| Swansea City Brand - USA 01:15 - Feb 19 with 3647 views | Nookiejack |
One of the 'fors' for the sale of our club to the Americans - is that it will boost our commercial revenue in the US through their know how/contacts etc.
However when you google John Moores and Charles Noell (Peregrine Systems, San Diego Padres TV rights etc.) - you find a stream of negative articles from the US about them.
So do we actually understand the impact on the 'Swansea City' brand in the US of being associated with them?
Fair enough it may be positive.
However being associated with them might be quite negative, devalue our brand and actually lower our potential to grow commercial revenues in the US? |  | | |  |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 16:35 - Feb 19 with 1148 views | stAteSwan |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 15:59 - Feb 19 by Nookiejack |
That's the great to know - so doesn't appear to be an issue for us - with regards to growing in the US.
As an aside what's the story behind Moores and appropriating the Padres TV rights? Is that the reason Padres didm't spend enough on the team?
Or didn't he spend money on the team and then appropriated the TV rights?
Are there any truth in these stories you read on the internet - as worrying from over here? |
I am pretty new to being a Swansea supporter, but I'd be more worried if this place was not worried about potential investment. Many of you know the club far better than I could ever hope to know, and you have every right to be worried about any outside group coming in to take an interest in the club. Especially when a club just down the road from you is struggling with a foreign owner.
I just think its worth pointing out that not every foreign investor is Tom Petty or Vincent Tan or the Glazer faimily (Though, in fairness, I don't think the Glazer's are that bad)
One thing to understand about Baseball over here is that TV rights are handled team by team. Owners are responsible for selling their own product to local television. National networks have a deal with the league itself, but the profit for individual clubs off that is minimal. In the same vein, National Networks rarely venture out to San Diego for a game...as they are going to stick to major names and markets (New York, LA, Chicago, and Boston are on TV more than anyone else) That means, for a team like San Diego, they have to do whatever they can to get as much money for their local TV rights. My best understanding is that Moores tried to be creative, overvalued his own franchise, and it blew up in his face.
The thing is...My understanding is the BPL covers all TV rights for their clubs, so its not like the same problem could happen in Swansea. The thing you must understd is that American and UK sports are very different in the way they are run. For instance, San Diego not spending enough? He was taking what's seen in the US as a small market club. However, fans have large market expectations for that club.
Moore's biggest mistake with San Diego was that he couldnt out spend the franchise's in New York, Boston, and LA, with their deep pocketed owners and large TV rights deals. There was a limit to what he could spend.
If Swansea wants Moores to invest to try and catch up to Manchester United...than yes, you are setting him up to fail. However, if you want him to help finance buying the Liberty Stadium, and to be able to provide you enouh cash that you can splash on a better quality player that might put you in position to challenge for a European place...than you've got a shot. | | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 16:35 - Feb 19 with 1147 views | ApeShit |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 16:30 - Feb 19 by Jackanapes |
If they sell for for ten times as much as they buy us, then I suspect we wont be in too much of a position to complain. [Post edited 19 Feb 2015 16:31]
|
The Padres were. |  | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 16:42 - Feb 19 with 1139 views | Jackanapes |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 16:35 - Feb 19 by ApeShit |
The Padres were. |
Do you speak for the Padres the same way that you speak for all Swansea supporters? |  |
|
“The stupidest thing she knew was for people to act like they knew all about the things they knew absolutely nothing about.†|
| |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 17:27 - Feb 19 with 1107 views | ApeShit |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 16:42 - Feb 19 by Jackanapes |
Do you speak for the Padres the same way that you speak for all Swansea supporters? |
I'm not speaking for what the fans think, I'm talking about their performances, seasons (or whatever they call them) since.
You don't seem that bothered whatever happens anyway, and I've got to do the dishes, have a good evening. [Post edited 19 Feb 2015 17:29]
| | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 17:39 - Feb 19 with 1098 views | Private_Partz |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 16:35 - Feb 19 by stAteSwan |
I am pretty new to being a Swansea supporter, but I'd be more worried if this place was not worried about potential investment. Many of you know the club far better than I could ever hope to know, and you have every right to be worried about any outside group coming in to take an interest in the club. Especially when a club just down the road from you is struggling with a foreign owner.
