madras

nixons here...he'll have one off you.

why thursday ? please note.......i'm watching shameless not SSN

if only we could get points for headlines.

mi'wa done me aswell

oh dear........SSN mong fest for the morning then.

We didn't qualify for the CL though did we. Arguably in part due to spending the Summer budget early and buying Woodgate we had our highest finish under Robson and finished in a CL qualifying round position, but by no means were we guaranteed the money from getting into the CL proper. We lost out in a 2 legged game, didn't qualify, and didn't get the cash bonus that would have paid for the players you are suggesting we bought. Anyone who goes on about not spending that Summer is advocating being far more reckless with the clubs finances than the old board is ever accused of being. What you are saying is that we should have gambled money that the club couldn't budget for without the CL money in the hope that the player(s) bought with that money would make a significant difference in their first couple of competitive games for us (ie would be the difference between losing the tie with the existing established players and winning it with the new one's involvement). That's a ridiculous risk to take. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing, especially when it's combined with the surety that doing something differently would have had a positive outcome - if only we'd bought unidentified player X he'd have stopped the Partizan goal/scored the home equaliser/scored the pen that Shearer or Dyer or Woodgate or Hughes missed. Bollocks. New players not fully integrated are as likely to cost you a game as win you one. The hilarious irony is that had we spent more money that Summer in the assumption that we were going to qualify, and had we still lost that tie, you and those like you would be slating the old board (not the manager who would have chosen the player btw, but the board) for spending that money before we were guaranteed the income. no we didn't qualify but we had our best chance to build and put some distance between us and those behind us. lets not forget woodgate was bought in january.........8 months later we'd added bowyer on a free. i find it quite striking that those saying we shouldn't have invested then....good team, chance of boosting the coffers by 20mill a season,cementing it for a while,on top of a decent financial position ie bringing in more money than your forking out, are the same people who say we should be now investing on a much larger scale even before we think about transfer fees, we are not taking in enough to pay the bills.

The "credible manager" lined up seems to be Steve Bruce which would mean that it's an appointment that won't take place till next season by which time we might already be in the Championship. That would explain partly why Ashley has been so reluctuant to hire a fire fighter short term. But that's the bit I don't get - fine, if we've got Bruce lined up for the summer, I'd take that. But that doesn't mean we couldn't get in Venables or someone like that on a really short-term basis with the promise of a big bonus if we're kept up? Or should we just stump up the £3m compen to Wigan and have Bruce now?? if they thought kinnear was a credible manager then my money is going on tommy cassidy.

it doesn't prove what you have said, and many others. What it shows is that going by comments made on numerous occasions by people on here, the entire premiership is at deaths door. who said at deaths door ? drastic belt tightening certainly. who outside the top 4 is finding fresh cash to try and compete with those. all that link proved was that those with the biggest turnover to wages can finance (afford to have) the bigger debt. thats what you've been carping on about all these months isn't it "oooohhhh look at the debt on them" in a brians mam from the life of brian type voice. our debt and wages wouldn't be so bad if we were bringing in a lot extra revenue. do you think liverpool or arsenal would carry on as they are now if they dropped out the champs league for 5 seasons ? we were once in a position to speculate like that, you've been going a long time can you help me remember the actions of the board last time we qualified for the champs league, we bought woodgate in the winter before qualifying then in the summer of actually qualifying.........shit i can't remember, will someone please help me out ?

that link you posted....liverpool £56mill of debt and they have all that champs league money aswell. look at most of the others. those with a lot of debt (like us) and without champs league size income (like us) are fastening their belts in a good bit tighter. good link that really. proves what most of us have been saying for a while. thanks for that.

in that link you posted under the man utd bit there is an interesting bit about the "comfort level" which compares wages to turnover ratioo. as it says "the key performance indicator to a clubs welfare" wonder what ours is like ?

