NJS

What about the SAFC model with a front man backed by a group with enough money between them? Seems to be working.

It's where you say that any new owner will take debts in to account and not buy the club if it is going to hinder them. I get your initial point, but the discussion had appeared to move on from that. The thing is that the last figure that was mentioned as not paid off was £27m - now if that amount is left on top of the amount Ashley wants then it "hinders" the new owners. I know it's naive in the extreme but I think if he makes £100m or more he should have the grace to pay it off.

There are a few comments saying we need one owner rather than a consortium - on the latter that's how the Mackems have done it and it seems to be working for them - I like the idea of more than one person with a stake though as has been said the idea of a Nigerian group does make me a tad nervous.

Given the lack of decent alternatives, I struggle to see how bringing back someone who saved us from relegation was a mistake - or was the mistake to actually make the fans hope?

Agree with you but picking up on this - in all the statements he's made he has never said that if he hadn't had to pay off the debt that any more would have been available for players. The impression I have of the man is a bit schizo - some good intentions but they are obscured by bad ideas that have failed.

Celebrated by kissing the badge when scoring for Sunderland against us.

My Dad and Uncle did the same and being honest I do find it unsettling - they did really support us but as you say would go and watch them - I think they found modern intensive rivalry to be as strange.

I'm not sure whether they'll even be doing any merchandise or whether that was a swipe from someone above - I was just saying that the idea of somehow doing the club out of money by buying a t-shirt or badge seemed pretty petty. When I first started going away I used to go with the original supporters club for a couple of years and that organisation was pretty amateurish but very well intentioned in providing its service. The club in the person of that cunt Fletcher killed it and I would hate to see a cozy relationship with this new organisation like when Shepherd tried a liaison committee a few years ago. In my opinion the organisation should be mainly a watchdog to keep whoever the owner is in check - even if we ruled the world Man U style there would still be room for a dissenting voice as I can't imagine things ever being "perfect" even if the club was successful.

The Ashley debate will be over in the next month or so (hopefully) - the fact that this shitstorm has made people organise should be the thing that matters so that in the future their can be some kind of common voice - I do think they shouldn't have even mentioned this issue in their press release but understand the desire to get people on their side. It's the big picture/future that matters. As for robbing the club of money thats BS as well - having everything ran by or tied to the club takes away the whole point - independence.

One thing I universally can't stand is the notion of having more than one team - again the concept is completely alien to me (apart from the old cliche of whoever's playing the mackems).

Ashley isnt a cockney Having looked up where Burnham actually is and using the broad definition of a cockney as a Londoner and having seen how far that broadness can be applied to Geordies both by North Easterners and southeners alike, I'm quite happy to lump him in with cockneys. So because a minority of people don't fully understand where Geordies really come from, it is alright to call people who have nothing to do with London, cockneys (even when you actually know where the cockney boundaries do or don't lie)? Strange argument. From a stupid/simplistic football pov I think its okay - being strict there are probably no cockney teams but that's just boring.

Mordashov is a graduate of the Leningrad Engineering-Economical Institute. After graduation he joined Cherepovetskiy Metallurgical Plant in 1988 as an economist. He later gained an MBA from Northumbria University in Newcastle upon Tyne in 2001. 2+2 = $22.5bn

Something like £10 million of future income will have gone out of the club. Gone where? Surely it will still be sat in the clubs account. I think he means it will be included in Ashley's profit and therefore depending on how rich the new owners are, it could be £10m less to spend.

What about foreign fans who chose us when we were a good team - surely just as bad as those choosing Chelsea now? tbf it's not the same if they're still sticking by us. I doubt many of the current Chelski "supporters" would if they started crashing and burning. I was playing devil's advocate a bit and I agree that if they are still "here" then they are just as much masochists as the rest of us.

What about foreign fans who chose us when we were a good team - surely just as bad as those choosing Chelsea now?

Ashley isnt a cockney Having looked up where Burnham actually is and using the broad definition of a cockney as a Londoner and having seen how far that broadness can be applied to Geordies both by North Easterners and southeners alike, I'm quite happy to lump him in with cockneys.

I think the press release is quite seriously flawed but to use that and shit like the Greggs thing to dismiss the entire notion is just an excuse for people who never wanted anything in the first place.

Like Keegan in January? When he arrived he mentioned probable signings. After judging the squad in a short time spell he declared it as good enough to stay up (apart from trying to sign Woodgate which would have been an excellent signing). He was right.

That's why it needs phenomenal team ethos - there would be nothing wrong with a setup if the manager briefed the rest on who he wants as well as who the wasters are but I'm a million miles from being convinced this idea has worked anywhere.

The thing is this idea about a structure which is long term would suggest a cohesive policy about type of players signed with an idea of a style - eg Arsenal flair Vs Bolton fitness/strength. This would then suggest continuity when managers change but it completely neglects how managers usually work in wanting "their" players/style. Ashley's supposed plan would therefore have suggested a cohesive approach to managers as well - meaning people not only happy with the structure but with the style/targetting policy as well. I know we've suffered more than most due to managerial player turnover but I feel this reduced influence and culpability for the manager himself still feels unnatural to me.

I think the difference is that they supposedly work as a committee with a joint approach - I have no problem with that and on that basis think it would be unfair to single out Comolli. The problem we had as far as I can see is friction, opposed agendas, lack of cohesion and at a basic level no money. IMO Ashley should have intervened earlier and either banged their heads together or made changes if it was unworkable.

Don't care where anyone is from - to quote from Total Recall a man is defined by his actions, not his history - but I find it hard to see how "pin stickers" can have a true attachment. I've actually known a couple of people with no affiliation who've gone for years but that's obviously possible if you do live in the UK. There also tend to be a trend for foreigners/non-attenders to be too much football fans rather than Newcastle fans - I despaired at that thread a while ago where so many posters favourite ever footballing moment didn't involve NUFC - that to me is completely alien never mind foreign. I don't doubt some of those posters were "proper" fans who have no excuse in my mind but the point stands.

If a June appointee had the same say as Keegan did, what makes you think the same deals wouldn't have been done? If you mention players Keegan supposedly vetoed, I can easily name the players alleged to have been put for sale that Keegan probably stopped from leaving.

Aye, leave king Kev alone. It's not his fault he done a runner at the worst possible time leaving the club in the s***. Which other manager wouldn't have "done a runner" if put under the same circumstances ? Jose Mourinho? How about Bobby Robson? If you're not happy having players bought for you then he should have gone when Jonas arrived, not on the day after the transfer window closed which was the worst possible time. If it was any other manager the fans would want him hung by his bollocks. So does het get any credit for hanging on hoping thisngs would turn out okay or would you have slated him if he'd walked in June? As I've also said before, if he had left then we'd have exactly the same shit squad as we have now.

Aye, leave king Kev alone. It's not his fault he done a runner at the worst possible time leaving the club in the shit. Did he know that Ashley would "do a runner" and not appoint a proper manager in his place? I keep being told far better managers would have come but for the protests/sale - Keegan could have thought that as well.