I just think its worth pointing out that not every foreign investor is Tom Petty or Vincent Tan or the Glazer faimily (Though, in fairness, I don't think the Glazer's are that bad)
One thing to understand about Baseball over here is that TV rights are handled team by team. Owners are responsible for selling their own product to local television. National networks have a deal with the league itself, but the profit for individual clubs off that is minimal. In the same vein, National Networks rarely venture out to San Diego for a game...as they are going to stick to major names and markets (New York, LA, Chicago, and Boston are on TV more than anyone else) That means, for a team like San Diego, they have to do whatever they can to get as much money for their local TV rights. My best understanding is that Moores tried to be creative, overvalued his own franchise, and it blew up in his face.
The thing is...My understanding is the BPL covers all TV rights for their clubs, so its not like the same problem could happen in Swansea. The thing you must understd is that American and UK sports are very different in the way they are run. For instance, San Diego not spending enough? He was taking what's seen in the US as a small market club. However, fans have large market expectations for that club.
Moore's biggest mistake with San Diego was that he couldnt out spend the franchise's in New York, Boston, and LA, with their deep pocketed owners and large TV rights deals. There was a limit to what he could spend.
If Swansea wants Moores to invest to try and catch up to Manchester United...than yes, you are setting him up to fail. However, if you want him to help finance buying the Liberty Stadium, and to be able to provide you enouh cash that you can splash on a better quality player that might put you in position to challenge for a European place...than you've got a shot. |
Thanks for that stAte. It is good to see some positive posts on our potential 'investors'. I suspect those on our Board who are not selling are looking for Moores and Co to bring some experience to the managment of the club. His experience of failure could then be of value. If you want to develope home security then employ a burglar. If you want internet security then a hacker is your man. The problem is we have been burnt once and then we look at the car crashes at other clubs and we will therefore remain very wary. Being on high alert is very good IMHO as hopefully we will pick up very early on if things start to go amiss. |  |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 17:58 - Feb 19 with 1086 views | Jackanapes |
On reflection Im probably being very naive. The padres forum was probably rife with threads saying " Time to go now Pal" and " What the fk have the board done" | |
|
“The stupidest thing she knew was for people to act like they knew all about the things they knew absolutely nothing about.†|
| |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 18:15 - Feb 19 with 1068 views | stAteSwan |
If you want to hire someone to run your business that has no experience in failure, than you probably are hiring someone with no experience.
I have no issue with posters here being wary. That is perfectly understandable. What I do not get is the posters commenting about how the club would be better off getting relegated. That's nonsense. There's no guarantee that the club can get back immediately once they are relegated. Wigan looks ticketed for League One at the moment, and they were the FA Cup Winners just two years ago. | | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 18:18 - Feb 19 with 1066 views | trampie |
It might come down to the Americans motivation, if its money and the term investor screams that out, then we could be in serious trouble if they get their hands on our club as its very difficult for clubs to make a profit [they all chase the same pool of players who can ask the earth for their services, therefore usually there is no profit only a loss].
Other owners like rich benefactors might hope to make a profit but if they don't they feel they have given something back to their community and the team they love, rich backers from around the globe might see it as a play thing, a status symbol, they might hope to make a profit but if they don't they still get the status of owning a top flight pro team and will often do nothing to jeopardise their standing if they do not get success on or off the field.
Pure financial investors, equates to a huge risk, if they make money they might syphon it off without reinvesting it and if they make losses [which is probably more likely than making a profit for most teams, perhaps not the Swans in the short time mind due to our strong current financial situation] then they might pull the plug on the team selling what they can to get as much money back as possible.
For us fans imo, American investors would be a bigger risk than local ownership or a benefactor or a rich billionaire looking for a new toy.
