The_Steve Posted Sunday at 10:01 Share Posted Sunday at 10:01 57 minutes ago, Zatman said: Ita a scum model and killing the game along with other things. Real Union away kit looking like Villa colours is awful but people mocked Newcastle and Wolves having Saudi/Portuguese jerseys Unai owns the club, not NSWE, so the comparison is wrong on many levels. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted Sunday at 10:01 Share Posted Sunday at 10:01 52 minutes ago, Zatman said: What benefits have multi club ownership brought to anybody. Troyes, Molenbeek and Lorient are teams connected to Premier League multi club owners who were relegated last season Ita a scum model and killing the game along with other things. Real Union away kit looking like Villa colours is awful but people mocked Newcastle and Wolves having Saudi/Portuguese jerseys 'Scum model' i think you are being overly ridiculous with that wording im sorry to say. You are basically saying our owners are scum for doing this? You should be thanking them for everything they have done. It obviously increases commericial opportunities and exposure to other markets you can also look at. You also can send players out on loan for development as we may be seeing with real union getting some of our youngsters. The colours thing i just dont understand as you are talking about multi club ownership now you are shifting to another subject completely I pose the same question to you Give us a detailed planned how we consistently finish above chelsea and man utd each season without doing what we have been doing under NSWE. We are all ears. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted Sunday at 10:30 Share Posted Sunday at 10:30 25 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: 'Scum model' i think you are being overly ridiculous with that wording im sorry to say. You are basically saying our owners are scum for doing this? You should be thanking them for everything they have done. It obviously increases commericial opportunities and exposure to other markets you can also look at. You also can send players out on loan for development as we may be seeing with real union getting some of our youngsters. The colours thing i just dont understand as you are talking about multi club ownership now you are shifting to another subject completely I pose the same question to you Give us a detailed planned how we consistently finish above chelsea and man utd each season without doing what we have been doing under NSWE. We are all ears. Its a scum model and just because other teams do it doesnt make it better. Not sure how our connections to Vitoria or Zed helped us get top 4 last year As for the owners they can and should be questioned. Its not a dictatorship that we have to happy clap everything they do 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted Sunday at 10:36 Share Posted Sunday at 10:36 (edited) I love NSWE. They got us our villa back (even if I think we have been losing it again over the past 12 months off the field). I am not especially fussed about the V sports stuff, yes, look, it is what it is and more power to them More broadly, surely some critical thinking is allowed about decisions being taken? For four or five years Lerner and Krulak were feted, and not really questioned. They said they were here for the long haul. However, when it all imploded they were nowhere to be seen and it was the fans left to pick up the pieces With us in the Championship. That's why I think the off field stuff is important and it should not just be a blank cheque. At the very least, these matters should be explained more honestly. Edited Sunday at 10:37 by Captain_Townsend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted Sunday at 10:55 Share Posted Sunday at 10:55 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Zatman said: Its a scum model and just because other teams do it doesnt make it better. Not sure how our connections to Vitoria or Zed helped us get top 4 last year As for the owners they can and should be questioned. Its not a dictatorship that we have to happy clap everything they do You keep saying scum model, please elaborate. Are Fleetwood Town scum for having a club in Dubai? Are Barnsley scum for being part of a 7 team group? Are Brighton scum because their owner also owns a Belgian team? Are Brentford also scum for having a Danish feeder club? Are Bournemouth also scum? How do you propose we get around visas in a post-Brexit world? Edited Sunday at 10:56 by The_Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted Sunday at 11:21 Share Posted Sunday at 11:21 48 minutes ago, Zatman said: Its a scum model and just because other teams do it doesnt make it better. Not sure how our connections to Vitoria or Zed helped us get top 4 last year As for the owners they can and should be questioned. Its not a dictatorship that we have to happy clap everything they do Well as you clearly know we were barred from doing any business with vitoria so not sure how you expect a answer for that qusstion? Unless you are out in Egypt none of us know what is foung on behind the scenes with the two clubs You can question them but if you dont have a answer to what they