spintheblackcircle
incoming!!!
- Mar 1, 2002
- 66,269
- 12,213
Of course they are. Though in May, they came out and said they weren't looking to sell, and were in the long haul.FSG is an investment company. If they feel like they can get max ROI by selling now, they will.
Exactly. At their price.Of course they are. Though in May, they came out and said they weren't looking to sell, and were in the long haul.
I do think they're willing to sell, but at their price.
Why would they care what anyone else is spending whatsoever? They make more dialing spending back wherever they finish first or fourth.Tbh, if you read their statement to the Athletic, it's not too much different than usual. They're willing to consider offers, will sell part, will potentially sell all, if the right bid came down the pipe.
I think some of this is due to the fact that they're not willing to invest what it takes to keep the club to the top, and there's no check on the spending of other ownership groups.
They sold 11%just recently, likely at way lower than the value (when you consider what Chelsea went for... and they have meh revenues, along with a stadium boondoggle). So I wouldn't be shocked if they're looking to sell another chunk, while still keeping the top line. They did just buy a hockey club, so, it would make sense if they're spreading around some of the risk.Exactly. At their price.
If some crazy billionnaire on a power trip is willing to overpay, they will sell for sure. If they do not get their price, the asset will likely continue to appreciate so they are not in a rush.
That also makes sense.They sold 11%just recently, likely at way lower than the value (when you consider what Chelsea went for... and they have meh revenues, along with a stadium boondoggle). So I wouldn't be shocked if they're looking to sell another chunk, while still keeping the top line. They did just buy a hockey club, so, it would make sense if they're spreading around some of the risk.
Why would they care what anyone else is spending whatsoever? They make more dialing spending back wherever they finish first or fourth.
They see an opportunity and are willing to explore it. Other clubs have little to do with it.
Radcliffe?Wonder if the Ricketts will pounce again considering their Chelsea pursuit.
Didn't consider that. Would be an interesting turn of events for sure.if it's oil money, Klopp is gone.
This is very dramatic. No reason at all to worry about this.I'll go out and say that if they are selling, I am nervous on who they get.
FSG is not perfect by any stretch... but if it's oil money, Klopp is gone. I also wouldn't want anyone like Chelsea's ownership group.
Why is that?FSG is not perfect by any stretch... but if it's oil money, Klopp is gone.
This is very dramatic. No reason at all to worry about this.
We can worry about this when we know who wants to buy, we know how imminent this is, and we know how much % of the club is being sold. Feels a long was to go here
Why is that?
Last time they sold portion to Redbird, they purchased the Penguins. My feeling is they want an NBA team in Vegas.That also makes sense.
Maybe they need some cash for another purchase and want to liquify some assets. That would also make sense.
Why is it limited? How much additional money do they make finishing first versus third? I don’t think it’s nearly enough for them to care. They seem perfectly content with their model and competitiveness is only an objective up to a point.They care because they don't want to have to go out and light money on fire in the transfers. They like cost certainty. Even though MLB doesn't really have a cap, the tax does limit some of what MOST clubs would spend. Their concerns with Liverpool, and international football, and the entire reason they wanted to get into bed with a Super League is the idea of runaway costs, and then not being able to collect the tv / appearance premium.
Yeah, they're in the business of making money. But to them, their ability to make money is limited by oil wealth just lighting cash on fire.