Would these investors buy some shares and then pump in ex amount of millions in the form of a loan ? that we have to pay back to them, if so results will need to be good and we will have to stay in the Prem whatever we do. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 18:26 - Feb 19 with 1060 views | Nookiejack |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 16:35 - Feb 19 by stAteSwan |
I am pretty new to being a Swansea supporter, but I'd be more worried if this place was not worried about potential investment. Many of you know the club far better than I could ever hope to know, and you have every right to be worried about any outside group coming in to take an interest in the club. Especially when a club just down the road from you is struggling with a foreign owner.
I just think its worth pointing out that not every foreign investor is Tom Petty or Vincent Tan or the Glazer faimily (Though, in fairness, I don't think the Glazer's are that bad)
One thing to understand about Baseball over here is that TV rights are handled team by team. Owners are responsible for selling their own product to local television. National networks have a deal with the league itself, but the profit for individual clubs off that is minimal. In the same vein, National Networks rarely venture out to San Diego for a game...as they are going to stick to major names and markets (New York, LA, Chicago, and Boston are on TV more than anyone else) That means, for a team like San Diego, they have to do whatever they can to get as much money for their local TV rights. My best understanding is that Moores tried to be creative, overvalued his own franchise, and it blew up in his face.
The thing is...My understanding is the BPL covers all TV rights for their clubs, so its not like the same problem could happen in Swansea. The thing you must understd is that American and UK sports are very different in the way they are run. For instance, San Diego not spending enough? He was taking what's seen in the US as a small market club. However, fans have large market expectations for that club.
Moore's biggest mistake with San Diego was that he couldnt out spend the franchise's in New York, Boston, and LA, with their deep pocketed owners and large TV rights deals. There was a limit to what he could spend.
If Swansea wants Moores to invest to try and catch up to Manchester United...than yes, you are setting him up to fail. However, if you want him to help finance buying the Liberty Stadium, and to be able to provide you enouh cash that you can splash on a better quality player that might put you in position to challenge for a European place...than you've got a shot. |
Thank you so much for your feedback about how the takeover by Moores and Noell is being perceived by our fans in the states.
If you don't mind I would like to hone in the following for discussion - as I find certain perceptions worrying - as have just seen some similar thoughts from a fan on another thread.
'If Swansea wants Moores to invest to try and catch up to Manchester United...than yes, you are setting him up to fail. However, if you want him to help finance buying the Liberty Stadium, and to be able to provide you enouh cash that you can splash on a better quality player that might put you in position to challenge for a European place...than you've got a shot.'
Just to explain we really don't need Moores to help us finance the Liberty stadium - the club has assets between £100m and £150m of assets (depending on how you value the new TV rights) and no debt. We can easily raise a commercial loan at very low interest rates - as have so much (debt-free unmortgaged security).
In contrast if we already had say £80m to £100m of debt mortgaged against our £100m to £150m of assets - then Moores may well be the person to help us finance stadium purchase. Although a counter to this is we probably can negotiate buying the stadium for £2m per annum over 10 years - so again we don't need Moores.
Then to recap on Financial Fair Play (FFP).
'A club can now only spend on the team an additional £4m per year on salaries plus extra income from new commercial activities and can only make a loss (total) of £15m over 3 years unless the owners put in equity (not loans, equity).'
What this means is the drawbridge has been raised and rich owners can't provide loans to clubs anymore to bring in better quality players. The wage bill can only go up by max. £4m per annum etc.
Therefore I don't see how - under FFP - Moores is allowed to provide us with enough cash to splash on better quality players. Those days are gone it is a thing of the past - you are not allowed to it anymore. Also our club ethos has been since we came out of administration - that we live within our means. We do not splash the cash - such as a club like Cardiff - even if FFP wasn't in place.
Many of our our supporters over here - have the same perceptions as you and think rich billionaire from the states - will splash the cash on our players and take us into Europe etc FFP doesn't allow you to do this anymore.
