• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Transfer fred.

AdamB said:
It is. Mainly players in their 30s though so not sure its a threat to the PL or CL

There's only a handful of idiots like Neves who are wasting their prime years
Click to expand...
It’s more that clears up clubs FFP issues
Yet we can’t shift anyone
Although the clubs selling out there are ones with history in the UAE
Pool and united were being brought by Arabs and Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Chelsea are owned by the same Saudis
 
Bedfordspurs said:
It’s more that clears up clubs FFP issues
Yet we can’t shift anyone
Although the clubs selling out there are ones with history in the UAE
Pool and united were being brought by Arabs and Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Chelsea are owned by the same Saudis
Click to expand...

Understand the point about FFP.

I'd like to think that now that we're back from Asia and Ange will know who he wants, we could give a list of maybe even 10 players to those Saudi teams and offload a couple of them!
 
AdamB said:
Understand the point about FFP.

I'd like to think that now that we're back from Asia and Ange will know who he wants, we could give a list of maybe even 10 players to those Saudi teams and offload a couple of them!
Click to expand...

Yep that whole window of 'Ange assessing the squad before making any decisions on outs' must be up now (For most players anyway). Time to start shifting those he doesn't want. We have a massive squad, especially considering we are not in Europe and we still need new CBs to come in. It's hard to believe there aren't some that he has given the green light to try and sell already.

There was also rumours that the club would be more ruthless this window, tearing up contracts for those they couldn't shift etc. I know that it's too early for that yet but something needs to start happening soon
 
AdamB said:
Understand the point about FFP.

I'd like to think that now that we're back from Asia and Ange will know who he wants, we could give a list of maybe even 10 players to those Saudi teams and offload a couple of them!
Click to expand...

I live in hope that we can flog the excess to Saudi but I suppose it depends on if they feel by doing so it helps us close a gap to clubs they have an affiliation to

They ain't going to help Spurs if it hurts Liverpool, Chelsea or Saudi Sportswashing Machine, but let's see
 
AdamB said:
Understand the point about FFP.

I'd like to think that now that we're back from Asia and Ange will know who he wants, we could give a list of maybe even 10 players to those Saudi teams and offload a couple of them!
Click to expand...
The saudi teams wont buy our players. They are generally doing it for the european clubs they have financial interests in who need to cook their books. Its not a free for all
 
Gutter Boy said:
The saudi teams wont buy our players. They are generally doing it for the european clubs they have financial interests in who need to cook their books. Its not a free for all
Click to expand...

They have less than a 5% interest in clearlake capitol. Which own 50% of chelsea. Dunno about liverpool, celtic, inter milan wolves and celtic. None in real madrid or city as far as i know? Ronaldo was a free.
 
Gutter Boy said:
The saudi teams wont buy our players. They are generally doing it for the european clubs they have financial interests in who need to cook their books. Its not a free for all
Click to expand...
The players they have been buying are for the most part formerly coverted players with bigish reputations. You can't really say that about the guys we want to get rid of other than Lloris and he reportedly got an offer from a Saudi club.


Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk
 
Lilbaz said:
They have less than a 5% interest in clearlake capitol. Which own 50% of chelsea. Dunno about liverpool, celtic, inter milan wolves and celtic. None in real madrid or city as far as i know? Ronaldo was a free.
Click to expand...
Indeed, some of the rhetoric here around this is clearly nonsense.
 
Lilbaz said:
They have less than a 5% interest in clearlake capitol. Which own 50% of chelsea. Dunno about liverpool, celtic, inter milan wolves and celtic. None in real madrid or city as far as i know? Ronaldo was a free.
Click to expand...
Stop coming out with facts, it doesn't change that everyone else is on the fiddle and out to get us.
 
Its clearly somewhere in the middle and there is a factual conflict of interest in some cases. If I was a 5% stake holder in an investment fund I would want a return, if I could make a quip per quo deal between two of my owned entities in order to push things forward that I would do that, especially over dealing with a rival. It would be much more easily facilitated deals by picking the phone up to one of your business partners to do so than not. The same with Saudi Sportswashing Machine clearly. Liverpool have a long standing academy in Saudi and there is major talk they are the next target for take over.

Just because not all deals follow that same pattern (Many are freebies so no club connections) does not mean that those conflicts don't exist. Made even more murky that PIF now own 4 clubs in Saudi so the whole distribution of money throughout the game becomes more complex.

If people don't think that money won't be passed around more freely between clubs of similar interest as Roman was doing with his European Brass Plating and similar club ownership then I would say they are being naive TBH

No one is out to get us but its clearly the way of life that people will deal more freely with people they have association with than not. Its only going to get worse too.
 
