Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Arsenal news and interviews
Discuss anything Arsenal related, players, tactics etc.

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby DiamondGooner » Sat Oct 16, 2021 6:05 pm

theHotHead wrote:The Newcastle purchase makes perfect sense, the club won't take much to buy, they have a great stadium already and numerous and fanatical support. Everything is in place for them to become a top level club.


This.

If you have the inbuilt fan numbers, they already have a stadium which just needs a touch up and it costs less than to buy an Arsenal or Liverpool, once they get the players which you have to do at any club, then they'll have everything in place for less than half the cost.

It cost them £300m to buy Newcastle, Daniel Ek is offering £2 billion for Arsenal.

Do the maths, the growth potential for the Newcastle buy is tremendous, in the next 8 years they could become a £2 billion valued club.

Its a wonderful bit of business, very smart, in fact they practically chose the perfect club, maybe not as good as the Chelsea purchase by Abramovich because the Chelsea location is far better but other than that, Newcastle practically have the North East all to themselves.

Abramovich bought Chelsea for £140m back in 2003 - They're now the 6th most valuable club worth £2.13 Billion.

Now compare that to sht investments we get offered as regular folk, stocks and shares in companies where the higher ups pull the plug on the stock market whenever they want.
Image
User avatar
DiamondGooner
SE13
SE13
 
Posts: 27364
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:35 am
Location: At the Gucci store

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby Özim » Sat Oct 16, 2021 6:24 pm

Yeah agreed, Newcastle is a great buy, Arsenal just isn’t good value for money, 2 billion+ for a club who haven’t won a title for 17 years and have never won the CL and laughing in midtable isn’t a good price.

Probably why we don’t have a lot of options right now, Kroenke or Eck, but the latter isn’t that rich in terms of football billionaires.

From a business and football point of view Newcastle are a great buy, Arsenal would have to halve in value to be a decent buy, because it’s just not worth the 2 billion it’s valued at.
Özim
David Rocastle
David Rocastle
 
Posts: 5080
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:26 pm

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby theHotHead » Sat Oct 16, 2021 6:34 pm

Power n Glory wrote:
NovaGB wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:
NovaGB wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:
NovaGB wrote:I always wonder why these arabs and oil tycoons keep buying shitey clubs with no history and don't revive fallen giants like Everton and VIlla etc (or us) it still looks weird to me seeing Chelshit and Man City always up the top


Both Everton and Villa are owners by super rich billionaire tycoons as well.


Yeah but they don't do that mad FFP dodging crazy spending like City and Chelsea over the last 10-15 years


City and Cheslea got in early before the FFP rules were applied and have been to get their ducks in order to cover their tracks now that they have to follow certain guidelines. I also think they've gathered enough power and leverage to continue taking the piss and only take a slap on the wrist for breaching any rules. I think they may come down harder on teams that try to pull the same stunt today. We'll see. With COViD hurting football revenues, I have a feeling rules will be relaxed for outside investments.


For someone who only just really watches the arsenal and england games these days i don't know how the hell PSG are getting away with ffp


Good lawyers. It's nuts. I think they have tried to clamp down on them before but nothing happened. Lawyers dealt with it.

Are there 2 levels of FFP, what the Premier League have and what UEFA have, or is it just UEFA that have FFP rules?

As soon as it came out I knew it would be circumnavigated easily, think about it, UEFA have revenues of circa €£3.5bn, the PSG dude has £6bn, Man City dude has £23bn, Newcastle's consortium have £320bn :rofll:

Any rules UEFA come up with the clubs will get the best lawyers and crush UEFA, thats a dick swinging competition UEFA will back out of.
User avatar
theHotHead
Arsène Wenger
Arsène Wenger
 
Posts: 13182
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby theHotHead » Sat Oct 16, 2021 6:41 pm

Özim wrote:Yeah agreed, Newcastle is a great buy, Arsenal just isn’t good value for money, 2 billion+ for a club who haven’t won a title for 17 years and have never won the CL and laughing in midtable isn’t a good price.