Hopefully all our fans across the world will start understanding this soon. | | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 18:34 - Feb 19 with 1046 views | stAteSwan |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 18:26 - Feb 19 by Nookiejack |
Thank you so much for your feedback about how the takeover by Moores and Noell is being perceived by our fans in the states.
If you don't mind I would like to hone in the following for discussion - as I find certain perceptions worrying - as have just seen some similar thoughts from a fan on another thread.
'If Swansea wants Moores to invest to try and catch up to Manchester United...than yes, you are setting him up to fail. However, if you want him to help finance buying the Liberty Stadium, and to be able to provide you enouh cash that you can splash on a better quality player that might put you in position to challenge for a European place...than you've got a shot.'
Just to explain we really don't need Moores to help us finance the Liberty stadium - the club has assets between £100m and £150m of assets (depending on how you value the new TV rights) and no debt. We can easily raise a commercial loan at very low interest rates - as have so much (debt-free unmortgaged security).
In contrast if we already had say £80m to £100m of debt mortgaged against our £100m to £150m of assets - then Moores may well be the person to help us finance stadium purchase. Although a counter to this is we probably can negotiate buying the stadium for £2m per annum over 10 years - so again we don't need Moores.
Then to recap on Financial Fair Play (FFP).
'A club can now only spend on the team an additional £4m per year on salaries plus extra income from new commercial activities and can only make a loss (total) of £15m over 3 years unless the owners put in equity (not loans, equity).'
What this means is the drawbridge has been raised and rich owners can't provide loans to clubs anymore to bring in better quality players. The wage bill can only go up by max. £4m per annum etc.
Therefore I don't see how - under FFP - Moores is allowed to provide us with enough cash to splash on better quality players. Those days are gone it is a thing of the past - you are not allowed to it anymore. Also our club ethos has been since we came out of administration - that we live within our means. We do not splash the cash - such as a club like Cardiff - even if FFP wasn't in place.
Many of our our supporters over here - have the same perceptions as you and think rich billionaire from the states - will splash the cash on our players and take us into Europe etc FFP doesn't allow you to do this anymore.
Hopefully all our fans across the world will start understanding this soon. |
I was more or less quoting what I had seen written. Many American Writers are convinced that Swansea only sold Bony so they could buy the Liberty Stadium. Likewise, the only mentions I have seen out of Moore's connections to the club out of American Press is that it could be used to help us compete and spend at this level.
I won't pretend to understand Financial Fair Play. Over here in the states, it's every man for himself. Many club's have brought themselves out of the doldrums by simply being bought by a Well to do owner, and just out spend everyone else. For many of us, that's all we know.
I only started to learn the basics behind Financial Fair Play a few months ago. | | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 18:42 - Feb 19 with 1038 views | Starsky |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 12:10 - Feb 19 by Jackanapes |
Well I carried a bucket. How about you?
Worrying and taking action are two different things. Everyone has already decided this is a bad thing when no-one knows what is going to happen. Why?
I mean surely everyone tried to stop Petty from taking over the club didnt they? Or did they react after they realised what was going on? [Post edited 19 Feb 2015 12:18]
|
When Petty took over, if I remember correctly, we were just getting divorced from 9th floor and the debt that they lumped on us to cover their overheads whilst running our club.
So initially, when Petty came in, I had faith... For about 24 hours.
This time, were being pushed towards an arranged marriage... And we don't need to get married.
It's not about the yanks... It's about any outsider.
Why can't we keep progressing with the increased revenue coming in from Sky?
why doesn't someone work out compensation for all the hard unpaid work that our want away shareholders are due and pay them off, with the shares going to the other shareholders or the trust.
Why should they have lottery type gains from the club that they love so much.
They've already had some money back through dividends.
Swansea till I die be fecked. |  |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 18:46 - Feb 19 with 1035 views | Nookiejack |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 18:34 - Feb 19 by stAteSwan |
I was more or less quoting what I had seen written. Many American Writers are convinced that Swansea only sold Bony so they could buy the Liberty Stadium. Likewise, the only mentions I have seen out of Moore's connections to the club out of American Press is that it could be used to help us compete and spend at this level.
