By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Apparently we're favourites according to WalesOnline (take it with a pinch of salt, I know), but if it's true that 8.5m is enough to get him then we are mad not to make an offer
In today's market - £8.5m is a bargain. Especially when players like Jeff Schlupp and Jacob Murphy are going for £12m each. There's a lot of value to be had with other leagues, given how obscene British-to-British club transfers are.
I'd like the guy to come to us whether Gylfi stays or goes. We need to invest in the first team and strengthen what we already have.
It looks like you use youtube is a similar escape to the other village idiot fantasist Nirvana. You two related? Actually related not just similar in your stupidity for clarity.
Heard the saying give a man enough rope? It's far more fun watching you squirm and scrap for some semblance of sense your google searches may unearth. Re-read it, think about what you have said. You can do it.
In the mean time inform us all of this super duper brand new Sky deal that only you seem to know about.
Think you will find that after a period of quiet reflection it is only your good self that is unaware of the massively increased Sky TV deal that kicked in at the start of the 16/17 season.
If you read Lisa's last post with this understanding in mind you will see she thinks it added £25million. Think it might have been a tad higher, but it sounds about right to me.
Think you will find that after a period of quiet reflection it is only your good self that is unaware of the massively increased Sky TV deal that kicked in at the start of the 16/17 season.
If you read Lisa's last post with this understanding in mind you will see she thinks it added £25million. Think it might have been a tad higher, but it sounds about right to me.
[Post edited 3 Aug 2017 16:35]
So you have just realised (after googling) that there is no new Sky deal. It is the same deal that was in place last year and the same deal that will be in place next year.
Correct. The planet of Mergers & Acquisitions professionals that actually understands these matters.
[Post edited 3 Aug 2017 13:26]
I've lived in the M&A world for 30 years pal and done hundreds of deals, including Sports businesses. You are still talking out of your arse as usual. Smart buyers don't use value multiples on a 1year profit multiple based on exceptional sale of key assets (players). Also any smart buyer would look at risk and the catastrophic impact of loss of 80% of revenue from one supplier (Sky) by selling the key assets. The £100m value was probably a little light, but unless there's yet another huge rise in TV revenues that isn't taken by players and agents, £300m is nonsense. You'd be laughed out any M&A process with such naive logic and methodology. Go back and play M&A games with your friends little boy and make up silly stories and numbers.
So you have just realised (after googling) that there is no new Sky deal. It is the same deal that was in place last year and the same deal that will be in place next year.
Moron.
You are confusing calander years and financial years.
Or perhaps now deliberately conflating them in order to cover up your huge fcuking blunder I exposed yesterday.
I've lived in the M&A world for 30 years pal and done hundreds of deals, including Sports businesses. You are still talking out of your arse as usual. Smart buyers don't use value multiples on a 1year profit multiple based on exceptional sale of key assets (players). Also any smart buyer would look at risk and the catastrophic impact of loss of 80% of revenue from one supplier (Sky) by selling the key assets. The £100m value was probably a little light, but unless there's yet another huge rise in TV revenues that isn't taken by players and agents, £300m is nonsense. You'd be laughed out any M&A process with such naive logic and methodology. Go back and play M&A games with your friends little boy and make up silly stories and numbers.
I've lived in the M&A world for 30 years pal and done hundreds of deals, including Sports businesses. You are still talking out of your arse as usual. Smart buyers don't use value multiples on a 1year profit multiple based on exceptional sale of key assets (players). Also any smart buyer would look at risk and the catastrophic impact of loss of 80% of revenue from one supplier (Sky) by selling the key assets. The £100m value was probably a little light, but unless there's yet another huge rise in TV revenues that isn't taken by players and agents, £300m is nonsense. You'd be laughed out any M&A process with such naive logic and methodology. Go back and play M&A games with your friends little boy and make up silly stories and numbers.
Don't forget his hair-brained version of the attraction of stadium acquisition.
I feel bad even talking to him, it feels like I am holding a midget back by his forehead as he desperately tries to take flailing swipes.... a drunk midget.
Don't forget his hair-brained version of the attraction of stadium acquisition.
I feel bad even talking to him, it feels like I am holding a midget back by his forehead as he desperately tries to take flailing swipes.... a drunk midget.
I must admit you do have impressive touch tying speed, but your spelling needs quite a lot of work.
For example, the term is hare-brained.
Also, given your general demeanour here feel it is appropriate to caution you that reckless does not have a 'w'.
Turned from Boudebouz over cokk fight over who knows more about the clubs finances.