Probably why we don’t have a lot of options right now, Kroenke or Eck, but the latter isn’t that rich in terms of football billionaires.

From a business and football point of view Newcastle are a great buy, Arsenal would have to halve in value to be a decent buy, because it’s just not worth the 2 billion it’s valued at.

Is that 2 billion for the club or for Arsenal Football Club Holdings, or whatever they are called ? If so its not just the club its the other interests outside of football that contribute to the value.
User avatar
theHotHead
Arsène Wenger
Arsène Wenger
 
Posts: 13182
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby Highbury Hillbilly » Sat Oct 16, 2021 7:02 pm

This is the reason I'd be skeptical of a Daniel Ek takeover effort.

No owner that's serious about winning trophies would risk £3bn on Arsenal in its current state. I can see him financing it via private equity, so he puts in a fraction of his own cash and pays him and his consortium partners tens of millions in dividends.

FSG bought Liverpool for a piddling £300m 10 years ago. That's a bargain considering the club's status in English football. It also allowed them to invest heavily straight away and recruit the right managers and coaches.

Arsenal meanwhile haven't been in CL for 5 years, and are going backwards despite buying half of a new team each summer. That valuation doesn't make sense to anybody except PE vultures.
Highbury Hillbilly
Bertie Mee
Bertie Mee
 
Posts: 9709
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:43 am

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby Özim » Sat Oct 16, 2021 7:07 pm

theHotHead wrote:
Özim wrote:Yeah agreed, Newcastle is a great buy, Arsenal just isn’t good value for money, 2 billion+ for a club who haven’t won a title for 17 years and have never won the CL and laughing in midtable isn’t a good price.

Probably why we don’t have a lot of options right now, Kroenke or Eck, but the latter isn’t that rich in terms of football billionaires.

From a business and football point of view Newcastle are a great buy, Arsenal would have to halve in value to be a decent buy, because it’s just not worth the 2 billion it’s valued at.

Is that 2 billion for the club or for Arsenal Football Club Holdings, or whatever they are called ? If so its not just the club its the other interests outside of football that contribute to the value.


What other interests do you mean, I’m not familiar?

I assume it’s for the club,

Our commercial deals aren’t all that compared to other clubs due to our lack of success in the last 17 years.
Özim
David Rocastle
David Rocastle
 
Posts: 5080
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:26 pm

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby Özim » Sat Oct 16, 2021 7:10 pm

Highbury Hillbilly wrote:This is the reason I'd be skeptical of a Daniel Ek takeover effort.

No owner that's serious about winning trophies would risk £3bn on Arsenal in its current state. I can see him financing it via private equity, so he puts in a fraction of his own cash and pays him and his consortium partners tens of millions in dividends.

FSG bought Liverpool for a piddling £300m 10 years ago. That's a bargain considering the club's status in English football. It also allowed them to invest heavily straight away and recruit the right managers and coaches.

Arsenal meanwhile haven't been in CL for 5 years, and are going backwards despite buying half of a new team each summer. That valuation doesn't make sense to anybody except PE vultures.


Yeah I just don’t get Arsenals’ value, our commercial deals are nothing special, we’ve not have any real success for years, we’re a midtable team, we’re also not gaining fans like we use to, generally kids prefer the winning teams like City and Chelsea etc (likewise fans abroad).

Where does that value come from, it doesn’t make sense and doesn’t make us attractive to a potential buyer.
Özim
David Rocastle
David Rocastle
 
Posts: 5080
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:26 pm

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby NovaGB » Sat Oct 16, 2021 8:54 pm

DiamondGooner wrote:
theHotHead wrote:The Newcastle purchase makes perfect sense, the club won't take much to buy, they have a great stadium already and numerous and fanatical support. Everything is in place for them to become a top level club.


This.

If you have the inbuilt fan numbers, they already have a stadium which just needs a touch up and it costs less than to buy an Arsenal or Liverpool, once they get the players which you have to do at any club, then they'll have everything in place for less than half the cost.

It cost them £300m to buy Newcastle, Daniel Ek is offering £2 billion for Arsenal.

