Pace/ALK set to buy Espanyol?

[Big Vinny K]

No one appears to have asked the most important question.

Are we now all fans of Espanyol? Will we go to watch Espanyol when we are in Spain for our holidays? Perhaps, we will also plan weekends in Barcelona to take in a game. Will we be able to get tickets for some of Espanyol's big home games, Real Madrid, Athletico Madrid, Barcelona?

Will we also welcome Espanyol fans to Turf Moor when they come to visit their sister club? (We play in different leagues, we are both part of the same ownership group. I don't think it's helpful to think of "parent club" and "feeder club" - perhaps we can claim to be "big sister" - because we were acquired first by Alan Pace and Espanyol can be "little sister."

UTC

Each to their own I suppose but personally I cannot get my head round how a life long supporter of a club like Burnley can start supporting another club.

Our club has had its own identity and managed on its own for more than 130 years. Espanyol have been around for 125 years too and have also managed fine by themselves and have a proud tradition and history like ourselves.

But now because a set of Wall Street bankers from a country with zero history and tradition in football decide think they can make hundreds of millions out of the game some fans at the drop of a hat start supporting a team that a few months ago they could not give a flying sh-it about. But now because someone wants to make money out of owning the 2 clubs fans start feeling affection for another team. I just do not get it.

[Big Vinny K]

No one appears to have asked the most important question.

Are we now all fans of Espanyol? Will we go to watch Espanyol when we are in Spain for our holidays? Perhaps, we will also plan weekends in Barcelona to take in a game. Will we be able to get tickets for some of Espanyol's big home games, Real Madrid, Athletico Madrid, Barcelona?

Will we also welcome Espanyol fans to Turf Moor when they come to visit their sister club? (We play in different leagues, we are both part of the same ownership group. I don't think it's helpful to think of "parent club" and "feeder club" - perhaps we can claim to be "big sister" - because we were acquired first by Alan Pace and Espanyol can be "little sister."

UTC

Each to their own I suppose but personally I cannot get my head round how a life long supporter of a club like Burnley can start supporting another club.

Our club has had its own identity and managed on its own for more than 130 years. Espanyol have been around for 125 years too and have also managed fine by themselves and have a proud tradition and history like ourselves.

But now because a set of Wall Street bankers from a country with zero history and tradition in football decide think they can make hundreds of millions out of the game some fans at the drop of a hat start supporting a team that a few months ago they could not give a flying sh-it about. But now because someone wants to make money out of owning the 2 clubs fans start feeling affection for another team. I just do not get it.

[Big Vinny K]

No one appears to have asked the most important question.

Are we now all fans of Espanyol? Will we go to watch Espanyol when we are in Spain for our holidays? Perhaps, we will also plan weekends in Barcelona to take in a game. Will we be able to get tickets for some of Espanyol's big home games, Real Madrid, Athletico Madrid, Barcelona?

Will we also welcome Espanyol fans to Turf Moor when they come to visit their sister club? (We play in different leagues, we are both part of the same ownership group. I don't think it's helpful to think of "parent club" and "feeder club" - perhaps we can claim to be "big sister" - because we were acquired first by Alan Pace and Espanyol can be "little sister."

UTC

Each to their own I suppose but personally I cannot get my head round how a life long supporter of a club like Burnley can start supporting another club.

Our club has had its own identity and managed on its own for more than 130 years. Espanyol have been around for 125 years too and have also managed fine by themselves and have a proud tradition and history like ourselves.

But now because a set of Wall Street bankers from a country with zero history and tradition in football decide think they can make hundreds of millions out of the game some fans at the drop of a hat start supporting a team that a few months ago they could not give a flying sh-it about. But now because someone wants to make money out of owning the 2 clubs fans start feeling affection for another team.

I just do not get it.

[ClaretPete001]

Here's a breakdown of their turnover for the last 5 full financial years for which data is publicly available (typically ending June 30th of the specified year):

This should read:

Here's a breakdown of their broadcast revenue for the last 5 full financial years for which data is publicly available:

[CyrilEbokiPoh]

Can you think of one reason why he would invest in any football club other than making money?

The problem is - what is the credible alternative?

Of course he wants to make money out of us. So did the last lot. But what's the alternative, there aren't many Teasdale's or Kilby's left.

It's a thankless task even if you have money, never mind if you dont.

[JohnMcGreal]

Will Espanyol become everyone's favourite underdog?

[GetIntoEm]

No interest in supporting another team. Think it's odd personally.

