End of Moshiri - Friedkin Purchase Falls Through

[Gary1878]

The Premier League is becoming less about the top 6 and more about being competitive at the top end consistently. There are so many big teams now competing that just to get into the top half is going to be a challenge.

City, Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs, Newcastle and Villa are all well setup to continue to finish in the top half. That leaves 2 spots for the foreseeable future. And that’s not including WH or Brighton.

If we can get back to the days that we had under Moyes where we were finishing 5th/6th on a consistent basis, that would be an incredible success.

[Bob Sacamano]

Foreseeable top 10 finishes and boss cup runs (maybe fluke a win) would do me just fine. The league has manufactured a pecking order that can’t be undone other than being state owned. May as well lean into it and just disrupt with the odd top 6 finish & European footy or a fluke cup win and play in Europe that way.

[Trowel]

https://twitter.com/BenDWalsh/status/1724476717807407549 https://twitter.com/lizrhoffman/status/1724485465443578231

[Escalator]

Fooked if that makes any sense to me?

[Escalator]

Got a feeling these guys may walk away now, what would the club be worth if relegated AND facing a £300 million law suit ?
Sure they could re negotiate the selling price but what would it be if existing debt/liabilities plus £300m they would be taking on more than a £1 billion liability, Moshiri would have to pay them to take the club off his hands.

[brap2]

Worse than the last lot.

[NomadskiEFC]

One upside to the recent vote against the ban is under 777 we have a bunch of clubs to get cheap / free transfers from.

Not saying that offsets being owned by fraudsters like.

[Trowel]

Although that bunch of clubs might get smaller if they're struggling to keep Genoa solvent...

[Cozzie]

Genuinely believe these guys will finish the club off.

Just a hunch like.

[Cereal Killer]

One upside to the recent vote against the ban is under 777 we have a bunch of clubs to get cheap / free transfers from.

Not saying that offsets being owned by fraudsters like.

This tongue in cheek?

No logic to that at all. If the other teams had anyone that be useful to us, then surely they’d be sold to maximise income, not donated to us on the cheap…

[NomadskiEFC]

One upside to the recent vote against the ban is under 777 we have a bunch of clubs to get cheap / free transfers from.

Not saying that offsets being owned by fraudsters like.

This tongue in cheek?

No logic to that at all. If the other teams had anyone that be useful to us, then surely they’d be sold to maximise income, not donated to us on the cheap…

Well how would it work for other clubs with owners of multiple clubs behind them, like Newcastle if it can't work for us? There's all the drama about them and even a ban on multiple club owners went to a vote.

But somehow because it's us there's no upside?

[superpull]

The thing this specific vote was worried about was a state sponsored league buying people for stupid sums of money and then basically giving them away to premier league clubs that the same state also owns. Newcastle's situation is not the same as ours.

Our model *should* create a great route for providing solid loan options for our better kids and side-stepping the old work permit issues we have had in the past. Although Brexit fucked that all up anyway. Our loan model will be outgoing, not incoming.

It will also be a good route to minimise financial risk on players. Not quite sure? Bring him into a mid-table Serie A side you own, then sell him to England or Spain if he shines there for a modest profit (but still less than your other club would have to pay if it was from a non-linked team)

[Cereal Killer]

One upside to the recent vote against the ban is under 777 we have a bunch of clubs to get cheap / free transfers from.

Not saying that offsets being owned by fraudsters like.

This tongue in cheek?

No logic to that at all. If the other teams had anyone that be useful to us, then surely they’d be sold to maximise income, not donated to us on the cheap…

Well how would it work for other clubs with owners of multiple clubs behind them, like Newcastle if it can't work for us? There's all the drama about them and even a ban on multiple club owners went to a vote.

But somehow because it's us there's no upside?

Newcastle/City are owned by the state entities who can lash stupid money at players through other leagues and then loan them/sell them way below market rate and not bat an eyelid at the losses

We’ll have a speculative insurance owner/ponzi scheme who struggles to pay bills most of the time, they can’t afford to sell us a £30m player for £15m

[Trowel]

The federal prosecutor who won a conviction against Sam Bankman-Fried is overseeing a Justice Department investigation into sports buyer 777 Partners, whose entanglement with U.S. investors has raised questions about its already murky finances.

Nicolas Roos is part of a DOJ team probing whether 777 violated U.S. money-laundering laws, among other infractions, in its quick rise from an unknown investor in lump-sum legal settlements to an owner of sports teams around the world, people familiar with the matter said.

The Southern District of New York, where major financial-fraud cases tend to land, is discussing a joint investigation with law enforcement in Miami, where 777 is based, some of the people said. SDNY declined to comment. A spokeswoman for Florida prosecutors didn’t return a request for comment.

https://www.semafor.com/article/11/30/2 ... oney-flows

[Trowel]

https://twitter.com/business/status/1730699333824106999