I won't pretend to understand Financial Fair Play. Over here in the states, it's every man for himself. Many club's have brought themselves out of the doldrums by simply being bought by a Well to do owner, and just out spend everyone else. For many of us, that's all we know.
I only started to learn the basics behind Financial Fair Play a few months ago. |
I really appreciate that you have taken trouble to contribute to this thread and given us a balanced view | | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 19:50 - Feb 19 with 1011 views | Jackanapes |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 18:42 - Feb 19 by Starsky |
When Petty took over, if I remember correctly, we were just getting divorced from 9th floor and the debt that they lumped on us to cover their overheads whilst running our club.
So initially, when Petty came in, I had faith... For about 24 hours.
This time, were being pushed towards an arranged marriage... And we don't need to get married.
It's not about the yanks... It's about any outsider.
Why can't we keep progressing with the increased revenue coming in from Sky?
why doesn't someone work out compensation for all the hard unpaid work that our want away shareholders are due and pay them off, with the shares going to the other shareholders or the trust.
Why should they have lottery type gains from the club that they love so much.
They've already had some money back through dividends.
Swansea till I die be fecked. |
"This time, were being pushed towards an arranged marriage... And we don't need to get married.
It's not about the yanks... It's about any outsider.
Why can't we keep progressing with the increased revenue coming in from Sky?"
As someone who is happy to watch us finish 11th every season, I agree. I suspect not every supporter shares that view though. Also as sky money goes up so wages so do transfers etc. We only get the same money as every other team at our level. How do we gain any advantage in order to progress there? [Post edited 19 Feb 2015 19:51]
| |
|
“The stupidest thing she knew was for people to act like they knew all about the things they knew absolutely nothing about.†|
| |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 21:41 - Feb 19 with 985 views | Starsky |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 19:50 - Feb 19 by Jackanapes |
"This time, were being pushed towards an arranged marriage... And we don't need to get married.
It's not about the yanks... It's about any outsider.
Why can't we keep progressing with the increased revenue coming in from Sky?"
As someone who is happy to watch us finish 11th every season, I agree. I suspect not every supporter shares that view though. Also as sky money goes up so wages so do transfers etc. We only get the same money as every other team at our level. How do we gain any advantage in order to progress there? [Post edited 19 Feb 2015 19:51]
|
How?
We continue to make more astute signings than the rest of them.
That's Swansea City | |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 23:16 - Feb 19 with 955 views | Swanseajill |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 18:26 - Feb 19 by Nookiejack |
Thank you so much for your feedback about how the takeover by Moores and Noell is being perceived by our fans in the states.
If you don't mind I would like to hone in the following for discussion - as I find certain perceptions worrying - as have just seen some similar thoughts from a fan on another thread.
'If Swansea wants Moores to invest to try and catch up to Manchester United...than yes, you are setting him up to fail. However, if you want him to help finance buying the Liberty Stadium, and to be able to provide you enouh cash that you can splash on a better quality player that might put you in position to challenge for a European place...than you've got a shot.'
Just to explain we really don't need Moores to help us finance the Liberty stadium - the club has assets between £100m and £150m of assets (depending on how you value the new TV rights) and no debt. We can easily raise a commercial loan at very low interest rates - as have so much (debt-free unmortgaged security).
In contrast if we already had say £80m to £100m of debt mortgaged against our £100m to £150m of assets - then Moores may well be the person to help us finance stadium purchase. Although a counter to this is we probably can negotiate buying the stadium for £2m per annum over 10 years - so again we don't need Moores.
Then to recap on Financial Fair Play (FFP).
'A club can now only spend on the team an additional £4m per year on salaries plus extra income from new commercial activities and can only make a loss (total) of £15m over 3 years unless the owners put in equity (not loans, equity).'
What this means is the drawbridge has been raised and rich owners can't provide loans to clubs anymore to bring in better quality players. The wage bill can only go up by max. £4m per annum etc.