However, I don't personally see anything wrong with our ownership getting more rich, more powerful. Can only benefit us in the long run. Let's face it, there's a lot of money in football, and the best clubs have the richest owners.

Long gone are the days of a local business man owning a club like Burnley, as much as people are struggling to deal with that, it's reality.

I follow Burnley because I'm a football fan. This sort of stuff that goes on doesn't particularly bother me. It is what it is. If it makes us more powerful then great.

[gandhisflipflop]

I note that a lot of the sniping and negativity on this thread are from the same posters who have had an issue with the ownership since day one and cannot wait for another dig.

[FeedTheArf]

Well, hypothetically, a £20m ‘return’ could be a new Cricket Field stand. Adds more value to the stadium, and club, plus makes it more attractive for investors. It’s possible the £100m could be ‘returned’ upon a sale, e.g. in 2035 the club does a Brighton and is sold on for £400m, the £100m owed could remain with the club from the overall profit, no?

And given the option of pocketing the £100m or leaving it with the club, which do you think a group of ex bankers with no prior association to Burnley are going to take as they ride off into the sunset?

[RVclaret]

And given the option of pocketing the £100m or leaving it with the club, which do you think a group of ex bankers with no prior association to Burnley are going to take as they ride off into the sunset?

I don’t know, haven’t seen the deal terms.

[FeedTheArf]

I note that a lot of the sniping and negativity on this thread are from the same posters who have had an issue with the ownership since day one and cannot wait for another dig.

Or, the same group of posters that were concerned about the ownership have now seen ALK take another move that could well come at the detriment of BFC.

The initial articles already talk of high quality loan signings from BFC to Espanyol. Do we really think those loans are going to be at full market value? If you do, the best I can say is you’re incredibly naive.

[RVclaret]

Interesting piece on how Watford are gaining a competitive advantage using their multi club model to circumvent GBE requirements post Brexit (amount of foreign players you are allowed to sign). Obv no benefits to Burnley from all of this though.

https://x.com/gbeexperthub/status/19446 ... 66977?s=46

[gandhisflipflop]

Or, the same group of posters that were concerned about the ownership have now seen ALK take another move that could well come at the detriment of BFC.

The initial articles already talk of high quality loan signings from BFC to Espanyol. Do we really think those loans are going to be at full market value? If you do, the best I can say is you’re incredibly naive.

The same group of posters have had an agenda and have been resistant to any change at the club. The article is from ‘sportwitness’ which are hardly the most solid of sources. I wouldn’t want us to be a feeder club to another club either but I’m prepared to wait and see before posting yet more anti ownership negative undertones. They have been here for 5 years this year, and the club is still here in the PL with plenty of talent, a sound management and recruitment team and a board that is actively trying to progress us, rather than sitting on a load of cash just happy that we exist.

[Row x]

I note that a lot of the sniping and negativity on this thread are from the same posters who have had an issue with the ownership since day one and cannot wait for another dig.

I agree, but everyone is entitled to an opinion, what I don't like on here is if your opinion doesn't fit the anti ownership agenda you are belittled and made out that you know @#%+ all.

[FeedTheArf]

I don’t know, haven’t seen the deal terms.

True, but let’s imagine a Velocity board meeting 10 years from now.

Pace: “Right lads, we’ve been offered £400m for the club.”

Board: “We’re going to make so much money!” (A quote they’ve already used on camera I might add)

Pace: “Steady on boys. I think we should do the right thing and leave £100m of it in the club coffers. We could call it the ALK legacy fund. They could finally fix that Cricket Field stand or pay off those debts we created to buy our own shares.”

Board: “You’re absolutely right, that would be the right thing to do. Thanks for making us see sense, Alan. Here we were going to buy another yacht, but giving the money back to Burnley - a club I’d not even heard about a few years ago - seems like a much better idea.”

Doesn’t sound very realistic does it?

[123EasyasBFC]

The same group of posters have had an agenda and have been resistant to any change at the club. The article is from ‘sportwitness’ which are hardly the most solid of sources. I wouldn’t want us to be a feeder club to another club either but I’m prepared to wait and see before posting yet more anti ownership negative undertones. They have been here for 5 years this year, and the club is still here in the PL with plenty of talent, a sound management and recruitment team and a board that is actively trying to progress us, rather than sitting on a load of cash just happy that we exist.

Far to positive for this forum, it’s not allowed

[RVclaret]

True, but let’s imagine a Velocity board meeting 10 years from now.

Pace: “Right lads, we’ve been offered £400m for the club.”

Board: “We’re going to make so much money!” (A quote they’ve already used on camera I might add)

Pace: “Steady on boys. I think we should do the right thing and leave £100m of it in the club coffers. We could call it the ALK legacy fund. They could finally fix that Cricket Field stand or pay off those debts we created to buy our own shares.”

Board: “You’re absolutely right, that would be the right thing to do. Thanks for making us see sense, Alan. Here we were going to buy another yacht, but giving the money back to Burnley - a club I’d not even heard about a few years ago - seems like a much better idea.”

Doesn’t sound very realistic does it?

When a football club’s owners borrow funds from the club (e.g., £100m) to finance their takeover, and this amount is listed as a debtor on the club’s balance sheet, the treatment of this debt upon the sale of the club depends on several factors, including the terms of the loan, the sale agreement etc.

Buyers typically demand that such debts be settled before or during the sale to avoid inheriting financial liabilities. The £100m would likely be repaid by the owners (from sale proceeds or other funds) or accounted for in the sale price. If repayment isn’t feasible, the debt could remain, but this would likely lower the club’s sale value and complicate the transaction.

[clarets1978]

Board: “We’re going to make so much money!” (A quote they’ve already used on camera I might add)

There's nothing like adding context to a quote before quoting it is there. Watch the episode of Mission to Burnley that is on. Its a joke in response to a reply that they thought it would be easy to run a football club

[Row x]

There's nothing like adding context to a quote before quoting it is there. Watch the episode of Mission to Burnley that is on. Its a joke in response to a reply that they thought it would be easy to run a football club

It was a sarcastic comment made light heartedly

It's been mentioned many times, but gets ignored, then brought out as a fact at some point later.

[GetIntoEm]

Surely nobody is naive enough to think that there are football club owners at this level who are not in it to make money

[jedi_master]

To the point further up about 'supporting' Espanyol (an alien concept to me, a Burnley fan, who frankly couldn't care less about any other club), just an immediate thought on my mind... Playing devils advocate, if the two clubs are entirely managed separately and not reliant upon each others success - would it not be better for Burnley that Espanyol are unsuccessful/relegated so that we remain the primary concern and the Golden Goose in this arrangement?

[claretonthecoast1882]

To the point further up about 'supporting' Espanyol (an alien concept to me, a Burnley fan, who frankly couldn't care less about any other club), just an immediate thought on my mind... Playing devils advocate, if the two clubs are entirely managed separately and not reliant upon each others success - would it not be better for Burnley that Espanyol are unsuccessful/relegated so that we remain the primary concern and the Golden Goose in this arrangement?

Looking at the odds there are only 3 teams shorter than Espanyol in the relegation market so every chance

[ClaretTony]

The problem is - what is the credible alternative?

Of course he wants to make money out of us. So did the last lot. But what's the alternative, there aren't many Teasdale's or Kilby's left.

It's a thankless task even if you have money, never mind if you dont.

Agree but I was replying to someone who didn't think he was making money out of it

[FeedTheArf]

There's nothing like adding context to a quote before quoting it is there. Watch the episode of Mission to Burnley that is on. Its a joke in response to a reply that they thought it would be easy to run a football club

You’re absolutely right. Many a true word spoken in jest.

My trouble is, I just don’t trust them. And I probably am bias against them and their actions. I didn’t like the leveraged buyout, I don’t like the MCO. I want the very best for my club and they are not it.

I feel like the majority of fans have been seduced by some LED boards and a more adventurous transfer strategy.

At the same time, I’m not naive to think there’s a queue Barry Kilbys out there. So are ALK the best we can hope for in the short term? Possibly. Do I have to like it? No.

[NewClaret]

The initial articles already talk of high quality loan signings from BFC to Espanyol. Do we really think those loans are going to be at full market value? If you do, the best I can say is you’re incredibly naive.

On this point, I don’t think it’s naive to expect the opposite, where inflated loan fees/arrangements are paid to assist Burnley’s PSR position on some loans. I think that scenario is one of the major attractions for ALK on the multi-club model - the optionality and flexibility to navigate PSR. I don’t expect they’ll do anything wild that could be investigated, but I mean deals that are better than are on the table elsewhere at any given point in time.

