The Sunday Times - Southampton put up for sale at £250m

[djharvey]

[Badger]

So could it be a two horse race between Redball and Red Bull ? 

[djharvey]

[tajjuk]

You'd think Newcastle are probably a more attractive proposition. 

[Nolan]

Just now, tajjuk said:

You'd think Newcastle are probably a more attractive proposition. 

Would you? £300mil for a Mike Ashleigh run company?

[Convict Colony]

2 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

You'd think Newcastle are probably a more attractive proposition. 

yeah i'd go with this - 300m to buy and 140 to invest sounds about right

[Matthew Le God]

2 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

You'd think Newcastle are probably a more attractive proposition. 

More expensive and weaker academy. Saints are more moneyball than them. 

[tajjuk]

3 minutes ago, Nolan said:

Would you? £300mil for a Mike Ashleigh run company?

Potential wise yes. We are probably a little stronger in set up right now (and arguably in first team assets as well) but they have 50k made geordies to build on and potentially more to turn up, I mean a good Newcastle team that played good football you wouldn't be surprised if they filled like a 70k plus stadium to be honest. 

Also we are where we are now with an excellent academy, probably better behind the scenes set up etc. Newcastle are supposedly a mess, badly run etc. and are only slightly behind us, so again potential investors can see immediate gains there, sort out their behind the scenes stuff, recruiting etc. and they will already be better. 

[Matthew Le God]

@tajjuk Newcastle's bigger ground doesn't make a huge difference in matchday income compared to Saints. Our ticket prices are higher so it is a relatively small gap in matchday income between the two despite them having a 20k bigger stadium. Plus match day income for all Premier League clubs is a relatively small proportion of total income.

Edited 22 August, 2020 by Matthew Le God

[Wade Garrett]

Strange coincidence as I’m reading this I’m actually watching Moneyball.  Karma.

[Convict Colony]

31 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

@tajjuk Newcastle's bigger ground doesn't make a huge difference in matchday income compared to Saints. Our ticket prices are higher so it is a relatively small gap in matchday income between the two despite them having a 20k bigger stadium. Plus match day income for all Premier League clubs is a relatively small proportion of total income.

Interesting didn't think too much about that

[trousers]

1 hour ago, SuperSAINT said:

Where is @trousers ?!

I inadvertently scuppered the Dell deal by putting all my research on here only for some scumbag to pedal it as their own on twitter... Once bitten, twice shy. Keeping my cards close to my chest on this one.

[ErwinK1961]

Newcastle or West Ham would be my bet. Imagine we’d be cheaper though so maybe that might give us a chance?

[The Kraken]

Leeds maybe? Single team in the city, decent fan base, still seen as a pretty big side after their successes under Revie and winning the last Div 1 title before the PL came in, just back in the big league, a bit of a blank canvas behind the scenes perhaps. If not I agree Newcastle might be a likely target.

We know that the amount of tickets sold at the ground is only small percentage of income these days.   That said there’s still IMO a big correlation between size of ground (and if you can fill it) and perceived growth potential for success. Hence the likes of Newcastle will also always be seen as an attractive option.

[hypochondriac]

I might be biased but I'd definitely want to buy a club down south if I had a choice. Looking at the prem you'd imagine West ham would be the top choice but maybe the Olympic stadium is a bit of a curse. Beyond that you'd think we'd be worth a look. 

[Colinjb]

19 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I might be biased but I'd definitely want to buy a club down south if I had a choice. Looking at the prem you'd imagine West ham would be the top choice but maybe the Olympic stadium is a bit of a curse. 

Paying hundreds of millions for a club and not getting a stadium as part of it. Cannot see it happening over say Newcastle or us.

Edited 22 August, 2020 by Colinjb

[hypochondriac]

15 minutes ago, Colinjb said:

Paying hundreds of millions for a club and not getting a stadium as part of it. Cannot see it happening over say Newcastle or us.

Yes that was my point but the flipside is they pay virtually nothing to use it. 

[Ivan Katalinic's 'tache]

I can imagine Jim Bowen now: "Red Bull you wanted, RedBall you've got..."

[hypochondriac]

The only colour of ball saints ever get is blue. 

[benjii]

Well, they've demonstrated enormous vision and originality with their name so let's hope they can bring some of their spunk to Saints.

[SuperSAINT]

K,Billy’s final post in March voting for this doesn’t really align with RedBall does it?

F) American owners buying the club through loans put on the club

 

[RedFear]

Not wanting to pop anyone’s enthusiasm, but are heavily involved owners really what we want?

Especially ones whose biggest involvement appears to be in recruitment?