Grays_1890 said:
Its clearly somewhere in the middle and there is a factual conflict of interest in some cases. If I was a 5% stake holder in an investment fund I would want a return, if I could make a quip per quo deal between two of my owned entities in order to push things forward that I would do that, especially over dealing with a rival. It would be much more easily facilitated deals by picking the phone up to one of your business partners to do so than not. The same with Saudi Sportswashing Machine clearly. Liverpool have a long standing academy in Saudi and there is major talk they are the next target for take over.

Just because not all deals follow that same pattern (Many are freebies so no club connections) does not mean that those conflicts don't exist. Made even more murky that PIF now own 4 clubs in Saudi so the whole distribution of money throughout the game becomes more complex.

If people don't think that money won't be passed around more freely between clubs of similar interest as Roman was doing with his European Brass Plating and similar club ownership then I would say they are being naive TBH

No one is out to get us but its clearly the way of life that people will deal more freely with people they have association with than not. Its only going to get worse too.
Click to expand...
Having a 5% stake in an investment fund will give you next to zero say on their deals.
 
DubSpur said:
Having a 5% stake in an investment fund will give you next to zero say on their deals.
Click to expand...

So if you have 5% in an investment company that has a larger stake in a club you want to do business with, business that benefit both, you think thats not easier having that stake and interest than not? You would be able to pick the phone up and grease, would be like a footballing masonic lodge

If I was chairman of Chelsea and one of the investors owned a club they would be the first call I make in order to sound out collaboration on transfers, especially in a climate when that said investor was well known for being able to spend above the odds on players
 
Last edited:
Grays_1890 said:
So if you have 5% in an investment company that has a larger stake in a club you want to do business with, business that benefit both, you think thats not easier having that stake and interest than not? You would be able to pick the phone up and grease, would be like a footballing masonic lodge

If I was chairman of Chelsea and one of the investors owned a club they would be the first call I make in order to sound out collaboration on transfers, especially in a climate when that said investor was well known for being able to spend above the odds on players
Click to expand...

Think it's that 5% of the investment portfolio of clearlake is saudi money. So saudis own around 2.5% of chelsea. Then you have how much of the saudi clubs are owned by the saudi royal family? (They will have influence ofcourse). Would the saudi royals put pressure on saudi clubs to buy chelsea players to get around ffp for a 2.5% stake? I dunno.

Interesting that 9 saudi players were loaned to la liga clubs this summer. Also tebas has kept quiet on saudi spending so much. After being so vocal about the prem.
 
Lilbaz said:
Think it's that 5% of the investment portfolio of clearlake is saudi money. So saudis own around 2.5% of chelsea. Then you have how much of the saudi clubs are owned by the saudi royal family? (They will have influence ofcourse). Would the saudi royals put pressure on saudi clubs to buy chelsea players to get around ffp for a 2.5% stake? I dunno.

Interesting that 9 saudi players were loaned to la liga clubs this summer. Also tebas has kept quiet on saudi spending so much. After being so vocal about the prem.
Click to expand...

You could argue why have a stake at all? But people make investments for some reason and generally its to benefit somewhere either now or down the line. Make money or wield influence

For my money, there is clearly a network being created in Europe thats created for a reason beyond benefiting the Saudi league and its growth IMO. We will soon find out for sure

Managers and owners are getting nervous, both Klopp and Pep are have made statements which came over as them being slightly worried about how this will pan
 
Grays_1890 said:
You could argue why have a stake at all? But people make investments for some reason and generally its to benefit somewhere either now or down the line. Make money or wield influence

For my money, there is clearly a network being created in Europe thats created for a reason beyond benefiting the Saudi league and its growth IMO. We will soon find out for sure

Managers and owners are getting nervous, both Klopp and Pep are have made statements which came over as them being slightly worried about how this will pan
Click to expand...

Clearlake are an investment company. They invest money as a business (on behalf of their investors). Just 5% of that money is saudi money.
 
Lilbaz said:
Clearlake are an investment company. They invest money as a business (on behalf of their investors). Just 5% of that money is saudi money.
Click to expand...

Of course but as i say why have an % at all if it's not to make money or use that % regardless how as a means of using the network it brings as a platform for influence.
 
Last edited:
Bishop said:
The players they have been buying are for the most part formerly coverted players with bigish reputations. You can't really say that about the guys we want to get rid of other than Lloris and he reportedly got an offer from a Saudi club.


Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk
Click to expand...

A lot of them are also muslim which much be a factor in some players going there - Mahrez and Koulibaly for instance though obviously not everyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back