why would you get banned ? I don't know what his major intention was, what do you think it was ? I'm GUESSING that he didn't understand football too much, looked at our crowds, revenue and thought that he could make a small profit while retaining the income and spending less - and/or owning it for a few years and selling it on for a profit. Which is where he's come unstuck, because he had no wider understanding or knowledge of the football club. He clearly doesn't want to compete in the way the other big clubs do, and we are a big club, aren't we ? would you care to tell us how we should compete with the big clubs ? eerrr.......by buying players that help us to qualify regularly for europe like they do ? what with ? i wonder why everyone doesn't do this ? So you still prefer Ashleys spend nothing and make a profit in transfer windows policy, and resultant relegation, to his predecessors policy of aiming to compete with the top clubs ? Unless of course you think we are a small club like Charlton, Bolton etc ? i asked "what with" ? the same stuff as everybody else who is operating at a profit uses , including all those clubs with more revenue and higher gates than us, particularly. Fancy thinking we are one of the biggest clubs, blimey, whoever gave some of us that idea. I hope you are looking forward to competing at the level of Bolton, Charlton etc as you are advocating it. Its a highly strategic plan this, that the club has just now, refusing to hand over 20m quid or so to your manager and watching the clubs value fall by 100m instead. Its obvious the old regime have been getting it wrong all these years, we should have been playing in the 2nd division and making a profit instead of the San Siro. Liverpool and Arsenal take note !!! and how many seasons do you see us doing that before we have too much debt for the position we are/were in,ie losing money hand over fist and dropping down the league, or the banks just say "sorry...no more credit" ? you really do think we should just carry on borrowing regardless don't you ? you really think everybody else is making a profit don't you, and we are the only club with a debt ? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/2301797/Deloitte-football-finance-review-Club-by-club-Premier-League-analysis.html please point me to where i say everyone else makes a profit. i can point you to where i say debt isn't even necessarily a bad thing. so you do think we should just keep on borrowing regardless ?

why would you get banned ? I don't know what his major intention was, what do you think it was ? I'm GUESSING that he didn't understand football too much, looked at our crowds, revenue and thought that he could make a small profit while retaining the income and spending less - and/or owning it for a few years and selling it on for a profit. Which is where he's come unstuck, because he had no wider understanding or knowledge of the football club. He clearly doesn't want to compete in the way the other big clubs do, and we are a big club, aren't we ? would you care to tell us how we should compete with the big clubs ? eerrr.......by buying players that help us to qualify regularly for europe like they do ? what with ? i wonder why everyone doesn't do this ? So you still prefer Ashleys spend nothing and make a profit in transfer windows policy, and resultant relegation, to his predecessors policy of aiming to compete with the top clubs ? Unless of course you think we are a small club like Charlton, Bolton etc ? i asked "what with" ? the same stuff as everybody else who is operating at a profit uses , including all those clubs with more revenue and higher gates than us, particularly. Fancy thinking we are one of the biggest clubs, blimey, whoever gave some of us that idea. I hope you are looking forward to competing at the level of Bolton, Charlton etc as you are advocating it. Its a highly strategic plan this, that the club has just now, refusing to hand over 20m quid or so to your manager and watching the clubs value fall by 100m instead. Its obvious the old regime have been getting it wrong all these years, we should have been playing in the 2nd division and making a profit instead of the San Siro. Liverpool and Arsenal take note !!! and how many seasons do you see us doing that before we have too much debt for the position we are/were in,ie losing money hand over fist and dropping down the league, or the banks just say "sorry...no more credit" ? you really do think we should just carry on borrowing regardless don't you ?

why would you get banned ? I don't know what his major intention was, what do you think it was ? I'm GUESSING that he didn't understand football too much, looked at our crowds, revenue and thought that he could make a small profit while retaining the income and spending less - and/or owning it for a few years and selling it on for a profit. Which is where he's come unstuck, because he had no wider understanding or knowledge of the football club. He clearly doesn't want to compete in the way the other big clubs do, and we are a big club, aren't we ? would you care to tell us how we should compete with the big clubs ? eerrr.......by buying players that help us to qualify regularly for europe like they do ? what with ? i wonder why everyone doesn't do this ? So you still prefer Ashleys spend nothing and make a profit in transfer windows policy, and resultant relegation, to his predecessors policy of aiming to compete with the top clubs ? Unless of course you think we are a small club like Charlton, Bolton etc ? i asked "what with" ?

not only the ticketless fans but everyone who was outside the ground and tthought pushing at those in front would be a good idea.

why would you get banned ? I don't know what his major intention was, what do you think it was ? I'm GUESSING that he didn't understand football too much, looked at our crowds, revenue and thought that he could make a small profit while retaining the income and spending less - and/or owning it for a few years and selling it on for a profit. Which is where he's come unstuck, because he had no wider understanding or knowledge of the football club. He clearly doesn't want to compete in the way the other big clubs do, and we are a big club, aren't we ? would you care to tell us how we should compete with the big clubs ? eerrr.......by buying players that help us to qualify regularly for europe like they do ? what with ? i wonder why everyone doesn't do this ?

yes i have. i've been there several times. our fans done the same thing.........i thought they were wrong for doing it.

did the police force fans to push against the turnstiles/gates ? if ticketless fans hadn't been there would there have been less people doing it hence less force ? before anyone jumps in i'll say it again..yes the police fucked up and should've stopped the situation happening but they didn't and that does not excuse fans of any club pushing like that to get in anywhere.