I certainly don’t expect they’ll turn down another higher loan offer from an external club, if there is one on the table, because they’re business men. We can’t on the one hand argue they’re money-grabbing gits, then say they’ll loan all our players out on the cheap with better offers on the table

Of course in some scenarios there will be no or very poor external options for a player and any loan will be more about development or maintaining/maximising a players transfer value. In that case they might get good deals that counter balance the somewhat generous arrangements on others.

And ultimately that’s where the big money is and what they’ll care about most. A cheaper loan fee - if that’s how it pans out - will neither be here nor there in the scheme of things if the ultimate sale fee is good.

I think that’s why ALK want multiple clubs, so there’s always a ‘right’ club for a player to get game time and develop. The point made by a poster yesterday about the B team being in the Spanish 4th division probably helps that position too.

It’ll all be undisclosed though, so we will likely never know.

[Row x]

You’re absolutely right. Many a true word spoken in jest.

My trouble is, I just don’t trust them. And I probably am bias against them and their actions. I didn’t like the leveraged buyout, I don’t like the MCO. I want the very best for my club and they are not it.

I feel like the majority of fans have been seduced by some LED boards and a more adventurous transfer strategy.

At the same time, I’m not naive to think there’s a queue Barry Kilbys out there. So are ALK the best we can hope for in the short term? Possibly. Do I have to like it? No.

And there we are...a fine example where the majority of fans are viewed as idiots

[boyyanno]

You’re absolutely right. Many a true word spoken in jest.

My trouble is, I just don’t trust them. And I probably am bias against them and their actions. I didn’t like the leveraged buyout, I don’t like the MCO. I want the very best for my club and they are not it.

I feel like the majority of fans have been seduced by some LED boards and a more adventurous transfer strategy.

At the same time, I’m not naive to think there’s a queue Barry Kilbys out there. So are ALK the best we can hope for in the short term? Possibly. Do I have to like it? No.

I don't disagree with this. Realistically it's still the club that's paying for everything, either with it's own funds or debt, there seems to be a big myth that ALK are helping us or going to help us with loads of external investment- I just don't see it.

I'm glad they have reinvested some of the clubs money into the squad/players, but what's the difference between them owing us X million that we can't use and Garlick hoarding it in the bank and not using it. I can't see how we're any better off than we were if I'm honest, more exciting (maybe).

[NewClaret]

You’re absolutely right. Many a true word spoken in jest.

My trouble is, I just don’t trust them. And I probably am bias against them and their actions. I didn’t like the leveraged buyout, I don’t like the MCO. I want the very best for my club and they are not it.

I feel like the majority of fans have been seduced by some LED boards and a more adventurous transfer strategy.

At the same time, I’m not naive to think there’s a queue Barry Kilbys out there. So are ALK the best we can hope for in the short term? Possibly. Do I have to like it? No.

Very fair and honest post.

I also don’t like MCO’s, leveraged buy outs (should be banned), ‘business men’ investing in football clubs at all, agents sucking money out of the game, high ticket prices and now VAR! I’d scrap them all if I were ever able to.

I do agree with you that as far as BFC are concerned we’ve probably not fallen on the worst side of all of those things as we could have done though.

It’ll take a lot more infrastructure investment than LED boards for me to be happy with ALKs ownership whenever their time comes though.

[FeedTheArf]

what's the difference between them owing us X million that we can't use and Garlick hoarding it in the bank and not using it. I can't see how we're any better off than we were if I'm honest, more exciting (maybe).

The main difference being we wouldn’t have spent £20m in interest payments on that borrowing.

That’s not to say I have an issue with the club borrowing money. Borrow for players, borrow to improve the ground, just don’t borrow to help ALK buy shares.

[NewClaret]

To the point further up about 'supporting' Espanyol (an alien concept to me, a Burnley fan, who frankly couldn't care less about any other club), just an immediate thought on my mind... Playing devils advocate, if the two clubs are entirely managed separately and not reliant upon each others success - would it not be better for Burnley that Espanyol are unsuccessful/relegated so that we remain the primary concern and the Golden Goose in this arrangement?

Me either (on supporting two clubs).

I think we’ll remain the primary concern even in a relegation scenario. This is all about player development and profiteering, which will always be best achieved via England because English clubs generate by far the largest transfer fees in the world.

A player could spend a year with Espanyol doing well in La Liga and his value still wouldn’t be as high as it would be having a successful season in the Championship.