can do instead to compete with the likes of spurs chelsea and man utd people are not going to take your opinion seriously. Like i said on many occasions take your anger up with the Premier league the rule makers who have allowed this for years. Its not on our brilliant owners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted Sunday at 12:14 Share Posted Sunday at 12:14 51 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Well as you clearly know we were barred from doing any business with vitoria so not sure how you expect a answer for that qusstion? Unless you are out in Egypt none of us know what is foung on behind the scenes with the two clubs You can question them but if you dont have a answer to what they can do instead to compete with the likes of spurs chelsea and man utd people are not going to take your opinion seriously. Like i said on many occasions take your anger up with the Premier league the rule makers who have allowed this for years. Its not on our brilliant owners We finished over all 3 of them teams last season. We finished above Chelsea and Spurs two seasons ago when they had massive headstarts over us None of this had anything to do with affliate clubs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted Sunday at 12:20 Share Posted Sunday at 12:20 @Zatman I do think that the fact Unai owns the club makes a HUGE difference. I don't think NSWE will want to upset him by just shoehorning decisions in on him. I'm almost certain he will have green lit if not even suggested the ideas ( Even down to kit etc ). For example if you read his last interview, it really doesn't even seem like Real ever aims to compete at the top level, it's more of a community and opportunity for the local areas club ( Based on my reading ). Your broader point though, has good points but I feel are very much up for debate Current football ensures that if we want to compete at the top level, we need to give ourselves the playing field the bigger clubs are in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted Sunday at 12:27 Share Posted Sunday at 12:27 1 hour ago, The_Steve said: You keep saying scum model, please elaborate. Are Fleetwood Town scum for having a club in Dubai? Are Barnsley scum for being part of a 7 team group? Are Brighton scum because their owner also owns a Belgian team? Are Brentford also scum for having a Danish feeder club? Are Bournemouth also scum? How do you propose we get around visas in a post-Brexit world? Fleetwood set that team up themselves and didnt steal a club though the owner who set it up has been convicted for fraud so more than likely scum Brentford dont have a feeder club anymore and Barnsley are a small team who need assistance financially while we are the predatory team which people dont get Lorient fans might think Bournemouth are scum since the great multi ownership has led to relegation and never replaced 50 million worth of talent they sold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted Sunday at 12:34 Share Posted Sunday at 12:34 16 minutes ago, Zatman said: We finished over all 3 of them teams last season. We finished above Chelsea and Spurs two seasons ago when they had massive headstarts over us None of this had anything to do with affliate clubs We finished above chelsea and spurs how many times prior to the last few seasons in the last 20 years. You really think is going to remain that way if we dont continue the way we are doing? Its not going to happen. We need growth and the way NSWE plan has been going they had "play the game' and they are doing it successfully. Not going to criticise them for that and in my opinion neither should you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thabucks Posted Sunday at 12:40 Share Posted Sunday at 12:40 You cannot really compare all multi club ownership models and label the with the same brush IMO. Some have been bad some have been good. It all depends on the situation & long term goals of the individual ownership groups. If it’s a collaborative partnership where all clubs benefit from it what’s wrong with that. Vitoria can get access to players they may not ever be able to attain, through loans. Cross sharing of knowledge from scouting to training methods and cost savings through centralised processes - meaning they can focus their budget on playing matters. We also don’t own Vitoria, we have a 29% stake in them. We have collaborative relationships with other teams for the benefit of both sides. It’s a long term strategic model where the results can take years to come to fruition. The Senegal academy will take years to bear fruit. Same with Zed FC. Ultimately as we’re the top of the tree it’s designed to benefit us by giving us a competitive edge. I don’t think our owners would act in a way that is detrimental to the other clubs involved. Football has evolved and fans attitudes need to change with that. Multi club ownership is here to stay whether you like it or not and you’ve just got to accept that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted Sunday at 12:40 Share Posted Sunday at 12:40 Part owning Vitoria, Real Union, the failed MLS bid and working with Zed had f all to do with us finishing 4th. IMO of course. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thabucks Posted Sunday at 12:46 Share Posted Sunday at 12:46 4 minutes ago, sne said: Part owning Vitoria, Real Union, the failed MLS bid and working with Zed had f all to do with us finishing 4th. IMO of course. And - don’t see any relevance to your point whatsoever. Not saying your onion is invalided btw. Do you really think these partnerships were put in place for instant results ? … Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted Sunday at 12:47 Share Posted Sunday at 12:47 Just now, thabucks said: And - don’t see any relevance to your point whatsoever. Not saying your onion is invalided btw. Do you really think these partnerships were put in place for instant results ? … That's ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted Sunday at 14:23 Share Posted Sunday at 14:23 1 hour ago, thabucks said: You cannot really compare all multi club ownership models and label the with the same brush IMO. Some have been bad some have been good. It all depends on the situation & long term goals of the individual ownership groups. Agreed. And that's part of the problem - a vast majority of which have existed for years and many newer ones outside of City Group/Red Bull are often mutually beneficial to all parties. Conflating the issue helps no one. It's never been about building instant success, but creating the conditions to improve the long-term successes of clubs. Italy has a much worse multi-club ownership model, but that's not brought up either. People are free to have reservations, but some of it is honestly misplaced or misunderstanding the situation. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted Sunday at 18:23 Share Posted Sunday at 18:23 (edited) 4 hours ago, The_Steve said: Agreed. And that's part of the problem - a vast majority of which have existed for years and many newer ones outside of City Group/Red Bull are often mutually beneficial to all parties. Conflating the issue helps no one. It's never been about building instant success, but creating the conditions to improve the long-term successes of clubs. Italy has a much worse multi-club ownership model, but that's not brought up either. People are free to have reservations, but some of it is honestly misplaced or misunderstanding the situation. The City Group has helped a lot of clubs incredibly - not sure how you can say otherwise. Maybe you’re just going to shout “Troyes” until you’re blue in the face, who knows. Other clubs have had a lot of comparative success. Exactly the same with Red Bull. I’d wager our owners want to operate in a similar manner. The ownership structure at Vitoria only got changed because we couldn’t transfer players whilst in the same competition. At the top of the group is Aston Villa, supporting Aston Villa are the rest. Got to applaud the mental gymnastics to make this “good” and others “bad”, though. Kudos. Edited Sunday at 18:23 by bobzy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted Sunday at 18:27 Share Posted Sunday at 18:27 (edited) 10 hours ago, Demitri_C said: As i said above what do we do instead then? Its quite interesting you mocking afew of us above but provide no other way in which we compete with these clubs? I guess you would be more happier being like brentford or fulham? Give us a detailed planned how we consistently finish above chelsea and man utd each season without doing what we have been doing under NSWE. We are all ears. Name the benefit we’re currently getting from a multi-club ownership that has meant we finished 4th? I’m all ears. (Edit: For the pedants, multi-club “partnership”) Edited Sunday at 18:29 by bobzy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted Sunday at 18:31 Share Posted Sunday at 18:31 4 minutes ago, bobzy said: Name the benefit we’re currently getting from a multi-club ownership that has meant we finished 4th? I’m all ears. (Edit: For the pedants, multi-club “partnership”) When you answer my question ill answer yours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted Sunday at 18:33 Share Posted Sunday at 18:33 Just now, Demitri_C said: When you answer my question ill answer yours Well, you’re saying that we can’t compete without taking this route. We have to do it, otherwise we fall back. I don’t think that’s true as there’s been no impact from the other clubs on this season… …unless I’m missing something? What has the impact been? Why do we need to be doing this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted Sunday at 18:36 Share Posted Sunday at 18:36 Just now, bobzy said: Well, you’re saying that we can’t compete without taking this route. We have to do it, otherwise we fall back. I don’t think that’s true as there’s been no impact from the other clubs on this season… …unless I’m missing something? What has the impact been? Why do we need to be doing this? I asked how do we compete with the other clubs above us without doing what they do and no one who is opposed to this has given us a plan of what we should do? If it doesn't "benefit " the big clubs then why do they do it? For extra revenue opportunities, players, work permits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts