Unbelievable

I really think there is some misconception here. Any quote I've seen from Hopkinson, his predecessors or any PIF representative, assumes our ambition is to become successful by growing the brand and as a result our commercial revenue streams, as well as implementing the foundations for a high performance culture. Nowhere does or did it ever say we would achieve anything through directly tapping into the vast resources of PIF. I think they've always made it abundantly clear the goal is not for this football club to achieve success in a supercharged, unsustainable fashion, but rather on strong, sustainable foundations. They have placed very ambitious, perhaps overly ambitious timescales on achieving their targets, and therefore some skepticism is definitely understandable, but it's not as if they've promised to blow the competition out of the water by pouring in untold amounts of funding and have reneged on that promise. Again, it's the "richest club in the world" framing at play that seems to be a hindrance more than a help sometimes.

Can you link me to this interview please btw?

It's not less money. It's basically what the rules would allow us to count towards revenue from sponsorship anyway, only they've managed to source it externally, which can only be considered a positive unless you are for whatever reason determined to highlight the negative in everything. In any case I'd be interested to know how you think they could have got more from a related party considering there seemingly wasn't a better deal for us on the open market and that is the very definition of how the associated party rules work?

Define "serious owners" for me please. Are "serious owners" supposed to hoy billions of their own money into their football club through related parties by definition, or could a hallmark of serious owners also be to develop the club under its own steam? Do say Brighton's and Bournemouth's owners not qualify as serious owners in your book? Who knows what the original idea was when they bought us, but given the circumstances I think they're doing a pretty solid job of developing the club. Certainly much more so than most of our previous owners in history.

In fairness we don't really know what level of investment PIF and the other owners were willing to put in before the restrictions were put in place, and it doesn't serve any purpose to keep harping on as if they aren't. We have to deal with the reality that we have very wealthy owners who are willing to put in at least as much as allowed by the current rules, but who also see us as an investment they want to eventually be able to be self-sustainable. Putting aside SA's questionable human rights record and the "richest club in the world" tag that never was realistic after the restrictions put in place to stop that being of any consequence, I think most fans would have bitten your arm off if you'd told them in the latter dark days under Ashley that we would be taken over by a party putting in over half a billion in the five years post takeover, allowing us to compete for CL qualification and domestic cups, and looking to build a new stadium or significantly upgrade and extend SJP as well as set up a new training ground to help us push on to the next level. Whilst there is always room for improvement, and whilst it is important to evaluate owners by the level to which they deliver on their promises, it is also important to remember we could quite easily still be owned by Ashley and playing our football in the championship by now.

Towards fair market value, as it would for us. Of course their fair market value is higher than ours because as per the crooked rules their earlier transgressions allowing them to even get to this level of exposure in the first place do not count against them. They've pulled up the drawbridge basically.

We have outperformed the cartel though, both in absolute terms and relatively speaking. Here is a comparison of commercial revenue development of us and the "big six" since PIF took over: Which gives this development over the entire period in relative growth: In absolute terms, we have also shortened the gap to the "big six" average from 197m to 162m: I fully understand our early commercial performance was partly dictated by Mike Ashley not even bothering with a commercial department, hence easy wins and low hanging fruit, etc. but to continue to pretend that we are not consistently outperforming our rivals commercially or managing to somewhat close the gap is flat out ignorant at best, or agenda driven nonsense at worst. To add and I hope we can at least agree on that, moving away from affiliated deals to unaffiliated sponsors is massive for the club's sustainability. Regarding the "2030", "number 1" and "within five years", firstly those have nothing to deal with this deal specifically (which is what I asked since you are in here painting the club's commercial performance in a bad light on the day after this deal was announced) and also, as discussed before, it shows you either don't understand momentum, ambition and high performance culture, or (more likely) you pretend to not understand because you are desperate for PIF to show you are right about them being chancers who always overpromise and under-deliver, even if that means the club you care about won't be successful. It is possible to loath SA's culture, leadership and policies whilst at the same time trying to be objective about the virtues of PIF's ownership of NUFC. Perhaps you should give it a try.

What nonsense is this exactly? Can you point me to some quotes that you think are clearly nonsensical as proven by this deal specifically?

We had this exact discussion last year if I remember correctly, until the accounts left you with egg on your face? Perhaps it would be prudent to wait for the accounts this time before telling me we cannot continue to significantly outperform our rivals when that is exactly what we have been doing for five years straight.

The bit in bold is the prism through which you and the other four consider any development at NUFC though, isn’t it..? Did you allow yourself to be happy when we qualified for CL (twice), or when we lifted the Carabao Cup, or did the fact we are owned by people whose values do not match your own prevent you from enjoying anything NUFC related? I am all for you guys having your circle jerk in the special SA ownership thread about how bad the Saudis are, but what has that got to do with criticising the club for growing its organic commercial revenue successfully?

You called..? The way I see it is we managed to get a company unaffiliated with our owners to sponsor our training ground and take on our shirt sponsorship for a little more revenue than we got from the affiliated company we had before, and seemingly in a challenging marketplace. That’s a positive and will contribute to our continued rapid commercial revenue growth. It is quite clear that PIF see us primarily as an investment and are seeking to make this club self sufficient and the best version of itself without bankrolling it with stupid amounts of money. To be honest, that’s all I’ve ever wanted, so I am happy with these recent developments. This way the day they leave the club will be in an infinitely better position than how they found it. Not at all surprised however to see the usual four or five miserable posters put a negative spin on the very thing they have criticised the club and its owners for not doing before, in reference to for example training ground sponsorship and also not having a shirt sponsor earlier this year.

And before that we were owned for over a decade by Mike Ashley, so it’s not like we had much to start with.

Hard to fathom that a team where half the players hail from a ten mile radius from where I live has held Spain to a goalless draw at a World Cup

Decent second half of football, and a fair result overall

Another great goal tbf