A lot of nonsense is written about Gao, but all said and done, his only real crime* appears to be a pretty obvious lack of money.

In terms of allowing the peoples whose job it is to run the club,the freedom to do exactly that, he seems to be exactly what you would want in an owner.

If anything, the few times it’s been suggested he has got involved, it’s been to do things fans had been asking for. i.e. first sacking Kruger and then Reed.

I understand these Americans are known for their innovative analysis of players, and although I am not against the principle, do I want owners whose own way of working and belief in this means they start dictating who we buy, over the head of Ralph and others?

Now I admit to having neither read nor watched Moneyball, so I understand I'm very uninformed on this, but if Ralph or scouts have a player in mind, but the owners (or their people) have spotted a player in the Swiss third division who happens to get more crosses in during 90 minutes, would they insist we go for him. I understand it was a similar principle that lead to Liverpool buying Downing and Andy Carroll**.

I also don’t see the excitement of an investment group buying us. An investment is exactly that, these are not the spendthrift billionaire's that people seem, for some reason, to think we deserve and that these days seems to be the only thing that differentiates a 'good' owner from a 'bad' one.

Just to be clear, this isn’t meant as celebration of Gao and his ownership, more just a question if any change of owner is really what we are after, as looking at these guys, I’m struggling to get the excitement of others.

-----------

MLG Notes -

* I understand this is very possibly not his only crime. I wasn’t talking in the legal sense, just metaphorical

** I know Stuart Downing and Andy Carroll did not come from the Swiss third division

[Nolan]

Also intriguing was this meeting with a group of season ticket holders and the board, where all the fans were sworn to secrecy, bit all seemed to come out happy (was originally posted on the 'lost zone' of the forum).

[Verbal]

3 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Yes that was my point but the flipside is they pay virtually nothing to use it. 

Your point was that the London Stadium is a 'curse'.  So really a point about witchcraft rather than economics.  

[SW5 SAINT]

4 hours ago, Colinjb said:

Paying hundreds of millions for a club and not getting a stadium as part of it. Cannot see it happening over say Newcastle or us.

Wham don’t come with a stadium either.......

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, Verbal said:

Your point was that the London Stadium is a 'curse'.  So really a point about witchcraft rather than economics.  

It was a figure of speech. I would have thought that was obvious. 

[Convict Colony]

3 hours ago, RedFear said:

Not wanting to pop anyone’s enthusiasm, but are heavily involved owners really what we want?

Especially ones whose biggest involvement appears to be in recruitment?

A lot of nonsense is written about Gao, but all said and done, his only real crime* appears to be a pretty obvious lack of money.

In terms of allowing the peoples whose job it is to run the club,the freedom to do exactly that, he seems to be exactly what you would want in an owner.

If anything, the few times it’s been suggested he has got involved, it’s been to do things fans had been asking for. i.e. first sacking Kruger and then Reed.

I understand these Americans are known for their innovative analysis of players, and although I am not against the principle, do I want owners whose own way of working and belief in this means they start dictating who we buy, over the head of Ralph and others?

Now I admit to having neither read nor watched Moneyball, so I understand I'm very uninformed on this, but if Ralph or scouts have a player in mind, but the owners (or their people) have spotted a player in the Swiss third division who happens to get more crosses in during 90 minutes, would they insist we go for him. I understand it was a similar principle that lead to Liverpool buying Downing and Andy Carroll**.

I also don’t see the excitement of an investment group buying us. An investment is exactly that, these are not the spendthrift billionaire's that people seem, for some reason, to think we deserve and that these days seems to be the only thing that differentiates a 'good' owner from a 'bad' one.

Just to be clear, this isn’t meant as celebration of Gao and his ownership, more just a question if any change of owner is really what we are after, as looking at these guys, I’m struggling to get the excitement of others.

-----------

MLG Notes -

* I understand this is very possibly not his only crime. I wasn’t talking in the legal sense, just metaphorical

** I know Stuart Downing and Andy Carroll did not come from the Swiss third division

Hahahahaha hahaha MLG notes 🤣🤣

[Verbal]

51 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

It was a figure of speech. I would have thought that was obvious. 

You said the stadium is a 'curse'.  Is that Keynesianism or monetarism?

[IFHP]

10 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Raising £440m doesn't  mean £440m is solely on purchase price. Leftovers could be spent on other things.

Plus all of the big 6 would cost more than £440m.

Who said any thing about the big 6?

Do you honestly believe they would by Saints for £200m odd then invest the same again?

 

 

 

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, IFHP said:

1) Who said any thing about the big 6?