Do the maths, the growth potential for the Newcastle buy is tremendous, in the next 8 years they could become a £2 billion valued club.

Its a wonderful bit of business, very smart, in fact they practically chose the perfect club, maybe not as good as the Chelsea purchase by Abramovich because the Chelsea location is far better but other than that, Newcastle practically have the North East all to themselves.

Abramovich bought Chelsea for £140m back in 2003 - They're now the 6th most valuable club worth £2.13 Billion.

Now compare that to sht investments we get offered as regular folk, stocks and shares in companies where the higher ups pull the plug on the stock market whenever they want.


I get the points but they are worth like 300 odd bn, they ain't in it to make money cos to make them a decent team it will cost them way more than they will earn, its a play thing.

How much has Abramovich and the City owners spent? must be a few billion
NovaGB
Thierry Henry
Thierry Henry
 
Posts: 1464
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 8:45 pm

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby theHotHead » Sun Oct 17, 2021 8:09 am

Özim wrote:
theHotHead wrote:
Özim wrote:Yeah agreed, Newcastle is a great buy, Arsenal just isn’t good value for money, 2 billion+ for a club who haven’t won a title for 17 years and have never won the CL and laughing in midtable isn’t a good price.

Probably why we don’t have a lot of options right now, Kroenke or Eck, but the latter isn’t that rich in terms of football billionaires.

From a business and football point of view Newcastle are a great buy, Arsenal would have to halve in value to be a decent buy, because it’s just not worth the 2 billion it’s valued at.

Is that 2 billion for the club or for Arsenal Football Club Holdings, or whatever they are called ? If so its not just the club its the other interests outside of football that contribute to the value.


What other interests do you mean, I’m not familiar?

I assume it’s for the club,

Our commercial deals aren’t all that compared to other clubs due to our lack of success in the last 17 years.

Property investments/portfolio, as an example, its not just the football club the Kroenke's own. Does the 2 billion valuation include the property portfolio too?
User avatar
theHotHead
Arsène Wenger
Arsène Wenger
 
Posts: 13182
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby DiamondGooner » Sun Oct 17, 2021 1:20 pm

theHotHead wrote:
Özim wrote:
theHotHead wrote:
Özim wrote:Yeah agreed, Newcastle is a great buy, Arsenal just isn’t good value for money, 2 billion+ for a club who haven’t won a title for 17 years and have never won the CL and laughing in midtable isn’t a good price.

Probably why we don’t have a lot of options right now, Kroenke or Eck, but the latter isn’t that rich in terms of football billionaires.

From a business and football point of view Newcastle are a great buy, Arsenal would have to halve in value to be a decent buy, because it’s just not worth the 2 billion it’s valued at.

Is that 2 billion for the club or for Arsenal Football Club Holdings, or whatever they are called ? If so its not just the club its the other interests outside of football that contribute to the value.


What other interests do you mean, I’m not familiar?

I assume it’s for the club,

Our commercial deals aren’t all that compared to other clubs due to our lack of success in the last 17 years.

Property investments/portfolio, as an example, its not just the football club the Kroenke's own. Does the 2 billion valuation include the property portfolio too?


I would assume that the £2B would include all Arsenal FC interests including the holdings if its bought under the AFC banner and portfolio.

We can't be certain but surely it includes all club sponsorships, all the surrounding land, stadium, training grounds.

I mean its up ot Kroenke what bits of AFC holdings he chooses to cut out of any deal, for example if he said "I want to keep the property near the Emirates" then truly that is up to him, he can cut it up anyway he wants however all immediate club related things would have to be included in the deal otherwise your not buying the club out right so I would assume its all included?
Image
User avatar
DiamondGooner
SE13
SE13
 
Posts: 27364
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:35 am
Location: At the Gucci store

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby Highbury Hillbilly » Sun Oct 17, 2021 3:17 pm

The buyer assumes all of the clubs debts as well. KSE last year bought out £220m in debt that was previously payable to another creditor. We spebt massively tbis summer so I imagine that number is bigger now.
Highbury Hillbilly
Bertie Mee
Bertie Mee
 
Posts: 9709
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:43 am

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby LMAO » Mon Oct 18, 2021 12:13 am

Özim wrote:
Highbury Hillbilly wrote:This is the reason I'd be skeptical of a Daniel Ek takeover effort.

