it where 50m+ then I'd agree with it being shady, but at this price point of 25m there's nothing to see here.

 

[RoadTrip]

If it’s not inflated, why did they not pick one of the other companies offering the same money?

If there were no other companies offering the same money, it is inflated.

Because a Saudi owned club wanted to advertise a Saudi company? I don’t know.

But a flawed assumption to assume if McDonalds offered the same money they would have been Newcastles preference.

Anyway, in my view this is not inflated. But I am also sure that this will be steadily increased in future with weird clauses that in turn make it eventually inflated.

 

[Josep Dowling]

It's not, we're looking for about £40m I think.

The sooner football sorts itself out the better. Should be a salary cap. FFP based on revenue is total stupidity.

Why should wealthy owners keep profits whilst the players on the pitch have their potential earnings capped? I’m all for finding solutions to make the game fairer but I don’t see how capping salaries would work.

Personally I think there should be a limit to the number of transfers you can make in one season so clubs can’t buy their way out of trouble like City did - say 4 signings max and the team must start with a couple of youth players in their squad. Have more focus towards clubs developing their own players by forcing them to use youth players in their 1st teams whilst at the same time stop City and Chelsea stockpiling the best youth players in this country and never using them.

They also need to tweak the homegrown rules because all that’s happening is the top clubs are signing English 3rd choice goalkeepers to meet the criteria. Or as City did this season sign an England starter then never use him.

 

[Mb194dc]

A salary cap would be at team level and have to be done through UEFA as well as by the PL. Football clubs need to have the possibility of being profitable, there's a balance.

It's not easy in a sport like football that has a legacy structure from when all clubs were quite even financially in the 19th century. That structure doesn't work well in the age of state owned and sugar daddy clubs.

Eventually it'll have to be addressed because it damages the entertainment and ultimately the money growth dries up probably making it even worse.

Newcastle are just the latest one. City and Newcastle so far are seemingly much better run than the US owned clubs as well. Even with controlls they'd do well, at least it'd be easier to catch them without losing billions of dollars in the process...

 

[Baneofthegame]

You do realise it's 25m Newcastle are getting, it's 15m less than spurs FFS.

If the deal is market value it's market value. This deal looks to me market value. If it where 50m+ then I'd agree with it being shady, but at this price point of 25m there's nothing to see here.

Its a 2.5x increase by a Saudi company? So for us that would be 100 million a year.

It’s not really the price anyway, more of it’s owned by the same people who own the club.

 

[Steve Bruce]

Its a 2.5x increase by a Saudi company? So for us that would be 100 million a year.

It’s not really the price anyway, more of it’s owned by the same people who own the club.

So what, Ashley owned Newcastle and sports direct sponsored the stadium.

Newcastle under Ashley wasn't run well and where a yoyo club and because of that sponsorships would be relatively low. Now they are champions league, it's natural that their would be a fairly steep increase.

Providing the sponsorships don't go the way of city where they are obviously inflated and Newcastles increase by what would be a reasonable market value then I don't see any issues with who sponsors them.

 

[CM]

Football's governing bodies really need to tighten up this loophole so no club can be sponsored by a company who has links to the club's owners. It's flagrant cheating, and very easy to rectify. I'm sure they'll continue to turn a blind eye to it until we have another Man City situation on our hands. It's all a bit sickening.

 

[crossy1686]

What’s the point of criticising Newcastle when more than half the forum wants the same for us?

We wouldn’t have to do the same, we already lead the market in sponsorship deals.

 

[miked99]

This might be a good thing. Because if it really is as blatant as it seems to be, then it might force the PL's hand to clamp down on city

 

[Random Precision]

Football's governing bodies really need to tighten up this loophole so no club can be sponsored by a company who has links to the club's owners. It's flagrant cheating, and very easy to rectify. I'm sure they'll continue to turn a blind eye to it until we have another Man City situation on our hands. It's all a bit sickening.

The more they bring in new rules the more likely it is that FFP and FMV are challenged in Court!!

 

[MDFC Manager]

It's not, we're looking for about £40m I think.

The sooner football sorts itself out the better. Should be a salary cap. FFP based on revenue is total stupidity.

Agreed, but there's easy ways around it. De Bruyne will be signed up by ADNOC as an ambassador, for example. How and who will regulate personal sponsorships?