Truly embarrassed for the drunk one. I told him/her/it on the last thread they came on wagging their misguided google tail that there is no need to be so defensive over your idiocy. Talk like a grown up and discussions may develop,can certainly see why they banned him from here (I will assume its a he). He lacks any sort of social skills or evidently self awareness. It probably does boil down to some sort of mental illness, most probably autism from what I have read from the efforts thus far, so I do feel terrible replying in the manner given, but I never have been one to suffer fools and won't start here.
I've lived in the M&A world for 30 years pal and done hundreds of deals, including Sports businesses. You are still talking out of your arse as usual. Smart buyers don't use value multiples on a 1year profit multiple based on exceptional sale of key assets (players). Also any smart buyer would look at risk and the catastrophic impact of loss of 80% of revenue from one supplier (Sky) by selling the key assets. The £100m value was probably a little light, but unless there's yet another huge rise in TV revenues that isn't taken by players and agents, £300m is nonsense. You'd be laughed out any M&A process with such naive logic and methodology. Go back and play M&A games with your friends little boy and make up silly stories and numbers.
Awayjack,
I don't pretend to know more than you about M&As but you mentioned "smart buyers" which doesn't always come into play in football.
I'm doing an M&A deal now which isn't too dissimilar. The seller's talking about silly multiples, based more on emotion than historic results whilst the buyer doesn't care a about that as he sees it as a vanity project.
A "smart buyer" would be paying less than 1/2 of what my client's willing to spend and the same could happen with us. If out Yanks want to sell and can find some bored billionaire, the deal will be done far above market average.
That's one of the things that annoyed me about the sale that HJ & LD brokered. I think we were worth more than £100m, but the desperation to sell before we got relegated made HJ and LD very nervous. Had we found the right buyer, we would have got at least £150m.
Ps the nest TV deal already looks a lot bigger than the existing one. If domestic rights stat the same, the international right increase will still see PL clubs rake in another 40-50%. It's madness but it's why clubs without cashflow issues are spending like there's no tomorrow !!!!
I don't pretend to know more than you about M&As but you mentioned "smart buyers" which doesn't always come into play in football.
I'm doing an M&A deal now which isn't too dissimilar. The seller's talking about silly multiples, based more on emotion than historic results whilst the buyer doesn't care a about that as he sees it as a vanity project.
A "smart buyer" would be paying less than 1/2 of what my client's willing to spend and the same could happen with us. If out Yanks want to sell and can find some bored billionaire, the deal will be done far above market average.
That's one of the things that annoyed me about the sale that HJ & LD brokered. I think we were worth more than £100m, but the desperation to sell before we got relegated made HJ and LD very nervous. Had we found the right buyer, we would have got at least £150m.
Ps the nest TV deal already looks a lot bigger than the existing one. If domestic rights stat the same, the international right increase will still see PL clubs rake in another 40-50%. It's madness but it's why clubs without cashflow issues are spending like there's no tomorrow !!!!
Yup agree football is odd sport with the mega rich looking for play things, often at inflated / illogical values. Sadly our investors are brokers/businessmen after a good return, so £100m value is what we're worth and I my guess is they'd happily exit at £150m if we can be mid table for future aTV revenues versus a relegation candidate that would mean risk of a drop of £100m in revenues our time and pros my a value of £30m or so with our relatively small stadium and supporter base.
My main point was there's no logic in the £300m value quoted by Shaky based on 10x 1 years profit, predominantly from selling our key assets (players). Unless of course we can generate £20m profit from player sales every season. Again unlikely as we've sold out best players for last 6 seasons and roughly at break-even on transfers. Also selling our best players every year puts huge risk that the 80% or £100m of our revenues from Prem/TV would drop to below £10m or do in championship. If Shaky is the M&A expert he claims, he wouldn't spout such nonsense about a value being based on player sales in one year and use profit multiples similar to Man Utd value method as public company.
I don't pretend to know more than you about M&As but you mentioned "smart buyers" which doesn't always come into play in football.
I'm doing an M&A deal now which isn't too dissimilar. The seller's talking about silly multiples, based more on emotion than historic results whilst the buyer doesn't care a about that as he sees it as a vanity project.
A "smart buyer" would be paying less than 1/2 of what my client's willing to spend and the same could happen with us. If out Yanks want to sell and can find some bored billionaire, the deal will be done far above market average.
That's one of the things that annoyed me about the sale that HJ & LD brokered. I think we were worth more than £100m, but the desperation to sell before we got relegated made HJ and LD very nervous. Had we found the right buyer, we would have got at least £150m.
Ps the nest TV deal already looks a lot bigger than the existing one. If domestic rights stat the same, the international right increase will still see PL clubs rake in another 40-50%. It's madness but it's why clubs without cashflow issues are spending like there's no tomorrow !!!!
A surprisingly lucid post.
Would I personally advise anybody to buy the club for £300 million? Of course not!
But the market for corporate assets is not a constant. For example it is is heavily influenced by stock market valuations, which - prior to yesterday's revelations that a grand jury has been established to investigate Trump - has been hitting new highs on a daily basis and is awash with speculative froth.
I personally believe there is a better than 25% probability that the market crashes this autumn/late summer, but as things stand I am confident that a story can be put together along with the already discussed profits outlook that can support a £300m valuation. No problem.
Yup agree football is odd sport with the mega rich looking for play things, often at inflated / illogical values. Sadly our investors are brokers/businessmen after a good return, so £100m value is what we're worth and I my guess is they'd happily exit at £150m if we can be mid table for future aTV revenues versus a relegation candidate that would mean risk of a drop of £100m in revenues our time and pros my a value of £30m or so with our relatively small stadium and supporter base.
My main point was there's no logic in the £300m value quoted by Shaky based on 10x 1 years profit, predominantly from selling our key assets (players). Unless of course we can generate £20m profit from player sales every season. Again unlikely as we've sold out best players for last 6 seasons and roughly at break-even on transfers. Also selling our best players every year puts huge risk that the 80% or £100m of our revenues from Prem/TV would drop to below £10m or do in championship. If Shaky is the M&A expert he claims, he wouldn't spout such nonsense about a value being based on player sales in one year and use profit multiples similar to Man Utd value method as public company.
"Sadly our investors are brokers/businessmen after a good return, so £100m value is what we're worth and I my guess is they'd happily exit at £150m if we can be mid table for future aTV revenues versus a relegation candidate that would mean risk of a drop of £100m in revenues our time and pros my a value of £30m or so with our relatively small stadium and supporter base. "
What the hell are you talking about?
But of course the pure gibberish you wrote there is no doubt entirely unrelated to your internal clarity of thought on the subject of M&A, that enabled you to provide valuable analysis and predict events with remarkable accuracy as regards the takeover machinations at the club over the past few years.
Oh no wait, that was me.
In contrast I have heard not peep from you. Where were you in the Trust's many hours of need, witholding your 30 years experience of hundreds of transactions?
I don't pretend to know more than you about M&As but you mentioned "smart buyers" which doesn't always come into play in football.
I'm doing an M&A deal now which isn't too dissimilar. The seller's talking about silly multiples, based more on emotion than historic results whilst the buyer doesn't care a about that as he sees it as a vanity project.
A "smart buyer" would be paying less than 1/2 of what my client's willing to spend and the same could happen with us. If out Yanks want to sell and can find some bored billionaire, the deal will be done far above market average.
That's one of the things that annoyed me about the sale that HJ & LD brokered. I think we were worth more than £100m, but the desperation to sell before we got relegated made HJ and LD very nervous. Had we found the right buyer, we would have got at least £150m.
Ps the nest TV deal already looks a lot bigger than the existing one. If domestic rights stat the same, the international right increase will still see PL clubs rake in another 40-50%. It's madness but it's why clubs without cashflow issues are spending like there's no tomorrow !!!!
Vanity projects are usually the pretext for taking over a club on the European stage where money is no object and thus any potential returns, there are exceptions but are very rare in the grand scheme of things. We are a club with a small fanbase, a small ground, not particularly "fashionable" in the UK and extra often unwanted baggage in the form of fan interference. £300m is the ramblings of a mad man, nothing more. They have a clear MO with with DC United, acquire the stadium deal then flip it for a profit. As I said previously, this set of owners aren't the real dangers, the real dangerous owners are the ones that come on board after the stadium is acquired, as up to that point you can buy and flip a club without really harming it. The less scope there is in a club the more danger of it damaging it to get it.
Vanity projects are usually the pretext for taking over a club on the European stage where money is no object and thus any potential returns, there are exceptions but are very rare in the grand scheme of things. We are a club with a small fanbase, a small ground, not particularly "fashionable" in the UK and extra often unwanted baggage in the form of fan interference. £300m is the ramblings of a mad man, nothing more. They have a clear MO with with DC United, acquire the stadium deal then flip it for a profit. As I said previously, this set of owners aren't the real dangers, the real dangerous owners are the ones that come on board after the stadium is acquired, as up to that point you can buy and flip a club without really harming it. The less scope there is in a club the more danger of it damaging it to get it.
"The less scope there is in a club the more danger of it damaging it to get it. "
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.