[FeedTheArf]

And there we are...a fine example where the majority of fans are viewed as idiots

I didn’t say idiots, I said seduced. I’m not saying there’s a problem in that. The club had started to get stale. The ground looked tired. The transfers weren’t exactly exciting. But we could have achieved all of that by paying an outstanding CEO £5m a year without the club supplementing ALKs purchase.

[NewClaret]

True, but let’s imagine a Velocity board meeting 10 years from now.

Pace: “Right lads, we’ve been offered £400m for the club.”

Board: “We’re going to make so much money!” (A quote they’ve already used on camera I might add)

Pace: “Steady on boys. I think we should do the right thing and leave £100m of it in the club coffers. We could call it the ALK legacy fund. They could finally fix that Cricket Field stand or pay off those debts we created to buy our own shares.”

Board: “You’re absolutely right, that would be the right thing to do. Thanks for making us see sense, Alan. Here we were going to buy another yacht, but giving the money back to Burnley - a club I’d not even heard about a few years ago - seems like a much better idea.”

Doesn’t sound very realistic does it?

To be fair, this is exactly what Garlick could have done and didn’t. The money was literally sat in the clubs bank account.

Obviously he didn’t, which sort of underlines that not much has changed in that respect.

Business men be business men.

[Row x]

I didn’t say idiots, I said seduced. I’m not saying there’s a problem in that. The club had started to get stale. The ground looked tired. The transfers weren’t exactly exciting. But we could have achieved all of that by paying an outstanding CEO £5m a year without the club supplementing ALKs purchase.

Saying that the majority of fans have been seduced because of a few fancy lights at the ground is certainly suggesting they are idiots, even if you don't say the exact word. I find it insulting to those fans to suggest they support the ownership just because of those reasons.

[CyrilEbokiPoh]

Agree but I was replying to someone who didn't think he was making money out of it

I honestly don’t know what options we have. On the face of it there could be much worse options.

That said, Alk have never really been under pressure. Had we not got promoted at the first ask both times it would be interested to see what would have happened.

I do believe if we came under severe pressure they would be nowhere to be seen.

Fortunately. To date we have been pretty successful under their leadership.

[ollieclarets8]

Everything I've read so far on this suggests when they do leave the club we won't have a pot to **** in.

[Goliath]

In reality this is a deeper and wider issue than just Burnley or even football. It's an inherent flaw in Capitalism that if you don't chase bigger profits then you seemingly get left behind. You see it in all industries. Makes you wonder where it's all going to end.

[quoonbeatz]

No one appears to have asked the most important question.

Are we now all fans of Espanyol? Will we go to watch Espanyol when we are in Spain for our holidays? Perhaps, we will also plan weekends in Barcelona to take in a game. Will we be able to get tickets for some of Espanyol's big home games, Real Madrid, Athletico Madrid, Barcelona?

Will we also welcome Espanyol fans to Turf Moor when they come to visit their sister club? (We play in different leagues, we are both part of the same ownership group. I don't think it's helpful to think of "parent club" and "feeder club" - perhaps we can claim to be "big sister" - because we were acquired first by Alan Pace and Espanyol can be "little sister."

UTC

Been a good parody account for a long time but really come to the fore of late.

[Goliath]

Everything I've read so far on this suggests when they do leave the club we won't have a pot to **** in.

Depends on who takes over surely to be fair. I've never known previous owners to leave a load of cash on the table when exiting to spend on players etc. That's up to the new owners

[CyrilEbokiPoh]

Depends on who takes over surely to be fair. I've never known previous owners to leave a load of cash on the table when exiting to spend on players etc. That's up to the new owners

The same in business in general. They literally stop investing. Spending. Cut every cost possible. Take as much of the wages as they can off the books. Then disappear with the proceeds.

[ClaretPete001]

Depends on who takes over surely to be fair. I've never known previous owners to leave a load of cash on the table when exiting to spend on players etc. That's up to the new owners

I doubt the club is saleable at the moment as a single business unless ALK take a big loss or we go into administration. Their may come a time when ALK can sell it at a reasonable price but I don't think they will be able to any time soon.

A buyer would have to pay ALK £200 million plus for the shares, service the nigh on £200 million worth of creditors and presumably find a £100 million or so to invest in the squad on the presumption that ALK are unlikely to sell while we are in the PL or receiving parachute money. Quite simply the leveraged buyout and subsequent borrowing has made it pricey for new owners.

If the group is successful I would guess it's shares would become a vehicle traded between Private Equity companies who see it a good fit with their existing portfolios.