 

[The Irish Connection]

To take over us will cost approximately 20x what Newcastle cost? We should be justified in claiming shirt sponsorship of 20x theirs. £500m is a nice round number too

Only being slightly facetious

Agree with this. I don’t see why INEOS couldn’t come in with a sponsor worth 200m per season or something, the value would be justified given the fan base.

Pity it could be ages before we get a resolution though.

 

[GMoore23]

Why should wealthy owners keep profits whilst the players on the pitch have their potential earnings capped? I’m all for finding solutions to make the game fairer but I don’t see how capping salaries would work.

Personally I think there should be a limit to the number of transfers you can make in one season so clubs can’t buy their way out of trouble like City did - say 4 signings max and the team must start with a couple of youth players in their squad. Have more focus towards clubs developing their own players by forcing them to use youth players in their 1st teams whilst at the same time stop City and Chelsea stockpiling the best youth players in this country and never using them.

They also need to tweak the homegrown rules because all that’s happening is the top clubs are signing English 3rd choice goalkeepers to meet the criteria. Or as City did this season sign an England starter then never use him.

The problem in football is the exploitation of fans who are too dumb to realise.
Players shouldn't be earning what they do and neither should the club owners.

Clubs release multiple kits every season at extortionate prices and ticket prices continue to rise
TV sports packages are ridiculous. Broadcasters bid obscene amounts for the tv rights then just burden the average Joe with the extra cost.
The government needs to bring in strict regulations but of course they won't.

Remember when young players were paid a basic salary and had to clean the senior players boots after games.
Those young players slacked off a lot less after making it because they knew how much effort it took to get there.

Now they're millionaires at 18. The whole game needs a reset.

 

[Scottynaldinho]

What’s the point of criticising Newcastle when more than half the forum wants the same for us?

I can see a lot of pillars going weak with this comment.

 

[NLunited]

What’s the point of criticising Newcastle when more than half the forum wants the same for us?

Yup. A majority are clamoring for our club to get ruined.

 

[Scottynaldinho]

A little research can go a long way. The company indeed have partnerships with local clubs, see the link from 6 years ago: https://www.behance.net/gallery/58786325/SELA-SPORT

Also, the company has a partnership with goal.com

Edit: The linkedin also seems legit and dates back to a few years.
https://www.linkedin.com/company/sela/posts/?feedView=all

 

[Cloud7]

I don’t think a salary cap will ever be a truly workable idea for a whole host of reasons.

The best way to attempt to create an even playing field is to put a cap on the amount of transfers a team is allowed. Let’s say for example for the football year you are allowed a total of 5 incoming and 5 outgoing players. This includes transfers, loans, whatever. No exceptions. With a hard limit like this it at least reduces hoarding of players to some extent, as well as using loans as loopholes.

If you have an injury crisis? Tough luck, get someone from your youth academy to fill in. That’s what they’re being prepared for.

 

[marktan]

We wouldn’t have to do the same, we already lead the market in sponsorship deals.

The whole point people want the Qataris is so the to can artificially pump money like all the other oil clubs

 

[JSArsenal]

The problem in football is the exploitation of fans who are too dumb to realise.
Players shouldn't be earning what they do and neither should the club owners.

Clubs release multiple kits every season at extortionate prices and ticket prices continue to rise
TV sports packages are ridiculous. Broadcasters bid obscene amounts for the tv rights then just burden the average Joe with the extra cost.
The government needs to bring in strict regulations but of course they won't.

Remember when young players were paid a basic salary and had to clean the senior players boots after games.
Those young players slacked off a lot less after making it because they knew how much effort it took to get there.

Now they're millionaires at 18. The whole game needs a reset.

My issue with a salary cap is that you're taking away money from the people who generate it (the players), the money that clubs save in salaries will just go into the owners' pockets. Billionaires getting richer and richer.

It is weird how fans are up in arms against players who actually go out and play the game, getting paid to do so, but no one says a word about how much money Sky, Nike/Adidas and the clubs are raking in.

I'd cap transfer fees or introduce a higher tax on transfer fees and club revenue, reinvest that into the community.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

A salary cap would be at team level and have to be done through UEFA as well as by the PL. Football clubs need to have the possibility of being profitable, there's a balance.

No they don’t.

 

[RuudTom83]

Meh, welcome to modern football. Ownerships creating shell companies to circumvent FFP.

Nothing new.

