Investment

[Rev]

1 hour ago, jimtastic56 said:

If Amanda Staveley sold her small stake In Newcastle Utd , she could easily afford to buy the Rams . She is well connected and would bring in massive investment . We could get in the Prem and pay the likes of Raheem Stirling £250k a week . But would us Rams fans be happier paying double for our season tickets ? We haven’t had a poll for ages . 

A. She sold her stake over the summer, and left Newcastle.

B. She's relatively potless, and a liar. 

https://www.ft.com/content/5f2b79cc-6ca0-4f2d-9ab8-ebb456972f01

 

[Eoghan1884]

Interestingly on Steve Pagliuca, he’s made it pretty apparent he does want a multi club group. He’s been in talks recently to buy Red Star FC in France who are a second division team. He seems to like the idea of buying a club at cheap and building them how he wants to. We would tick a lot of boxes in that ideology. 

[AljosaAsanovic]

Multi-club ownership is a cancer in the sport and I don't want my beloved club to be any part of it. 

[jimtastic56]

2 hours ago, Rev said:

A. She sold her stake over the summer, and left Newcastle.

B. She's relatively potless, and a liar. 

https://www.ft.com/content/5f2b79cc-6ca0-4f2d-9ab8-ebb456972f01

 

She might have good lawyers . But if we did get in the Prem , would you be happy to pay double for YOUR season ticket ?

[eddielewis]

1 hour ago, AljosaAsanovic said:

Multi-club ownership is a cancer in the sport and I don't want my beloved club to be any part of it. 

I would say after all of the recent examples it's probably no worse than a singular owner. I think the main problem recently is that a lot of these owners rush in and get trigger happy and start accumulating clubs without really laying down the framework and getting success with their original purchased club. Boelhy with Chelsea/Strasbourg, Textor with Lyon/Palace/Botafago are a great examples of that. Obviously the player swapping in order to cook the books should be outlawed.

CFG seem to have got it right with the 13 clubs they own where the ownership is catered to the situation. They own only 20% Yokohama F Marinos for example just to keep the club competively ticking by in the top end of the J league. What they get out of it is a scouting network in Japan and a entry way of marketing for Man City in Japan.

If the rumours are true with Pagliuca and with how currently operates Atalanta where he's very much at arms length and doesn't delve too much in terms of the operation of the club where he could leave that to Clowes with Derby then that would be a tempting prospect and could work for all.

Edited 23 hours ago by eddielewis

[ilkleyram]

In all this chatter about investment we should also consider that returns are not only financial. Fame/notoriety, free advertising for other businesses, associations with other clubs or other football organisations, helping an area to develop or just pure enjoyment of being closely involved in a professional sport for example, may also be reasons for people to invest in a club whilst knowing the financial downsides. Forget the Mel we ended up knowing, at the beginning his money was all about developing the club; his desire for half the first team to be made up of academy players was mocked by some but we’re now largely having to start again when, without administration, we might have got pretty close to that target this season. It doesn’t have to be all about the financial returns. 

[kevinhectoring]

7 hours ago, jimtastic56 said:

If Amanda Staveley sold her small stake In Newcastle Utd , she could easily afford to buy the Rams . She is well connected and would bring in massive investment . We could get in the Prem and pay the likes of Raheem Stirling £250k a week . But would us Rams fans be happier paying double for our season tickets ? We haven’t had a poll for ages . 

imo we don’t want someone who can merely afford to buy us. We want someone with a few billions here and there and probably a US franchise or two. And we want one person, not a private equity firm (look at Chelsea) and not a consortium. 

[kevinhectoring]

11 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

 

Yikes. He doth protest too much 

[Tamworthram]

5 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Yikes. He doth protest too much 

I assume you are joking. I didn’t pick up any suggestion of protesting in that clip. Quite the opposite in fact.

[AljosaAsanovic]

8 hours ago, eddielewis said:

I would say after all of the recent examples it's probably no worse than a singular owner. I think the main problem recently is that a lot of these owners rush in and get trigger happy and start accumulating clubs without really laying down the framework and getting success with their original purchased club. Boelhy with Chelsea/Strasbourg, Textor with Lyon/Palace/Botafago are a great examples of that. Obviously the player swapping in order to cook the books should be outlawed.

CFG seem to have got it right with the 13 clubs they own where the ownership is catered to the situation. They own only 20% Yokohama F Marinos for example just to keep the club competively ticking by in the top end of the J league. What they get out of it is a scouting network in Japan and a entry way of marketing for Man City in Japan.

