WhatTheFunk

Do you honestly think adopting Ashley's methods (hiring an inexperienced DoF over the manager, net £0 transfers, allowing the star striker's contract to run down to get him off the wages, trying to sell the club, bringing in a manager unable to find a job anywhere else) back in 2001 would have got us into the CL? Probably not, or not in a hurry, but I'm not the one setting CL qualification as a benchmark. The point re Shepherd should be clear. It's not about where we had been under the old board, but where we were going. If Shepherd had stayed, I honestly think we\d be in a bigger mess than we are right now. Unless you have inside information about his plans to get in control of a situation where we were losing £30 million a year before they sold the club? I have it on good authority that just before selling out to Ashley, FS was looking actively into securitizing the club's assets and refinancing its debt. What I understood now from one of the solicitors involved was that we would have lost most value on the paper money with the credit crunch which would have put us in an even graver situation. Dunno whether or not you could really blame Shepherd for that as he couldn't have foretold the financial crisis unfolding the way it did. didn't they refinance the debt regularly anyway (similar to getting a better deal when your tie-in on your mortgage runs out)? and fred could hardly have been blamed for not seeing the credit crunch coming. but, the taking on of any new debt would need to be secured on assets and by the looks of it there was nothing left to hock. looks like something was being done around March 2007 with property adjacent to the stadium. My solicitor friend would not say exactly what, but I gather he was trying to mortgage that for additional loans. We would have been a further good few million in debt than we are at the moment.

It has to be macbeth. He has a website and his numbers are bigger. bigger font size or bigger in the sense of all the money fat freddy shepherd wasted? WAHEY!!! we should have got Bob Murray in, he's an accountant and he really showed the scap metal dealer how its done Oh he's finally commented after all the lurking he has done on this thread. first time I've looked at it, couldn't resist pointing out that Bob Murray was an accountant - as you and others ignored it the first time I pointed it out. Have you sat your history paper yet ? hook, line, sinker

Do you honestly think adopting Ashley's methods (hiring an inexperienced DoF over the manager, net £0 transfers, allowing the star striker's contract to run down to get him off the wages, trying to sell the club, bringing in a manager unable to find a job anywhere else) back in 2001 would have got us into the CL? Probably not, or not in a hurry, but I'm not the one setting CL qualification as a benchmark. The point re Shepherd should be clear. It's not about where we had been under the old board, but where we were going. If Shepherd had stayed, I honestly think we\d be in a bigger mess than we are right now. Unless you have inside information about his plans to get in control of a situation where we were losing £30 million a year before they sold the club? I have it on good authority that just before selling out to Ashley, FS was looking actively into securitizing the club's assets and refinancing its debt. What I understood now from one of the solicitors involved was that we would have lost most value on the paper money with the credit crunch which would have put us in an even graver situation. Dunno whether or not you could really blame Shepherd for that as he couldn't have foretold the financial crisis unfolding the way it did.

Question: If we play hardball with City, and only agree to sell for what we believe he is worth, and a bid from City is no longer forthcoming keeping Shay at the club....does it still make us a "selling club who sell our best players?"

redknapp is a prize cunt. he's a liar and a cheat, and a whiny wobbly jawed prick managing a club that fits the same exact description. the only credit he should get is for sucking as much cock in the football hierarchy as his throat can gobble down.

The lad can certainly hit them!

At least monkey know life is important. I couldn't imagine you can ask such a silly question. I expect it's a more reasonable one. Sorry. so you can't really explain how all the other successful clubs [all 4 of them] have creamed off the bulk of the trophies while not going into debt and buying top footballers, which appears to be the goal that you and others are chasing ? Thanks. it was done by MAGIC! it must be. Paul Daniels would be proud of you The reason is that they have spent big and actually achieved results!!! Trust me, if any of the big 4 right now hired shit managers like Souness and finished 13th a couple seasons running, they would be in deep shit. But another thing you seem to forget is that especially Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool are massive international brands worldwide. We're well known worldwide, we're just not anywhere near as big commercially.

At least monkey know life is important. I couldn't imagine you can ask such a silly question. I expect it's a more reasonable one. Sorry. so you can't really explain how all the other successful clubs [all 4 of them] have creamed off the bulk of the trophies while not going into debt and buying top footballers, which appears to be the goal that you and others are chasing ? Thanks. it was done by MAGIC!

Belgian outfit Ghent. Read it in several different places.

1. have you found your village yet 2. have you told us what you think of a manager with 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards yet ? 3. What do you think of Craigy baby signign for man city for 14m quid, given that you supported his sale and the manager who made it ? Anything but admit that Shepherd left the club in a right old state and today we are paying the bill. just think, if we still had Craigy baby - who's sale you supported along with the manager who sold him - we would have had a 14m quid asset at the club. Did you ask me for a reminder of that question about a manager who won 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ? That would make it at least 4 out of 6 that you backed to succeed, wouldn't it ? How much did Liverpool pay for him? In turn, how much West Ham pay for him? 6.5m took him from Rovers to Liverpool, and 7.5m took him to the Hammers. The only reason City paid 14m is because they bloody can, and West Ham took them to the cleaners with it. I'm being pedantic because your argument about the 14m asset is ridiculous. as ridiculous as mandiarse ? what if I don't answer that? are you going to say "thought so"? or are you going to "tar me with the same brush"? This isn't about Ozzie, but about you using nonsense to jab at someone, and I decided to be pedantic about it since you seem to care little for logical debate since the finances/Shepherd interview were released.

I remember Dr. Spectrum raving about him being a massive prospect and better than Richards. Where is Speccy!!??

1. have you found your village yet 2. have you told us what you think of a manager with 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards yet ? 3. What do you think of Craigy baby signign for man city for 14m quid, given that you supported his sale and the manager who made it ? Anything but admit that Shepherd left the club in a right old state and today we are paying the bill. just think, if we still had Craigy baby - who's sale you supported along with the manager who sold him - we would have had a 14m quid asset at the club. Did you ask me for a reminder of that question about a manager who won 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ? That would make it at least 4 out of 6 that you backed to succeed, wouldn't it ? How much did Liverpool pay for him? In turn, how much West Ham pay for him? 6.5m took him from Rovers to Liverpool, and 7.5m took him to the Hammers. The only reason City paid 14m is because they bloody can, and West Ham took them to the cleaners with it. I'm being pedantic because your argument about the 14m asset is ridiculous.

The pontificating twat must have some sort of memory loss syndrome. He's clearly shit stirring with no real motivation for anything other than that. Keep your mouth shut. The club, ownership, management, playing staff etc... are deep in it enough already.

We paid £10 million for an international defender, I hardly think he was overpriced. As for being a panic buy, we signed him in early August and have been after him for more than a month. The season started in mid August, but you’re barking up the wrong tree. It was the lack of options that induced the panic. It was Collocini or nobody, such was the effectiveness of our scouting system. That is absolute dog shit. If we had 7 or 8 other targets, you would accuse the club of not knowing who they want, and not going after the man they really wanted. Your arguments in this thread stink of desperation to make a point that is hardly valid, to assert that you have an agenda. You don't make any fucking sense. Who the fuck are YOU to say that 10m for Coloccini was excessive? What do you base that on? A full Argentina international, who has been a regular starting CB for all his clubs apart from AC Milan. He's still not reached his peak for a central defender age wise. A high profile name. How much could he possibly have cost in this current climate where Wayne fucking Bridge is going for 16 odd million!!!??

That is just as valid a comment for those who thinks he's got plenty to spend. I think having a debate about a strategy over 4 or 5 years if he is committed to staying is one thing. What worries people like me, FS and a couple of others is that there seems an unwillingness from his pov to address this window/season and for those who seem to defend him in this thread to think about the here and now. How much he was willing to spend last summer or next summer are worthwhile topics imo - I think asking for funds for emergency plumbing for a f*** off hole in the living room ceiling shouldn't attract too much criticism. Personally I don’t care if he has to sell his house to buy a new left back. It was his decision to take on all the responsibility that comes with running a football club. I’m not interested in his sob stories, or how many times he’s seen Maradona play. The supporters and the team are the most important parts of any football club. Mr Ashley is neglecting both. would you give all your money to nufc ? No, but if I only had a personal fortune of £800m I wouldn’t have bought them. What if your personal fortune was nearly £2bn? "was" being very much the word. and the "is" happened after the "was". he had 1.9bn, and bought us with that. you reckon he knew he would lose all that money, and still went ahead and purchased the club?

Oh but if Ashley is so greedy why would he allow Given to go in a swap deal? Wouldn't he want to bank the cash and blow it all on big macs and lager?

Bastard!! Keep forgetting about that

I say flog Owen now for 8 million and spank 6 on this fella

would love him here. Me too, would be amazing. Was the first person we should have turned to when keegan Allardyce left. we would be in a completely different situation right now if he had been brought in. fyp

Why, for God's sake have they not provided motbud?

That's what I was getting at earlier, just didn't phrase it that well. So if the 'real' loss is £2.5m, are people justified in claiming Ashley should have spent more on the first team? It wasn't the real loss in cash terms. We went from owing £70 million at 30th June 2007 to owing £100 million at 30th June 2008, increasing to £110 million after that. If you forget amortisation (which is a perfectly good concept btw) and all that and just focus on Ashley's cash position it puts it into perspective. £30 million of extra cash was stuck into the business for the club to (at best) stand still. Forgive my ignorance quayside. But that figure of 70 million that we owed, was that including the interest? If not, does it not mean that the figure would have been closer to the 100 million by the time the interest was paid?

Chubby Jason!!!!

I like that quote. Yes, but it's not true. Blackburn is a good example. Success took years of stability for them, but the success wasn't followed by stability. It would be more correct to say progress brings stability. spot on

I like that quote. Bollocks. The quote sounds nice, and the sentiment is correct. But it needs to be bound by time. Success in how long? Immediate success? long term success? If it's long term success, then it means the stability came before the success. Flawed argument without the definition of a time scale. This is why, imo, the cliche'd "5 year plan" is essential as a measuring tool for where we were before say a takeover, or new manager, where we are now, and how we're doing relative to the plan in place.