2) Do you honestly believe they would by Saints for £200m odd then invest the same again?

1) If not the big six then who? Saints are one of the few clubs known to be for sale.

2) Who knows what they'd do. They could use it on Saints or use it on something else. Perhaps build up a network of clubs like the City Group, with a PL side, Toulouse and others.

[Saint_clark]

Any team involving Billy Beane will do well. The guys a genius. 

[Matthew Le God]

5 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

Any team involving Billy Beane will do well. The guys a genius. 

Jisheng Gao or Billy Beane...

[SaintsFan86]

Billy beane, Wonder if he'll turn a club into a Thriller.. Or it could be Bad.

[djharvey]

15 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

Any team involving Billy Beane will do well. The guys a genius. 

Yeah, just look at Barnsley fc! missed out on relegation by the skin of their teeth!

[Saint_clark]

10 minutes ago, djharvey said:

Yeah, just look at Barnsley fc! missed out on relegation by the skin of their teeth!

After a promotion that no-one expected. 

[djharvey]

Just now, Saint_clark said:

After a promotion that no-one expected. 

And a demotion prior to that! The same season the takeover was completed.

[djharvey]

I'm not saying Billy Beane wouldn't be a great influence/investor to have on board, but it rarely brings instant success!

You'd still get the bedwetters and naysayers on here moaning about something!

[GGalpin]

12 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

After a promotion that no-one expected. 

And considering their resources, their recruitment policy last few years is exceptional. The kinds of money spent on players and their returns is something far more impressive than what we've managed over the same period!

[SaintsFan86]

7 minutes ago, djharvey said:

I'm not saying Billy Beane wouldn't be a great influence/investor to have on board, but it rarely brings instant success!

You'd still get the bedwetters and naysayers on here moaning about something!

But we already have the right personel in charge too sort out the recruitment. We are just missing a little investment. Considering how we are, we've done well the past couple of seasons.

[tajjuk]

The Athletic article on this basically reckons the Premier League is their target because Scudamore has been brought onboard and because buying US sports is difficult aside Baseball but baseball is seen unlikely because of Beane.

The article then goes on the mention Spurs and Newcastle, Spurs being a more expensive option that would need more funding probably from a joint investor and Newcastle as a 'cheap' option. (no indication whether someone like Spurs might be sold) 

Also due to the way the deal has been done there is basically a ticking clock, as soon as the company was set up and investors put their money in they have 2 years to make a purchase or all the money has to go back to investors so i'd expect this group to be making a move sooner or later. 

So that factor might put us more possibly involved because the club is supposedly for sale.

Key though is this is an investment opportunity, these people are looking to make money from this, not spend it endlessly so even if they took us over I doubt you would see lots of spending, it would probably be much of the same, attempting to buy players low and sell high, and probably investment in the marketing of the club and maybe the area (IIRC several experts in property development are part of the group, amongst many others, there is a huge variety of experienced people in this group)

[benjii]

16 hours ago, RedFear said:

Not wanting to pop anyone’s enthusiasm, but are heavily involved owners really what we want?

Especially ones whose biggest involvement appears to be in recruitment?

A lot of nonsense is written about Gao, but all said and done, his only real crime* appears to be a pretty obvious lack of money.

In terms of allowing the peoples whose job it is to run the club,the freedom to do exactly that, he seems to be exactly what you would want in an owner.

If anything, the few times it’s been suggested he has got involved, it’s been to do things fans had been asking for. i.e. first sacking Kruger and then Reed.

I understand these Americans are known for their innovative analysis of players, and although I am not against the principle, do I want owners whose own way of working and belief in this means they start dictating who we buy, over the head of Ralph and others?

Now I admit to having neither read nor watched Moneyball, so I understand I'm very uninformed on this, but if Ralph or scouts have a player in mind, but the owners (or their people) have spotted a player in the Swiss third division who happens to get more crosses in during 90 minutes, would they insist we go for him. I understand it was a similar principle that lead to Liverpool buying Downing and Andy Carroll**.

I also don’t see the excitement of an investment group buying us. An investment is exactly that, these are not the spendthrift billionaire's that people seem, for some reason, to think we deserve and that these days seems to be the only thing that differentiates a 'good' owner from a 'bad' one.

Just to be clear, this isn’t meant as celebration of Gao and his ownership, more just a question if any change of owner is really what we are after, as looking at these guys, I’m struggling to get the excitement of others.

-----------

MLG Notes -

* I understand this is very possibly not his only crime. I wasn’t talking in the legal sense, just metaphorical

** I know Stuart Downing and Andy Carroll did not come from the Swiss third division

You're correct in the sense that we don't want a Vincent Tan type. An interfering owner without the competencies to interfere appropriately is not good.