If the rumours are true with Pagliuca and with how currently operates Atalanta where he's very much at arms length and doesn't delve too much in terms of the operation of the club where he could leave that to Clowes with Derby then that would be a tempting prospect and could work for all.

Tell that to Troyes fans who had a record signing that never played a minute for them so City could get round rules and now said player plays for city. 

Or Strasbourg who will have at least 3 Chelsea players on loan EVERY season. 

Or Salzburg fans who had all their history disregarded and for many years were a nursery club to RB Leipzig. 

Not saying it would happen with Derby or Pagliuca (although I do believ the second we have a player who is looking like they could be a future 25 million+ player, they will be off to Atalanta for 10 mil) but to support a team, and have as much heritage and history as DCFC (or others) to just become nothing more than a tool for Billionaire owners main toy is disgusting and it should not be allowed. 

If we could cut it right back you could say football clubs shouldnt be owned by a single person but by communities (that would be ideal but we are far to far gone for that), but id be amazed if you could convinnce me multiclub ownership is a good idea.  

Edited 14 hours ago by AljosaAsanovic

[eddielewis]

8 minutes ago, AljosaAsanovic said:

Tell that to Troyes fans who had a record signing that never played a minute for them so City could get round rules and now said player plays for city. 

Or Strasbourg who will have at least 3 Chelsea players on loan EVERY season. 

Or Salzburg fans who had all their history disregarded and for many years were a nursery club to RB Leipzig. 

Not saying it would happen with Derby or Pagliuca (although I do believ the second we have a player who is looking like they could be a future 25 million+ player, they will be off to Atalanta for 10 mil) but to support a team, and have as much heritage and history as DCFC (or others) to just become nothing more than a tool for Billionaire owners main toy is disgusting and it should not be allowed. 

If we could cut it right back you could say football clubs shouldnt be owned by a single person but by communities (that would be ideal but we are far to far gone for that), but id be amazed if you could convinnce me multiclub ownership is a good idea.  

My original post did say that inter-conglomerate players signings should be outlawed and to provide further context which I guess failed to do in my post would mean that examples like Troyes and Strasbourg would not happen. Uefa has completely failed to control this and they only seem bothered about it when it comes to European club competition level. 

You could flip it on it's head and say that multi club ownership and the transfer fiddling that's followed has benefitted both the club down the road and the owners original club Olympiakos. Whilst Troyes has been a failure at CFG, Girona has been a success with the transfer fiddling. 

What I was trying to say was that if you take all the examples of these multi club conglomerates and their potential pitfalls it just ends up being near enough the same as any other club where it's all reliant on what the intentions of the billionaire in charge, what they are trying to achieve, how many plates they can spin and whether it's made out to be what they say they are.

We've had examples of billionaire owners trying to change the club colours and name in Cardiff and Hull whilst they only owned one club. The problem that the 777 group clubs (Hertha, Liege, Genoa) are facing where they are the subject of a vanity project of a group that doesn't quite have the cash they promised has been the typical problem of many individual clubs. 

Clowes would never agree to it becoming a feeder club so I don't have that fear as much as you and I don't think we need to scare this forum to debating that particular point further.

I agree with you in an ideal world English football should be the same as Germany with the 50+1 rule where the community has greater say but as you say we are too far gone from that.

[roboto]

1 hour ago, AljosaAsanovic said:

Tell that to Troyes fans who had a record signing that never played a minute for them so City could get round rules and now said player plays for city. 

Or Strasbourg who will have at least 3 Chelsea players on loan EVERY season. 

Or Salzburg fans who had all their history disregarded and for many years were a nursery club to RB Leipzig. 

Not saying it would happen with Derby or Pagliuca (although I do believ the second we have a player who is looking like they could be a future 25 million+ player, they will be off to Atalanta for 10 mil) but to support a team, and have as much heritage and history as DCFC (or others) to just become nothing more than a tool for Billionaire owners main toy is disgusting and it should not be allowed. 

If we could cut it right back you could say football clubs shouldnt be owned by a single person but by communities (that would be ideal but we are far to far gone for that), but id be amazed if you could convinnce me multiclub ownership is a good idea.  

I understand the concern here, but those examples (Troyes, Strasbourg and Salzburg) are all in economically inferior leagues. If an owner buys us, then it will be with the intent of getting us into the EPL - the biggest money spinning league in the world - and would therefore more likely see us be favoured over other teams in a group.