Yeah the whole FFP thing is just a road block that's not particular useful or helpful in any way...what is even the main purpose of its existence!

Owner with a shit tonne of money wants to spend it, FFP says no, ok I'll create a fake company and sponsor my club for 50 million, FFP says yes.

I'm not even sure if its a bad or good thing tbh...If a super rich owner wants to waste some of his wealth then so be it.

I only wish something was in place to stop the Glazers back when they came sniffing around.

 

[crossy1686]

The whole point people want the Qataris is so the to can artificially pump money like all the other oil clubs

I think you’re projecting what you think people want Qataris for.

I would suggest people want Qataris because we know for sure they won’t take any money out of the club and will do whatever possible to ensure the club is successful as they’re never going to look to make profit from the club in any way shape or form.

It would also mean massive amounts of club infrastructure development as opposed to more debt.

 

[Nickelodeon]

I think you’re projecting what you think people want Qataris for.

I would suggest people want Qataris because we know for sure they won’t take any money out of the club and will do whatever possible to ensure the club is successful as they’re never going to look to make profit from the club in any way shape or form.

It would also mean massive amounts of club infrastructure development as opposed to more debt.

The only reason we know that is because that’s not how sportswashers operate their clubs. They can’t afford to be bad owners because that negates the entire purpose of buying the club.

 

[Random Precision]

The only reason we know that is because that’s not how sportswashers operate their clubs. They can’t afford to be bad owners because that negates the entire purpose of buying the club.

Oh, so Newcastle are now being criticised for having “good owners” That’s a new one.

 

[Dannn411]

We don't need it no but that's what we will get with Qatar, we will be surrounded in this air of doubt and negativity all the time.

What the majority of posters thought about city yesterday and the death of football, we become a nail in that coffin.

I ain't arsed either way but people need to be aware of what they want.

Ha. Do you think City and Newcastle are being surrounded by an "air of doubt and negativity all the time"? Every media outlet is calling City the "greatest British team ever" and everyone is thrilled Newcastle are in the CL. This includes UEFA and FIFA btw.

Wake up and smell the coffee, nobody but a few members of red cafe and some people in the Premier League care about how either Newcastle or City have gotten where they are. Everybody is congratulating both clubs like they have done it on a fair and equal footing to everybody else. People have crowned Pep the best ever and Eddie Howe is getting shouts for manager of the season. Just like everyone congratulates Madrid, Barcelona and Bayern Munich for basically treating their leagues like Serfdoms for many decades.

The last 20 years has given everyone a brutal reminder that football is a cold hard business and not the vestige of the working class. You either adapt or you will fade away into obscurity. That's why we need to match the financial firepower of the European elite anyway we can or we will be permanently second rate soon enough.

 

[CornishReds]

As long as its fair value who cares.
We need to get our house in order first
Glazers out

 

[crossy1686]

The only reason we know that is because that’s not how sportswashers operate their clubs. They can’t afford to be bad owners because that negates the entire purpose of buying the club.

Exactly

 

[crossy1686]

Oh, so Newcastle are now being criticised for having “good owners” That’s a new one.

Insecure much? Talk about reading between lines that don’t exist.

 

[TsuWave]

Football is finished. It is what it is.

 

[The Corinthian]

Premier League: Clubs to vote on temporary ban on loaning players from teams under same ownership


Premier League clubs are to vote on a temporary ban stopping teams from loaning players from clubs under the same ownership in January.

The measure would block Newcastle from signing players from clubs also owned by Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund (PIF).
It comes amid rumours Newcastle want to sign former Wolves captain Ruben Neves from Saudi Pro League side Al-Hilal.

Clubs will vote at a shareholders meeting on 21 November.


Premier League: Clubs to vote on temporary ban on loaning players from teams under same ownership - BBC Sport

 

[Bwuk]

Shouldn’t even be up for debate imo. Just shouldn’t be allowed.

 

[Ish]

A Toon supporting mate this morning goes on about "how no one cared when Watford and Udinese were doing it....just shows how rattled the big 6 are"

Yeah, the supporters of these clubs (City, Toon, PSG etc) don't really care one bit about any of the politics behind it, do they?

 

[Castia]

PL refs going over and doing games in Saudi is a massive red flag I can’t believe that happens. Refs literally getting paid by the same owners of Newcastle….who suddenly seem to be on TV every week (on again Sat night btw)

Games gone