Therefore I don't see how - under FFP - Moores is allowed to provide us with enough cash to splash on better quality players. Those days are gone it is a thing of the past - you are not allowed to it anymore. Also our club ethos has been since we came out of administration - that we live within our means. We do not splash the cash - such as a club like Cardiff - even if FFP wasn't in place.
Many of our our supporters over here - have the same perceptions as you and think rich billionaire from the states - will splash the cash on our players and take us into Europe etc FFP doesn't allow you to do this anymore.
Hopefully all our fans across the world will start understanding this soon. |
Excellent post.
I go further back than many that are posting here, and I've seen so many mistakes made for the dollar signs.
Too many, and some should never be forgotten.
I hope the majority of the board members have the clubs future as their number one priority. I'm a great believer in better the devil you know. |  | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 01:27 - Feb 20 with 903 views | JoeSoccerFan |
Answer to your questions: It will have no impact in the US market, because almost no one in the US soccer community knows who these guys are. | | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 01:43 - Feb 20 with 897 views | NeiltheTaylor |
The guys on Sirius XM FC (satellite radio sawker station over here, which intersperses Talkshoite broadcasts with US based football talk) mentioned it yesterday and were under the impression it was some kind of "investment" but didn't really get beyond that before the talk petered out around US "Investors" in the UK and wishing US soccer could get some of these guys' money. | |
| Joe_bradshaw -I thought the cryochamber was the new name for Cardiff's stadium.
|
| |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 01:46 - Feb 20 with 895 views | NeiltheTaylor |
Does anyone else expect us to welcome our new American overlords with the US National Men's team "I believe that we will win" chant from the World Cup? | |
| Joe_bradshaw -I thought the cryochamber was the new name for Cardiff's stadium.
|
| |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 02:33 - Feb 20 with 888 views | Nookiejack |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 01:43 - Feb 20 by NeiltheTaylor |
The guys on Sirius XM FC (satellite radio sawker station over here, which intersperses Talkshoite broadcasts with US based football talk) mentioned it yesterday and were under the impression it was some kind of "investment" but didn't really get beyond that before the talk petered out around US "Investors" in the UK and wishing US soccer could get some of these guys' money. |
Again thanks once again for your feedback from the States
Yes strange that the perception is out in the States that we are receiving money from them - whereas in reality our club is not receiving any of their money.
They are not injecting fresh equity capital into our club.
They are just buying shares off our shareholders that want to sell. It is those shareholders that are receiving their money - not out club.
They may be able to add value in other areas though - but don't think you can class this as investment. | | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 02:38 - Feb 20 with 884 views | Nookiejack |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 01:27 - Feb 20 by JoeSoccerFan |
Answer to your questions: It will have no impact in the US market, because almost no one in the US soccer community knows who these guys are. |
That's really encouraging - as you would hope we can grow our fanbase in the US | | | |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 07:44 - Feb 20 with 874 views | Dewi1jack |
| Swansea City Brand - USA on 01:27 - Feb 20 by JoeSoccerFan |
Answer to your questions: It will have no impact in the US market, because almost no one in the US soccer community knows who these guys are. |
Thanks to you and stAte.
It seems that we are far more interested in new owners as we've had Mr bad, grim and trouble before.
Hopefully we'll hold off with the pitchforks at the mo (although they're close to hand and the torches are soaking up the petrol  )
Better to be prepared to fight and hope you don't have to, than scrambling to get a force together.
But threads on us being relegated rather than give the Good Ole boys a chance? Seriously?
Protests Saturday? About what?
And yes, I've done Scarboro, Carlisle etc and personally I'd rather be miles ahead of our Eastern cousins, watching top flight football while picking up new fans all the time.
While we're top flight and getting extended highlights on the telly every week, we're going to be getting kids interested in us. They'll be the next generation of fans coming through the turnstiles when us oldies can no longer make the games home and away. |  |
| If you wake up breathing, thats a good start to your day and you'll make many thousands of people envious. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