I need to look more into this Pagliuca fella before forming a full opinion, but from the tweets posted and a light bit of background research it would seem he's doing an alright job with Atalanta, but if he were to get a team that is in the Premier League, then that would be a higher income source than an established Serie A side, and you would expect that the EPL team wouldn't act as a feeder team for them.

[CBRammette]

I know we need more funds to be competitive and move forward but its a crying shame as we are so lucky with how we are being run and the feel of the club at the minute. So difficult to find a majority investor who would retain that as they want to make money or get the ego boost from having the plaything. Why else invest? Wont be a fan so ultimately wont give a 💩 when it comes down to it. I trust DC to do lots of due diligence but ultimately when its done its done. The general demise of football as the fan's game will only get worse with as many overseas owners and growing.  
 

*but as an aside dealings between clubs in a group will i stantly be banned as soon as we become part of such a group anyway

Edited 12 hours ago by CBRammette
Afterthought

[eddielewis]

2 minutes ago, roboto said:

I understand the concern here, but those examples (Troyes, Strasbourg and Salzburg) are all in economically inferior leagues. If an owner buys us, then it will be with the intent of getting us into the EPL - the biggest money spinning league in the world - and would therefore more likely see us be favoured over other teams in a group.

I need to look more into this Pagliuca fella before forming a full opinion, but from the tweets posted and a light bit of background research it would seem he's doing an alright job with Atalanta, but if he were to get a team that is in the Premier League, then that would be a higher income source than an established Serie A side, and you would expect that the EPL team wouldn't act as a feeder team for them.

From what I've read Pagliuca runs Atalanta very much at arms length. He is the major financial provider to the club which has gradually taken the club to the next level but he leaves to day to day operation to Antonio Percassi who has been Club President since 2010. Pagliuca owns 55% and Percassi 45% of the majority shareholding. This is why if this rumour is to be true then it could be a similar set up where Clowes runs the club as Chairman and Pagliuca just signs the cheques essentially which could be an ideal scenario.

[AljosaAsanovic]

54 minutes ago, roboto said:

I understand the concern here, but those examples (Troyes, Strasbourg and Salzburg) are all in economically inferior leagues. If an owner buys us, then it will be with the intent of getting us into the EPL - the biggest money spinning league in the world - and would therefore more likely see us be favoured over other teams in a group.

I need to look more into this Pagliuca fella before forming a full opinion, but from the tweets posted and a light bit of background research it would seem he's doing an alright job with Atalanta, but if he were to get a team that is in the Premier League, then that would be a higher income source than an established Serie A side, and you would expect that the EPL team wouldn't act as a feeder team for them.

I see what you are saying but my opinion is based on the overall picture. It matters not to me if we are top of the food chain in a multi-club group, fans especially suffer massively as a result of some of them being used as nothing but feeders and development teams and thats what I hate.   

It's a massive no from me. 

Edited 11 hours ago by AljosaAsanovic

[RoyMac5]

5 minutes ago, AljosaAsanovic said:

I see what you are saying but my opinion is based on the overall picture. It matters not to me if we are top of the food chain in a multi-club group, fans especially suffer massively as a result of some of them being used as nothing but feeders and development teams and thats what I hate.   

It's a massive no from me. 

When things go 'wrong' in football it's always the fans who suffer. What other type of financial dealings are you going to rule out?

[AljosaAsanovic]

20 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

When things go 'wrong' in football it's always the fans who suffer. What other type of financial dealings are you going to rule out?

Yes there is always a chance of things going wrong in football and the fans do suffer. That can be part & parcel of something we sometimes have to accept. We have been there more than once.

Nothing is certain of course. DC could sell to another Mel or some other charlatan.  

But multi-club ownership using x amount of clubs solely to benefit a small amount of others, 100% does not sit right with me.

If it does with you, then does your preogative. But not with me.  

[RoyMac5]

8 minutes ago, AljosaAsanovic said:

...But multi-club ownership using x amount of clubs solely to benefit a small amount of others, 100% does not sit right with me.

If it does with you, then does your prerogative. But not with me.  

Did I say that? Does that always happen with multi-club ownership, I only really know of F*rest and Watford. Do all clubs financially mismanaged go into administration? Can these things be stopped? 

The best that can be done (on the whole) is try and minimise any potential for 'damage'?

[ossieram]

Has there been any solid links to any of this future investment,  or is it all rumours?

[AljosaAsanovic]

23 minutes ago, ossieram said:

Has there been any solid links to any of this future investment,  or is it all rumours?

Rumours. 

I doubt we'd hear anything till it was more or less a done deal.