It was always ALKs plan to create an investment group and our future is immediate future entirely intertwined with ALK and the new Chinese ownership. I think most people are concerned to varying degrees apart from possibly Paul. Some can see the potential, which I think is fair enough and others like me just see the risk both to the club and to football as most of us have known it.

[agreenwood]

I’m not remotely interested in the fortunes of Espanyol and the social media love-in currently taking place between the two sets of fans is frankly bizarre. No doubt it’ll soon sour once one of the two clubs becomes subservient to the other.

What I’m interested in is getting our team ready for a tough season in the Premier League. At the moment the midfield looks too weak and I’ve no idea where the goals are coming from.

What I do hope is that this takeover doesn’t detract from giving Scott Parker a fighting chance this season in any way.

[NewClaret]

I won’t quote all of your post Pete, but I would say overall we are hugely de-risked with another club in the group and a broader investor base (Chinese). That’s even aside from the assumption that they’ve raise capital given CP’s post that Pace’s holding had reduced.

I also think one potential end game is a listing in the US, which would only be possible via scale, versus continued passing amongst PE companies. But who knows.

[ClaretTony]

I’m not remotely interested in the fortunes of Espanyol and the social media love-in currently taking place between the two sets of fans is frankly bizarre. No doubt it’ll soon sour once one of the two clubs becomes subservient to the other.

What I’m interested in is getting our team ready for a tough season in the Premier League. At the moment the midfield looks too weak and I’ve no idea where the goals are coming from.

What I do hope is that this takeover doesn’t detract from giving Scott Parker a fighting chance this season in any way.

That love-in is from people who really cannot see any pitfalls whatsoever and people who cannot see any fault whatsoever in the way our club was bought or is run. If it wasn't a serious matter, it would be laughable.

Thankfully we have a good manager who knows what's needed and let's hope he gets that. We are returning to the PL while our owners are seemingly occupied elsewhere.

[Row x]

That love-in is from people who really cannot see any pitfalls whatsoever and people who cannot see any fault whatsoever in the way our club was bought or is run. If it wasn't a serious matter, it would be laughable.

Thankfully we have a good manager who knows what's needed and let's hope he gets that. We are returning to the PL while our owners are seemingly occupied elsewhere.

I don't think our club will come to a standstill just because certain people are involved elsewhere for a while, many businesses survive this kind of activity

[ClaretTony]

I don't think our club will come to a standstill just because certain people are involved elsewhere for a while, many businesses survive this kind of activity

Nobody suggests it would, but we all know nothing happens at our club unless it's signed off by the chairman.

[agreenwood]

That love-in is from people who really cannot see any pitfalls whatsoever and people who cannot see any fault whatsoever in the way our club was bought or is run. If it wasn't a serious matter, it would be laughable.

Thankfully we have a good manager who knows what's needed and let's hope he gets that. We are returning to the PL while our owners are seemingly occupied elsewhere.

There are long term concerns over multi club ownership, but distraction from the job at hand is certainly my short term concern. Hopefully that at least will prove unfounded.

[ClaretTony]

There are long term concerns over multi club ownership, but distraction from the job at hand is certainly my short term concern. Hopefully that at least will prove unfounded.

Serious long term concerns, undoubtedly.

[ClaretPete001]

I won’t quote all of your post Pete, but I would say overall we are hugely de-risked with another club in the group and a broader investor base (Chinese). That’s even aside from the assumption that they’ve raise capital given CP’s post that Pace’s holding had reduced.

I also think one potential end game is a listing in the US, which would only be possible via scale, versus continued passing amongst PE companies. But who knows.

I think hugely de-risked is a bit OTT but it looks a bit more sensible now as a business proposition.

[NewClaret]

I think hugely de-risked is a bit OTT but it looks a bit more sensible now as a business proposition.

Yes, perhaps a generous adjective to use, absent the facts.

If ALK had achieved the £150m rumoured to have been raised, plus acquired the Chinese as part of the investor base, I would say that’s a fair description though.

[NewClaret]

There are long term concerns over multi club ownership, but distraction from the job at hand is certainly my short term concern. Hopefully that at least will prove unfounded.

To be fair on this, a transaction of this nature will have taken months to conclude, so will have been going on all year probably peaked over the last few months where we’ve done very decent business.

The planning for the summer will have happened months ago and I’d expect Matt Williams will be leading on delivering that now.

I’d feel happier if we had a Premier League standard midfield already, but generally this seasons prep is not what concerns me. It’s the longer term unknowns.