But it would be nice to have an owner with a vision that extends past, "I needed to get some cash out of China". And whilst I don't demand an owner that will throw lots of money at us out of their own pocket (although that's clearly the only real way to achieve any long term success in European football if you don't already have a global brand or a dominant financial position in your domestic league), absent a lot of money or a decent strategy then it's likely that relegation will come at some point.

[Saint J 77]

Is there even a little bit of hope that there might be some real interest from a genuine buyer? 

https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/news/52745/does-ld-sports-pulling-out-suggest-takeover-imminent-at-st-marys

After reading the above I was hopeful the sponsor being pulled was the beginning of the end for all the Chinese involvement with the club. 

If we are still stuck with Gao beyond this season I fear it won't be long until the club has to start selling everything that isn't nailed down. 

[Barsiem]

16 minutes ago, Saint J 77 said:

Is there even a little bit of hope that there might be some real interest from a genuine buyer? 

https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/news/52745/does-ld-sports-pulling-out-suggest-takeover-imminent-at-st-marys

After reading the above I was hopeful the sponsor being pulled was the beginning of the end for all the Chinese involvement with the club. 

If we are still stuck with Gao beyond this season I fear it won't be long until the club has to start selling everything that isn't nailed down. 

Based on what exactly??  All we’ve ever heard are rumours, most (if not all) of which are completely baseless

Is Gao the greatest owner ever, no, but I don’t know what he’s done to deserve the level of mistrust he gets on here.  Some crap signings yes, but some great ones too

[stevy777_x]

3 minutes ago, Barsiem said:

Based on what exactly??  All we’ve ever heard are rumours, most (if not all) of which are completely baseless

Is Gao the greatest owner ever, no, but I don’t know what he’s done to deserve the level of mistrust he gets on here.  Some crap signings yes, but some great ones too

That s because people are racist and make assumptions on chinese.

 

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, Barsiem said:

Based on what exactly??  All we’ve ever heard are rumours, most (if not all) of which are completely baseless

Is Gao the greatest owner ever, no, but I don’t know what he’s done to deserve the level of mistrust he gets on here.  Some crap signings yes, but some great ones too

Goa doesn't make the signings, the success or failure of signings are nothing to do with him. When you look at the club now it's in a much better state than it was 3 years ago.  We have what appears to be a good management team, a very good first team manager and got our identity back as a club. Unfortunately though the management today are paying for the mistakes of yesterday, lumbered with a load of sh*te we cant give away and until the likes of Carillo, Lemina, Hoedt and co are got shot of we will still be hamstrung, that's not Goas fault. Would i prefer someone else as owner, absolutely and it all does appear a bit dodgy, but in truth he hasn't really done much different to how we've been run for years. 

[Matthew Le God]

Gao isn't bad owner, he isn't a good owner. He is simply 'an owner'.

 

[Barsiem]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

Goa doesn't make the signings, the success or failure of signings are nothing to do with him. When you look at the club now it's in a much better state than it was 3 years ago.  We have what appears to be a good management team, a very good first team manager and got our identity back as a club. Unfortunately though the management today are paying for the mistakes of yesterday, lumbered with a load of sh*te we cant give away and until the likes of Carillo, Lemina, Hoedt and co are got shot of we will still be hamstrung, that's not Goas fault. Would i prefer someone else as owner, absolutely and it all does appear a bit dodgy, but in truth he hasn't really done much different to how we've been run for years. 

That’s my view as well. If we get owners who want to invest to take us further then great, otherwise Gao is ok and a seems a lot better than some of the other owners out there

[S-Clarke]

1 hour ago, stevy777_x said:

That s because people are racist and make assumptions on chinese.

 

Absolute joke to play the racist card.

[Matthew Le God]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

Goa doesn't make the signings, the success or failure of signings are nothing to do with him. When you look at the club now it's in a much better state than it was 3 years ago.  We have what appears to be a good management team, a very good first team manager and got our identity back as a club. Unfortunately though the management today are paying for the mistakes of yesterday, lumbered with a load of sh*te we cant give away and until the likes of Carillo, Lemina, Hoedt and co are got shot of we will still be hamstrung, that's not Goas fault. Would i prefer someone else as owner, absolutely and it all does appear a bit dodgy, but in truth he hasn't really done much different to how we've been run for years. 

The Indian state? 😉

Edited 26 August, 2020 by Matthew Le God

[Turkish]

Just now, Matthew Le God said:

The Indian state? 😉