No owner that's serious about winning trophies would risk £3bn on Arsenal in its current state. I can see him financing it via private equity, so he puts in a fraction of his own cash and pays him and his consortium partners tens of millions in dividends.

FSG bought Liverpool for a piddling £300m 10 years ago. That's a bargain considering the club's status in English football. It also allowed them to invest heavily straight away and recruit the right managers and coaches.

Arsenal meanwhile haven't been in CL for 5 years, and are going backwards despite buying half of a new team each summer. That valuation doesn't make sense to anybody except PE vultures.


Yeah I just don’t get Arsenals’ value, our commercial deals are nothing special, we’ve not have any real success for years, we’re a midtable team, we’re also not gaining fans like we use to, generally kids prefer the winning teams like City and Chelsea etc (likewise fans abroad).

Where does that value come from, it doesn’t make sense and doesn’t make us attractive to a potential buyer.


Location, location, location.

London is expensive real estate.

Look at Kroenke's Rams. Relocated them from St. Louis to LA. Same name, same players, same coaches. Valuation doubled from $1.45 billion to $2.9 billion overnight just by changing ZIP codes.
User avatar
LMAO
Member of the Year 2019
Member of the Year 2019
 
Posts: 9746
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby DiamondGooner » Mon Oct 18, 2021 2:01 am

For Arsenal its location and strength of our brand.

We're one of the original top 4 and have a greater history and fan base globally along with it, Newcastles global fanbase is non-existent, AFC has fans in every part of the world.

That's going to start dropping though the longer we're out of the top 4.

We're in a lot of trouble right now, when Newcastle get up and running there will be no space for us in the top 5 let alone top 4.

Like I said, Jay better get used to liking that Europa league he hates so much because that's our new Champions league.

Honestly it was bad enough competing against the new top 4 (Utd, Chelsea, City, Liverpool) now adding NC to the mix in the next 2-3 years ............ we're fking done for.

We'll never win the Premier league ever again until some mega billionaire buys us as well, Kroenke and Arteta are not the men to take us to a trophy in the CL or Prem.

Chelsea have Tuchel, Liverpool have Klopp, City have Pep .......... we have fkin Artea.

What were we thinking? second rate and no balls to compete that's what, the mediocrity continues.

Imagine a time when every top flight manager declines Arsenal, its already begun, Conte won't come here, Allegri wouldn't come here ....... none of them will.
Image
User avatar
DiamondGooner
SE13
SE13
 
Posts: 27364
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:35 am
Location: At the Gucci store

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby EliteKiller » Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:21 am

Arsenal for decades were undisputed kings of London - now we are just one of several top London clubs - currently the 5th best in the EPL - last season we were 4th best - the season before that 3rd best .... that's a scary trend for owners and fans.

After 20 years in the top four we've gone 5th - 6th - 5th - 8th - 8th .... changes are now coming, but is it to little to late?
EliteKiller
David Rocastle
David Rocastle
 
Posts: 5259
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 11:48 pm

Re: Implications of Newcastle takeover on Arsenal

Postby Özim » Mon Oct 18, 2021 11:26 am

Truth is our appeal is eroding away because we’re allowing it to, 2nd rate players, 2nd rate managers and a fall from being big players in the PL to making up the numbers in midtable.

Who is going to be interested in a club who are so embedded in mediocrity, a club that is full of excuses and non of the answers, a club with owners who really don’t care what happens on the pitch.

Truth is less and less people and the longer it carries on the harder it will be. We probably could still attract a decent manager right now if we make certain assurances, but in a few years it may be too late.

From what I can see sticking with Arteta is proving costly as we’re really cementing our place as midtable nobodies and now we don’t even play decent football anymore.
Özim
David Rocastle
David Rocastle
 
Posts: 5080
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:26 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Arsenal Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests