Pace/ALK set to buy Espanyol?

[CyrilEbokiPoh]

Just a few thoughts to maybe calm the nerves…

Alan now has a pretty strong team in place that I assume he trusts. A new CEO joining on the commercial side, Matt Williams as COO, a steady hand in Scott leading the first team, Chris Casper over the Academy and an experienced appointment today for the women’s team.

He might feel with that team in place he’s well placed to focus some of his time elsewhere. And letting that group get on with their jobs might also be a good thing.

I expect he’ll trust them so much that in the longer term they’ll all get bigger roles in the enlarged group.

Precisely. All successful businesses / successful CEOs have investments and involvements in other businesses / ventures.

I haven’t looked. But I imagine if you looked up Barry Kilby on companies house, he’d have been involved in leading multiple organisations at the same time as Burnley.

[CyrilEbokiPoh]

Care to elaborate on what you disagree with, Tony?

My point was that he has now recruited a very strong team and therefore might feel comfortable spending less time on the day to day running of the club. We should take some comfort in the team he’s recruited too.

In wider business Chairmen don’t get so involved in the running of the business in the way Alan does Burnley, rather recruiting a team of experts to do it for them, so I’m not sure anything I said was controversial.

Agree. They surround themselves with people who are more skilled, experienced, talented or available in their respective areas.

I’d be more worried if he was controlling everything.

[jedi_master]

I just fail to understand how Pace and/or his associates have managed to cobble together the rumoured £150m and, having done so, felt it more prudent to ‘purchase’ a La Liga club as opposed to further invest in (or, better yet, actually pay off) their initial club ‘purchase’ which should be the total focus of their footballing priorities. There is no explanation possible of how purchasing RCD Espanyol with this money is in any way of more assistance to Burnley Football Club than investing this money into us directly. I do not personally care whatsoever in terms of football for anything other than the success, long term security and health of Burnley, so I will remain dubious as to anything that does not directly (as opposed to hopefully or optimistically) help it’s long term future. Sending loan players backwards and forwards and getting work permits for the odd player (that is if we even are the ‘lead club’ in this arrangement - you’d imagine that’s only the case whilst we are in the Premier League) is such a tiny benefit when looking at the big picture of our financial situation and relative security as a Premier League club.

I don’t see how ALK getting further alerts on their Experian account for a totally separate football club can be a good thing for our long term future, because we will, sadly, one day not get back up within the two years of parachute payments. That’s an almost certainty, unless Pace continues to (and credit where it is absolutely due on this front) get the managerial appointments spot on. Our finances and Espanyol’s will be in the same control, presumably, as one another. The relative financial strength of both will be somewhat reliant on the other if the controlling entity is one and the same. Everything is peachy whilst it’s peachy, (and it probably speaks to my risk-averse character in general that I like things built on solid ground with as much rigour and analysis as possible as opposed to sand and dreams) but what about when it’s not?

[CyrilEbokiPoh]

I just fail to understand how Pace and/or his associates have managed to cobble together the rumoured £150m and, having done so, felt it more prudent to ‘purchase’ a La Liga club as opposed to further invest in (or, better yet, actually pay off) their initial club ‘purchase’ which should be the total focus of their footballing priorities.

Because whether we like it or not. The return on investment from said investors. Will likely be (potentially) higher from this investment. Than paying off a debt. It’s that simple.

In its crudest form.

It’s like if you have a mortgage debt. At say 2% on old rates. Locked in for a few years.

And a savings rate available at 5% on current rates.

There are still nuances. But the better ‘investment’ is putting the money into the latter.

It’s obviously much more complex than that.

[NewClaret]

Precisely. All successful businesses / successful CEOs have investments and involvements in other businesses / ventures.

I haven’t looked. But I imagine if you looked up Barry Kilby on companies house, he’d have been involved in leading multiple organisations at the same time as Burnley.

Yes, it’s very rare at for a Chairman to be so hands on in any one organisation, more often performing the role at several organisations and mostly leave the running of them to the leadership.

I hope he remains closely involved, and I can’t see any other scenario that he will given his personality, but I also think there’s a fair argument that with a very strong team appointed, it might also be in our best interests to allow them to get on with their jobs.

[NewClaret]

Agree. They surround themselves with people who are more skilled, experienced, talented or available in their respective areas.

I’d be more worried if he was controlling everything.

Yep, I think that’s been a common concern for a lot of fans, so I don’t see how you can then also be worried about taking a bit of a step back.

And from a club staffs perspective, does anyone ever want to see more of their boss?

[jedi_master]

Because whether we like it or not. The return on investment from said investors. Will likely be (potentially) higher from this investment. Than paying off a debt. It’s that simple.

In its crudest form.

It’s like if you have a mortgage debt. At say 2% on old rates. Locked in for a few years.

And a savings rate available at 5% on current rates.

There are still nuances. But the better ‘investment’ is putting the money into the latter.

It’s obviously much more complex than that.

I absolutely understand that, that paragraph you quoted is rather facetious of me. The point I was articulating is that it serves no real material gain to all I am bothered about, so why would I as a Burnley fan be happy about this? Loans and work permits are not something to weigh against extending ourselves even further when we are already not built on a solid ground. The only benefits are to the ownership group.

[CyrilEbokiPoh]

I absolutely understand that, that paragraph you quoted is rather facetious of me. The point I was articulating is that it serves no real material gain to all I am bothered about, so why would I as a Burnley fan be happy about this? Loans and work permits are not something to weigh against extending ourselves even further when we are already not built on a solid ground. The only benefits are to the ownership group.

It all remains to be seen. I will be honest i am I think in a bit of a middle ground compared to many on here. I see pros to the ownership and what they have done / bring. But I also see risks and legitimate concerns too.

[Steddyman]

I absolutely understand that, that paragraph you quoted is rather facetious of me. The point I was articulating is that it serves no real material gain to all I am bothered about, so why would I as a Burnley fan be happy about this? Loans and work permits are not something to weigh against extending ourselves even further when we are already not built on a solid ground. The only benefits are to the ownership group.

Because having the second club will give us financial 'means' and 'manipulations' to allow us to spend more without being penalised by PSR rules.

[boatshed bill]

Because having the second club will give us financial 'means' and 'manipulations' to allow us to spend more without being penalised by PSR rules.

is this really what football has become?

[NewClaret]

I just fail to understand how Pace and/or his associates have managed to cobble together the rumoured £150m and, having done so, felt it more prudent to ‘purchase’ a La Liga club as opposed to further invest in (or, better yet, actually pay off) their initial club ‘purchase’ which should be the total focus of their footballing priorities. There is no explanation possible of how purchasing RCD Espanyol with this money is in any way of more assistance to Burnley Football Club than investing this money into us directly. I do not personally care whatsoever in terms of football for anything other than the success, long term security and health of Burnley, so I will remain dubious as to anything that does not directly (as opposed to hopefully or optimistically) help it’s long term future. Sending loan players backwards and forwards and getting work permits for the odd player (that is if we even are the ‘lead club’ in this arrangement - you’d imagine that’s only the case whilst we are in the Premier League) is such a tiny benefit when looking at the big picture of our financial situation and relative security as a Premier League club.

I don’t see how ALK getting further alerts on their Experian account for a totally separate football club can be a good thing for our long term future, because we will, sadly, one day not get back up within the two years of parachute payments. That’s an almost certainty, unless Pace continues to (and credit where it is absolutely due on this front) get the managerial appointments spot on. Our finances and Espanyol’s will be in the same control, presumably, as one another. The relative financial strength of both will be somewhat reliant on the other if the controlling entity is one and the same. Everything is peachy whilst it’s peachy, (and it probably speaks to my risk-averse character in general that I like things built on solid ground with as much rigour and analysis as possible as opposed to sand and dreams) but what about when it’s not?

You raise some good points here.

Regarding the £150m, if you’re comparing a scenario of purchase Espanyol vs invest £150m in Burnley, I doubt there’s a claret in the land voting for the former. That’s maybe not a reasonable comparison though, because the investment is probably only available to ALK on the basis that it’s invested in a new asset.

That said, it wouldn’t surprise me if the terms of the deal are that the purchase is completed over a number of years so it’s possible that some of this money could benefit Burnley. It’s might not be a strictly either/or scenario.

Stuart Hunt mentioned at the recent DP tournament that they wanted to invest in the ground, etc, so maybe there’s some raised for that, for example.

To your point about risk, what I do think we should take comfort in is the relative ease at which ALK have managed to raise that kind of money and the broadening of the investor base (assuming that’s what has happened) is definitely a direct benefit too. The rest are far more intangible, I agree with you there.

[boyyanno]

I just fail to understand how Pace and/or his associates have managed to cobble together the rumoured £150m and, having done so, felt it more prudent to ‘purchase’ a La Liga club as opposed to further invest in (or, better yet, actually pay off) their initial club ‘purchase’ which should be the total focus of their footballing priorities. There is no explanation possible of how purchasing RCD Espanyol with this money is in any way of more assistance to Burnley Football Club than investing this money into us directly. I do not personally care whatsoever in terms of football for anything other than the success, long term security and health of Burnley, so I will remain dubious as to anything that does not directly (as opposed to hopefully or optimistically) help it’s long term future. Sending loan players backwards and forwards and getting work permits for the odd player (that is if we even are the ‘lead club’ in this arrangement - you’d imagine that’s only the case whilst we are in the Premier League) is such a tiny benefit when looking at the big picture of our financial situation and relative security as a Premier League club.

I don’t see how ALK getting further alerts on their Experian account for a totally separate football club can be a good thing for our long term future, because we will, sadly, one day not get back up within the two years of parachute payments. That’s an almost certainty, unless Pace continues to (and credit where it is absolutely due on this front) get the managerial appointments spot on. Our finances and Espanyol’s will be in the same control, presumably, as one another. The relative financial strength of both will be somewhat reliant on the other if the controlling entity is one and the same. Everything is peachy whilst it’s peachy, (and it probably speaks to my risk-averse character in general that I like things built on solid ground with as much rigour and analysis as possible as opposed to sand and dreams) but what about when it’s not?

I disagree with multi club ownership fullstop.

For me the only real people who benefit are ALK, to some this means we may also benefit, but I'm not sure that's the plan. We've just seen here that when they had an extra 150m quid they've bought another club with it- not repaid our debts or invested it in to us.

Realistically ALK still owe us X amount of cash so Burnley have also helped fund the purchase of another football club. There's not been any outside investment particularly in to the club, just the ownership group itself.

People like to say it's how modern football operates, most ownership groups I see are actively investing in to their respective clubs- are ALK doing that with us?

[daveisaclaret]

Thread has become quite polarised. Basically you can either see that this is bad or you can make up imaginary reasons it's good.

[123EasyasBFC]

Thread has become quite polarised. Basically you can either see that this is bad or you can make up imaginary reasons it's good.

What makes it bad in your eyes? The fact it’s multi club ownership or something else?

[Big Vinny K]

Because having the second club will give us financial 'means' and 'manipulations' to allow us to spend more without being penalised by PSR rules.

How ?

[CyrilEbokiPoh]

Thread has become quite polarised. Basically you can either see that this is bad or you can make up imaginary reasons it's good.

Kind of

[Hibrieroy]

Maybe this will answer some concerns:
Dave Checketts part owner and Director of our club has announced a new private equity joint venture with the Cynosure group (the Eccles family in Utah) with an initial fund of $1.2 billion.
Cynosure/Checketts Sports Capital is looking to make around 3 or 4 investments. We are looking to do bigger deals. Checketts said he likes English, Spanish snd German soccer. Those are very interesting markets.
Make of it what you will. Just maybe. ??

[123EasyasBFC]

He already has but not sure why you are making it so personal and so confrontational.

If you want to debate about it just express your opinion.

I have already said I do not like multi club ownerships either. Especially dislike the concept of a ‘feeder’ club. Can you imagine how we would feel if we were bought by the owners of Bayern Munich for example to become their little project in England ?

There may be some truth in its a way of getting round PSR, or other financial or tax regulations. Again another reason for me to be against multi club ownership. Look at the basket case of Watford….and neither was that partnership good for Udinese who were once a very proud and great club in their own right.

Look at some of the clubs and owners who do this now - Chelsea, Man United, Man City etc. The very clubs who have and are still ruining football.

But you are entitled to put forward your own view. Just don’t ruin the thread and make this personal or you will get a deserved ban.

What about Palermo now under the city group, nearly went out of business now in Serie B, feeder club model working for them

[Big Vinny K]

What about Palermo now under the city group, nearly went out of business now in Serie B, feeder club model working for them

Surprisingly just googling something to back up your opinion does not give the full picture.

If you had been the slightest understanding of Italian football - and in particular football in the south of Italy and in Sicily you would understand that the vast majority of their supporters despise being part of the city group.

And yes whilst they did almost go bankrupt that’s nothing new for Palermo. Their fans would rather the club be independent and back in Serie D than where they are today.

Not all about money or results for fans.

[123EasyasBFC]

Surprisingly just googling something to back up your opinion does not give the full picture.

If you had been the slightest understanding of Italian football - and in particular football in the south of Italy and in Sicily you would understand that the vast majority of their supporters despise being part of the city group.

And yes whilst they did almost go bankrupt that’s nothing new for Palermo. Their fans would rather the club be independent and back in Serie D than where they are today.

Not all about money or results for fans.

The fans wont celebrate then if Palermo get promoted back to Serie A, the argument wasn’t about if fans like it, it was about clubs suffering from it and I gave you an example of a club not suffering from it

[taio]

By inflating sales from BFC to Espanyol to increase the profits or buying players cheaper for BFC via Espanol since the Premier League tax all clubs include on transfers doesn't need to be paid. Yes, it stinks but seems to be required to survive now.

I think you've misunderstood the point of my post, or you have quoted it by mistake.

While I'm replying, your point is entirely speculative, and even if you prove to be correct, it wouldn't be right or mean that those who are against multi-club ownership won't still be against it.

[Steddyman]

How ?

You are correct taio sorry, I should have been quoting responding to this question.

[Paul Waine]

MODs: Can we merge this thread with the Bloomberg article. They are both about the same subject, ALK raising $X millions to buy Espanyol.

[Big Vinny K]

The fans wont celebrate then if Palermo get promoted back to Serie A, the argument wasn’t about if fans like it, it was about clubs suffering from it and I gave you an example of a club not suffering from it

Who said the argument was about that ?
Are you making this stuff up as you go along ?

I said why I didn’t like it and I am telling you why many Palermo fans don’t like it.

I think I understand that being 2 divisions higher is going to please or benefit some people - even if it’s not the fans.

Palermo is a well supported historical club with a fan base bigger than ours. They have been up and down the leagues previously with various financial scandals. They have now lost a big part of their identity and tradition being owned by City. If this can happen to a club like Palermo it can definitely happen to Burnley. If that’s the kind of state you want for football then that’s up to you - it’s not what I want

[123EasyasBFC]

Who said the argument was about that ?
Are you making this stuff up as you go along ?

I said why I didn’t like it and I am telling you why many Palermo fans don’t like it.

I think I understand that being 2 divisions higher is going to please or benefit some people - even if it’s not the fans.

Palermo is a well supported historical club with a fan base bigger than ours. They have been up and down the leagues previously with various financial scandals. They have now lost a big part of their identity and tradition being owned by City. If this can happen to a club like Palermo it can definitely happen to Burnley. If that’s the kind of state you want for football then that’s up to you - it’s not what I want

You brought the argument by saying you didn’t like the thought of being a feeder club and I just gave one example of where a club is benefiting from it in Palermo. Girona another team who have also had success? They qualified for the champions league.

[Paul Waine]

All the years that Burnley have been successful when I've been a supporter (mid-1960s onwards) I've been aware that BFC is a feeder club to clubs that can pay higher wages to Burnley's better players. I'm sure we are all aware of this, even though we may not apply the "feeder club" description to the sale of our better players.

Of course, most Burnley fans are ambitious for the club. We want BFC to be a "top club" competing to win things. I say "most" because, whereas we all enjoy BFC winning, many fear that promotion will only result in the next season being disappointing and relegation follows. That's the challenge.

I'm sure Alan Pace/ALK would say that multi-club ownership is the opportunity for BFC to meet the challenge of building the club in the Premier League. Spanish football clubs provide some unique geographic advantages; links to Latin American clubs, easy access to EU. La Liga is a good league to develop players.

It's a good sign for BFC that Alan Pace/ALK can raise $Xm new equity to acquire Espanyol. The new equity may be equity both from existing investors and from new investors. Whether it's new equity from existing investors or from new investors it's a "vote of confidence" in what Alan Pace/ALK have achieved in the 4 and half seasons ownership of BFC. If it wasn't, but the purchase of Espanyol was seen to be favourable on it's own, the acquisition would be made by a totally separate entity. From a US investor perspective, which would they prefer, ALK having a multi-club ownership model in UK/Spain or two totally separate and independent clubs? (What are the other clubs in the top European (incl UK) leagues doing? More and more they are part of MCO groups).

UTC

[Vegas Claret]

we don't know how much money ALK has, there are some stupidly rich people in the US....

[Chester Perry]

All the years that Burnley have been successful when I've been a supporter (mid-1960s onwards) I've been aware that BFC is a feeder club to clubs that can pay higher wages to Burnley's better players. I'm sure we are all aware of this, even though we may not apply the "feeder club" description to the sale of our better players.

Of course, most Burnley fans are ambitious for the club. We want BFC to be a "top club" competing to win things. I say "most" because, whereas we all enjoy BFC winning, many fear that promotion will only result in the next season being disappointing and relegation follows. That's the challenge.

I'm sure Alan Pace/ALK would say that multi-club ownership is the opportunity for BFC to meet the challenge of building the club in the Premier League. Spanish football clubs provide some unique geographic advantages; links to Latin American clubs, easy access to EU. La Liga is a good league to develop players.

It's a good sign for BFC that Alan Pace/ALK can raise $Xm new equity to acquire Espanyol. The new equity may be equity both from existing investors and from new investors. Whether it's new equity from existing investors or from new investors it's a "vote of confidence" in what Alan Pace/ALK have achieved in the 4 and half seasons ownership of BFC. If it wasn't, but the purchase of Espanyol was seen to be favourable on it's own, the acquisition would be made by a totally separate entity. From a US investor perspective, which would they prefer, ALK having a multi-club ownership model in UK/Spain or two totally separate and independent clubs? (What are the other clubs in the top European (incl UK) leagues doing? More and more they are part of MCO groups).

UTC

The thing is there is literally no one who has yet made the multi-club thing work financially - a point re-iterated by Kieron Maguire in Thursday's Price of Football Podcast

[TPClaret]

we don't know how much money ALK has, there are some stupidly rich people in the US....

Exactly this. As posted further up about Dave Checketts.

[Vegas Claret]

[Quickenthetempo]

we don't know how much money ALK has, there are some stupidly rich people in the US....

I'm not sure it matters, they don't want to use their own money.


At great cost to our club.

[Big Vinny K]

You brought the argument by saying you didn’t like the thought of being a feeder club and I just gave one example of where a club is benefiting from it in Palermo. Girona another team who have also had success? They qualified for the champions league.

I posted one of the reasons why I did not like multi club ownership

I have no idea why you are replying to me with examples of clubs that in your eyes have benefited from multi club ownership when the reason I am against it applies in all cases.

Go annoy someone else please or even better take another of those long sabbaticals away from the board

[123EasyasBFC]

I posted one of the reasons why I did not like multi club ownership

I have no idea why you are replying to me with examples of clubs that in your eyes have benefited from multi club ownership when the reason I am against it applies in all cases.

Go annoy someone else please or even better take another of those long sabbaticals away from the board

You have no idea why I am replying? You asked me to give my opinion and in the same message brought up the feeder club issue, or is it now that you only want a reply if the opinion is the same as yours. There’s examples of multiple club systems working and examples of it not working but posters like yourself only seem to want to see the negative side in it.

Like on the other thread posters wishing Mike Garlick well on his multi club ownership because he’s a former owner and Burnley fan but the same people dead against ALK doing it

[Big Vinny K]

All the years that Burnley have been successful when I've been a supporter (mid-1960s onwards) I've been aware that BFC is a feeder club to clubs that can pay higher wages to Burnley's better players. I'm sure we are all aware of this, even though we may not apply the "feeder club" description to the sale of our better players.

Of course, most Burnley fans are ambitious for the club. We want BFC to be a "top club" competing to win things. I say "most" because, whereas we all enjoy BFC winning, many fear that promotion will only result in the next season being disappointing and relegation follows. That's the challenge.

I'm sure Alan Pace/ALK would say that multi-club ownership is the opportunity for BFC to meet the challenge of building the club in the Premier League. Spanish football clubs provide some unique geographic advantages; links to Latin American clubs, easy access to EU. La Liga is a good league to develop players.

It's a good sign for BFC that Alan Pace/ALK can raise $Xm new equity to acquire Espanyol. The new equity may be equity both from existing investors and from new investors. Whether it's new equity from existing investors or from new investors it's a "vote of confidence" in what Alan Pace/ALK have achieved in the 4 and half seasons ownership of BFC. If it wasn't, but the purchase of Espanyol was seen to be favourable on it's own, the acquisition would be made by a totally separate entity. From a US investor perspective, which would they prefer, ALK having a multi-club ownership model in UK/Spain or two totally separate and independent clubs? (What are the other clubs in the top European (incl UK) leagues doing? More and more they are part of MCO groups).

UTC

By that definition almost every club in the world bar maybe half a dozen are feeder clubs.

But as you know that’s not the definition of a feeder club in relation to multi ownership.

Question is would you be happy if we were taken over by the owners of a bigger and wealthier European club and they started to use Burnley football club to benefit their club first and foremost. Sending us some of their young players on loan for example, or players on their way back from injury, or players they do not feel are good enough for them to put them in the shop window to sell them on. And the main parent club insist that we play these players.
And then for the players that do end up a success they take them back to the parent club just like Chelsea did last week with a Strasbourg player ?

For clubs like Strasbourg, Palermo, Antwerp playing in poor leagues then sending some development players from the mass ranks of Chelsea etc might even improve these teams for a while but not sure that is anywhere near worth losing your identity, your independence and your culture too.

[NewClaret]

Who said the argument was about that ?
Are you making this stuff up as you go along ?

I said why I didn’t like it and I am telling you why many Palermo fans don’t like it.

I think I understand that being 2 divisions higher is going to please or benefit some people - even if it’s not the fans.

Palermo is a well supported historical club with a fan base bigger than ours. They have been up and down the leagues previously with various financial scandals. They have now lost a big part of their identity and tradition being owned by City. If this can happen to a club like Palermo it can definitely happen to Burnley. If that’s the kind of state you want for football then that’s up to you - it’s not what I want

I don’t know anything about Palermo, or even that they were owned by City Group until this thread, but I just had a look at their attendances on transfermarkt.

Not sure the data is entirely correct as some years it’s shows 0, but in early 2,000’s when they were in Serie A they averaged mid 20k. Then they dropped right off in the 2010’s as they dropped down the leagues, to to as low as 5k the season prior to the City purchase. Since the takeover they’re back up to low 20ks. Not quite the previous heights, but they are a division below.

Does somewhat suggest there’s at least some support/excitement around the club. I’m not disputing that many really dislike it, guess it’s all relative that if they happen to have some success and better football it gets overlooked.

What I’m really shocked about is that ALK are going for a La Liga club and not a sleeping giant a few leagues down in the cheap. Surely that’s where they could add most ‘value’?

[Big Vinny K]

I don’t know anything about Palermo, or even that they were owned by City Group until this thread, but I just had a look at their attendances on transfermarkt.

Not sure the data is entirely correct as some years it’s shows 0, but in early 2,000’s when they were in Serie A they averaged mid 20k. Then they dropped right off in the 2010’s as they dropped down the leagues, to to as low as 5k the season prior to the City purchase. Since the takeover they’re back up to low 20ks. Not quite the previous heights, but they are a division below.

Does somewhat suggest there’s at least some support/excitement around the club. I’m not disputing that many really dislike it, guess it’s all relative that if they happen to have some success and better football it gets overlooked.

What I’m really shocked about is that ALK are going for a La Liga club and not a sleeping giant a few leagues down in the cheap. Surely that’s where they could add most ‘value’?

Basket case of a club down the years but with fervent support. I have lots of family from Sicily and Palermo are an iconic club but to say they have had a roller coast of a journey is a massive understatement !!

Tbh the club is a bit like Burnley in terms of its importance to the community and its culture. Not just Burnley but a lot of other clubs in England too.

Results and success are secondary to a lot of their fans. Losing any of their identity or culture as a club is more important to them….as I think it would be to a lot of our fans too.

[123EasyasBFC]

I don’t know anything about Palermo, or even that they were owned by City Group until this thread, but I just had a look at their attendances on transfermarkt.

Not sure the data is entirely correct as some years it’s shows 0, but in early 2,000’s when they were in Serie A they averaged mid 20k. Then they dropped right off in the 2010’s as they dropped down the leagues, to to as low as 5k the season prior to the City purchase. Since the takeover they’re back up to low 20ks. Not quite the previous heights, but they are a division below.

Does somewhat suggest there’s at least some support/excitement around the club. I’m not disputing that many really dislike it, guess it’s all relative that if they happen to have some success and better football it gets overlooked.

What I’m really shocked about is that ALK are going for a La Liga club and not a sleeping giant a few leagues down in the cheap. Surely that’s where they could add most ‘value’?

No doubt the data showing they get decent attendances will get ignored because it doesn’t suit the narrative that all Palermo fans are against the city group owning them

[Elizabeth]

By that definition almost every club in the world bar maybe half a dozen are feeder clubs.

But as you know that’s not the definition of a feeder club in relation to multi ownership.

Question is would you be happy if we were taken over by the owners of a bigger and wealthier European club and they started to use Burnley football club to benefit their club first and foremost. Sending us some of their young players on loan for example, or players on their way back from injury, or players they do not feel are good enough for them to put them in the shop window to sell them on. And the main parent club insist that we play these players.
And then for the players that do end up a success they take them back to the parent club just like Chelsea did last week with a Strasbourg player ?

For clubs like Strasbourg, Palermo, Antwerp playing in poor leagues then sending some development players from the mass ranks of Chelsea etc might even improve these teams for a while but not sure that is anywhere near worth losing your identity, your independence and your culture too.

While I'm uncomfortable with this buying of Espanyol I don't think we have any worry that we will be used or that we will lose our independence. The club have worked hard to get us back into the top division and will be trying harder not to let it slip so easily this time. They want Burnley to compete there for the foreseeable

There are signs that our identity and culture are already changing before this Espanyol situation, some might think this is not a bad thing ( although they are stuck with the media shots of the chimneys and back streets for a long time)

I get why some are so passionately against it, especially if they have first hand knowledge of how it can go wrong for fans who care passionately about their club.

This seems potentially more of mutually beneficial quest.

[NewClaret]

Basket case of a club down the years but with fervent support. I have lots of family from Sicily and Palermo are an iconic club but to say they have had a roller coast of a journey is a massive understatement !!

Tbh the club is a bit like Burnley in terms of its importance to the community and its culture. Not just Burnley but a lot of other clubs in England too.

Results and success are secondary to a lot of their fans. Losing any of their identity or culture as a club is more important to them….as I think it would be to a lot of our fans too.

I shamefully didn’t even know they were Sicilian until looking them up just now. It looks a beautiful city. I’m going to put that on the visit list now.

Yeah, I can’t imagine Sicilians are particularly the type that take kindly to identity loss. Nor would we in reverse. The slight difference for us in this scenario is that we were the first acquisition

It’ll be interesting to see how Alan Pace handles this. He’s not daft, he must know the scepticism that will exist amongst fans on both sides so he’ll likely want to give it the whole “we’re different” spiel. And to be fair, maybe he has thoughts in mind how they will be different and maintain independence.

Will he position one or the other as the primary investment (unlikely)? Will he go to every game? What about his well documented love of Barcelona FC, how will he handle that? I’m not sure if he can speak Spanish?

I do think he’ll have learnt a lot about the importance of building ties with the community at Burnley though, so I’d expect him to put an emphasis on that.

Interesting to re-read the Checketts comments above too. Maybe Germany is next on the radar.

[Claretnick]

I’m not sure if he can speak Spanish?

We have a Spaniard on our current board of directors Prof. Antonio Dávila.Maybe he helps with the language

https://www.burnleyfootballclub.com/mor ... ff-members

[Big Vinny K]

While I'm uncomfortable with this buying of Espanyol I don't think we have any worry that we will be used or that we will lose our independence. The club have worked hard to get us back into the top division and will be trying harder not to let it slip so easily this time. They want Burnley to compete there for the foreseeable

There are signs that our identity and culture are already changing before this Espanyol situation, some might think this is not a bad thing ( although they are stuck with the media shots of the chimneys and back streets for a long time)

I get why some are so passionately against it, especially if they have first hand knowledge of how it can go wrong for fans who care passionately about their club.

This seems potentially more of mutually beneficial quest.

Sorry I think you misunderstood me.
I agree that in this case we will be ok as we are the bigger club.
My point is this if we were in the position of being the smaller / feeder club what would many of our fans think.

[CyrilEbokiPoh]

Sorry I think you misunderstood me.
I agree that in this case we will be ok as we are the bigger club.
My point is this if we were in the position of being the smaller / feeder club what would many of our fans think.

I would say we are very similar sized.

They have been in the top flight for around 90 seasons in total. One of the most of all Spanish clubs.

They haven't won a league title, although thats not exactly an easy feat in a league thats dominated by two teams in.a way that rivals Scotland!

As I said earlier in the thread and a few more since. It looks like it gives us a strategic advantage we dont currently have with South American players and post Brexit challenges, among other benefits!

[CyrilEbokiPoh]

also being a major city, with a brand new stadium that is potentially likely to host World Cup games - you an see the appeal to ALK! Whether we like it or not!?

[Big Vinny K]

I would say we are very similar sized.

They have been in the top flight for around 90 seasons in total. One of the most of all Spanish clubs.

They haven't won a league title, although thats not exactly an easy feat in a league thats dominated by two teams in.a way that rivals Scotland!

As I said earlier in the thread and a few more since. It looks like it gives us a strategic advantage we dont currently have with South American players and post Brexit challenges, among other benefits!

Historically, fan base, tradition, etc you may be right.

Financially - which is what matters unfortunately - they are miles behind burnley. Their wage bill is around a fifth of our last reported numbers and their total revenues nowhere near ours.

[ClaretPete001]

Leveraged buyouts not allowed in Spain so where is the money coming from?

As far as I Understand it LBOs are not banned in Spain. I guess we’ll just have to wait for the detail

[Chester Perry]

As far as I Understand it LBOs are not banned in Spain. I guess we’ll just have to wait for the detail

it is my understanding that LBO's are banned in La Liga - which has much more stringent financial rules than we have in English Leagues

[NewClaret]

it is my understanding that LBO's are banned in La Liga - which has much more stringent financial rules than we have in English Leagues

Bit of confusion here then because Google AI says not:

No, leveraged buyouts (LBOs) are not banned in La Liga. While the Premier League recently banned fully-leveraged buyouts, La Liga does not have a similar prohibition. LBOs, where a company is acquired using a significant amount of borrowed funds, are still permitted in Spanish football.

They should be banned everywhere though.

[ClaretPete001]

it is my understanding that LBO's are banned in La Liga - which has much more stringent financial rules than we have in English Leagues

I’m not an international lawyer but I don’t think leveraged buyouts are not allowed rather there are rules against using a clubs cash and assets to directly buy it.

This may sound like a pointless semantic and it could be
However. as we saw saw with our takeover ALK have used convoluted offshore structures to buy the club and a deal with the previous owners for a significant amount.

So, while ALK couldn’t use money out of the Spanish clubs bank accounts as they did with us they could theoretically create a heavily debt laden purchase.

Given ALK is a company that is not generating huge amounts of cash then it’s hard to see how they will purchase Espanyol without a great deal of debt secured against the clubs assets.

We’ll have to await details but I suspect if there is a deal it will more likely to be buying.a portion of the club in the first instance or something similar.

[dandeclaret]

Mr Pace might need to go and remove those videos of falling in love with Barcelona.... or else he could be in for a rocky time with the Espanyol fans

[Middle-agedClaret]

I realise I’m probably a real Luddite, but I find all this fairly depressing.