They don't need to deny anything as it's plainly ridiculous. We've got massively expensive assets and huge income. Even Leeds who were in a far worse situation than us and every other club in history only went into admin in 2007 because they were going to be relegated to the third division anyway, that was a full 5 years after it went tits up, 3 years after they were relegated from the Premiership and years after they had sold all of their assets. Creditors are a lot more eager to get their money back ASAP in the current economic cimate though aren't they? the main cerditor is the person he'll get burned most by going into administration. remembering that if they go into administration any creditors will be unlikely to get anywhere near what they are owed. Not true as such as all debts that are classed as " football debts" have to be paid in full. what are the "football debts" ? If you owe any of the following: (i) The Association (ii) The Football Association Premier League Limited (iii) The Football League Limited (iv) The Football Conference Limited (v) The Northern Premier League Limited (vi) The Southern Football League Limited (vii) The Isthmian Football League Limited (viii) Any member club of any of the organisations listed in (i) to (vii) above (ix) Any full-time or part-time employee of a member club, as defined in (viii) above, or former full-time or part-time employee of such a member club, in respect of sums due to such person by way of arrears of remuneration or expenses (x) The Professional Footballers’ Association (xi) The Football Foundation (xii) Any Affiliated Association (xiii) Any other affiliated clubs or leagues. From TheFa.com Also a bit at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7741859.stm probably one of the reasons why ashley took most of the clubs debts onto himself. i'll bet the club owes nowt or very little to any of those.

need the accountants in for that.

They don't need to deny anything as it's plainly ridiculous. We've got massively expensive assets and huge income. Even Leeds who were in a far worse situation than us and every other club in history only went into admin in 2007 because they were going to be relegated to the third division anyway, that was a full 5 years after it went tits up, 3 years after they were relegated from the Premiership and years after they had sold all of their assets. Creditors are a lot more eager to get their money back ASAP in the current economic cimate though aren't they? the main cerditor is the person he'll get burned most by going into administration. remembering that if they go into administration any creditors will be unlikely to get anywhere near what they are owed. The club took out a new mortgage in November 2008, so there's some bank we owe money to who'd probably want what they can get while we have £60M of on field assets rather than in three or four months time when it's £10M. I don't know the case, but Ashley is trying to sink JJB (a company he owns a fifth of) which seemed strange to me...until I realised all the cheap real estate it would leave for Sports Direct to buy. I don't know the truth or motives, but I'm not dismissing the story out of hand. ashley would lose massivly on administration as he is not only by far the major creditor but the ammount he'd lose on his purchase. he'd be much better off selling at a loss than allowing administrators to sell it off at even more of a loss. nowt about NUFC would surprise me though. No-one's buying, so it's difficult for him to sell a club that's losing millions every season. Depending on how big the mortgage is, he could have covered a significant amount of the purchase price with it. He's £8m up in transfers. He's taken 3 years of season ticket cash up front from many fans. Considering the players (that he couldn't offload) and property the club own, there'd be a canny amount that came back from that too. if nobodies buying then all the administrator will do is liquidate the assets and he'll basically take as big a hit as it is possible to take. rmember it'll be a leeds style fire sale. ha hasn't taken as much up front as you think. (set up a poll and see how many have pais the lot up front and how many are paying monthly). 8mill up in transfers but that is company money. i don't think he's allowed to just walk off with it. (any of those accountants around to clarify this ?) as happened with leeds the club would go as a going concern so the value of the property wouldn't really come into it. Perhaps. I was only responding to the fact that it's "plainly ridiculous" which I disagree with. gggg was saying "We've got massively expensive assets and huge income", but the net income of the club has been an annual loss in the tens of millions....and those expensive assets look a lot less valuable in the championship. Either way I reckon Ashley would be left with a loss. I don't know the how it works out, but if he can walk away now with a £100M loss, or put in another 3 years of thankless work and end up walking away with a £75M loss, who's to say he wouldn't want rid of the ball and chain sooner rather than later? i agree he'll be left with a loss but,purely my opinion, administration would mean bigger losses. unfortunatly as this is NUFC the more it is plainly ridiculous, the more it is likely.

They don't need to deny anything as it's plainly ridiculous. We've got massively expensive assets and huge income. Even Leeds who were in a far worse situation than us and every other club in history only went into admin in 2007 because they were going to be relegated to the third division anyway, that was a full 5 years after it went tits up, 3 years after they were relegated from the Premiership and years after they had sold all of their assets. Creditors are a lot more eager to get their money back ASAP in the current economic cimate though aren't they? the main cerditor is the person he'll get burned most by going into administration. remembering that if they go into administration any creditors will be unlikely to get anywhere near what they are owed. Not true as such as all debts that are classed as " football debts" have to be paid in full. what are the "football debts" ?

They don't need to deny anything as it's plainly ridiculous. We've got massively expensive assets and huge income. Even Leeds who were in a far worse situation than us and every other club in history only went into admin in 2007 because they were going to be relegated to the third division anyway, that was a full 5 years after it went tits up, 3 years after they were relegated from the Premiership and years after they had sold all of their assets. Creditors are a lot more eager to get their money back ASAP in the current economic cimate though aren't they? the main cerditor is the person he'll get burned most by going into administration. remembering that if they go into administration any creditors will be unlikely to get anywhere near what they are owed. The club took out a new mortgage in November 2008, so there's some bank we owe money to who'd probably want what they can get while we have £60M of on field assets rather than in three or four months time when it's £10M. I don't know the case, but Ashley is trying to sink JJB (a company he owns a fifth of) which seemed strange to me...until I realised all the cheap real estate it would leave for Sports Direct to buy. I don't know the truth or motives, but I'm not dismissing the story out of hand. ashley would lose massivly on administration as he is not only by far the major creditor but the ammount he'd lose on his purchase. he'd be much better off selling at a loss than allowing administrators to sell it off at even more of a loss. nowt about NUFC would surprise me though. No-one's buying, so it's difficult for him to sell a club that's losing millions every season. Depending on how big the mortgage is, he could have covered a significant amount of the purchase price with it. He's £8m up in transfers. He's taken 3 years of season ticket cash up front from many fans. Considering the players (that he couldn't offload) and property the club own, there'd be a canny amount that came back from that too. if nobodies buying then all the administrator will do is liquidate the assets and he'll basically take as big a hit as it is possible to take. rmember it'll be a leeds style fire sale. ha hasn't taken as much up front as you think. (set up a poll and see how many have pais the lot up front and how many are paying monthly). 8mill up in transfers but that is company money. i don't think he's allowed to just walk off with it. (any of those accountants around to clarify this ?) as happened with leeds the club would go as a going concern so the value of the property wouldn't really come into it.

They don't need to deny anything as it's plainly ridiculous. We've got massively expensive assets and huge income. Even Leeds who were in a far worse situation than us and every other club in history only went into admin in 2007 because they were going to be relegated to the third division anyway, that was a full 5 years after it went tits up, 3 years after they were relegated from the Premiership and years after they had sold all of their assets. Creditors are a lot more eager to get their money back ASAP in the current economic cimate though aren't they? the main cerditor is the person he'll get burned most by going into administration. remembering that if they go into administration any creditors will be unlikely to get anywhere near what they are owed. The club took out a new mortgage in November 2008, so there's some bank we owe money to who'd probably want what they can get while we have £60M of on field assets rather than in three or four months time when it's £10M. I don't know the case, but Ashley is trying to sink JJB (a company he owns a fifth of) which seemed strange to me...until I realised all the cheap real estate it would leave for Sports Direct to buy. I don't know the truth or motives, but I'm not dismissing the story out of hand. ashley would lose massivly on administration as he is not only by far the major creditor but the ammount he'd lose on his purchase. he'd be much better off selling at a loss than allowing administrators to sell it off at even more of a loss. nowt about NUFC would surprise me though.

why would you get banned ? I don't know what his major intention was, what do you think it was ? I'm GUESSING that he didn't understand football too much, looked at our crowds, revenue and thought that he could make a small profit while retaining the income and spending less - and/or owning it for a few years and selling it on for a profit. Which is where he's come unstuck, because he had no wider understanding or knowledge of the football club. He clearly doesn't want to compete in the way the other big clubs do, and we are a big club, aren't we ? would you care to tell us how we should compete with the big clubs ?

They don't need to deny anything as it's plainly ridiculous. We've got massively expensive assets and huge income. Even Leeds who were in a far worse situation than us and every other club in history only went into admin in 2007 because they were going to be relegated to the third division anyway, that was a full 5 years after it went tits up, 3 years after they were relegated from the Premiership and years after they had sold all of their assets. Creditors are a lot more eager to get their money back ASAP in the current economic cimate though aren't they? the main cerditor is the person he'll get burned most by going into administration. remembering that if they go into administration any creditors will be unlikely to get anywhere near what they are owed.