madras

The debt has been mentioned from almost day 1 so option 2 looks less likely and yes they should share some blame for the debts. A very small share and they claim to be able to stop the losses in roughly 18 months time. By then, Ashley will have put in another £30 million if he does no more than pay our debts. According to NUFC-finances, the club only lost money in one of the last four years Shepherd was in charge. http://www.football-finances.org.uk/newcastle/profit2.gif or managed to not run at a loss in 3 of the last 7. all perspective i suppose

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are. Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced. I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him. the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn. you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there. absolutely not. but the champions league qualifications were a result of the big spending, had it been big spending that was manageable then there'd be no need for scorn, but it wasnt manageable, it was reckless. and thats why we are where we are. ah, now. I was one of the few people on here who urged caution when loads of posters were urging the club to "splash the cash" after every defeat, and to back Souness, because they said he would get it right just like Alex Ferguson did at ManU. Probably the same people who are now condemning this approach for what it caused. But I don't do hindsight, thats for others, so are denying u-turns and double standarsds. Fact is, whatever the circumstance, you don't succeed in football without spending. I don't want the club to behave like the charltons of this world and - having the 17th biggest turnover [courtesy of the last regime, and down from 14th since Ashley came in, a downturn which will continue and will drop significantly if nothing is done to arrest it] I think it is not the course we should be taking either. 17th biggest turnover. i wonder how many of those numbered 1 to 16 run at a loss even with those turnovers ?

true. any protest now cant make ashley spend any more as the window has shut. support is whats needed, if you want to protest make it when something can be done about it.

you dont put that much cash in without being bothered about the future of that concern wether it be profit motivated or whatever.

to protest

Is the correct answer that everyone who keeps biting should realize instead of continuing to waste bandwith on the forum out of some unlikely hope that he'll ever admit to being wrong. gave up on that a while back.......a straight answer would do me. You should know by now that the chances of you getting either are approximately 0. If no one responds to NE5, no more threads get hijacked, and he doesn't get the attention he so craves. He'll disappear on his own. i don't want him to disappear. i think he's a canny bloke with an achiles heel (we all have them). this place wouldn't be the same without an ne5 baiting corner. i'd like him to post on other things though aswell. Would be one of the best posters on here if he didn't waste all his time arguing over something that will NEVER be resolved. come on, it's already been resolved. everyone knows including NE5 but it kills the game if he admits it.

Is the correct answer that everyone who keeps biting should realize instead of continuing to waste bandwith on the forum out of some unlikely hope that he'll ever admit to being wrong. gave up on that a while back.......a straight answer would do me. You should know by now that the chances of you getting either are approximately 0. If no one responds to NE5, no more threads get hijacked, and he doesn't get the attention he so craves. He'll disappear on his own. i don't want him to disappear. i think he's a canny bloke with an achiles heel (we all have them). this place wouldn't be the same without an ne5 baiting corner. i'd like him to post on other things though aswell.

Is the correct answer that everyone who keeps biting should realize instead of continuing to waste bandwith on the forum out of some unlikely hope that he'll ever admit to being wrong. gave up on that a while back.......a straight answer would do me.

that projected loss relies on the big gamble of avoiding relegation. personally i think ashley would have been better served releasing a bit to help the chances of staying up in order to protect his initial investment. we are getting somewhere here. where are we getting ? i'm quite happy for ashley to spend his personal cash on improving us but i wouldn't dream of having a go at him for not spending even more of his personal cash. can you tell the difference between that and borrowing more and more from the banks ? have it your way. We are going down, due to Ashley's cost cutting, and no doubt the 50,000 capacity crowds will cram into the ground just like before, and the revenue won't be affected in the slightest. so do you think we should have kept on borrowing,creating more and more debt until either success or bankruptcy ? (i've covered the debts others,i've said fred done well for a while,i thought dalglish was a good appointment and was got rid of too early..................................is there anything i haven't covered in your usual non-answers ?) Don't expect an answer to that. the previous post contains all the facts. Don't let them change your opinion though, shame you can't remember can't find an answer there to the question.......so do you think we should have kept on borrowing,creating more and more debt until either success or bankruptcy ?

that projected loss relies on the big gamble of avoiding relegation. personally i think ashley would have been better served releasing a bit to help the chances of staying up in order to protect his initial investment. we are getting somewhere here. where are we getting ? i'm quite happy for ashley to spend his personal cash on improving us but i wouldn't dream of having a go at him for not spending even more of his personal cash. can you tell the difference between that and borrowing more and more from the banks ? have it your way. We are going down, due to Ashley's cost cutting, and no doubt the 50,000 capacity crowds will cram into the ground just like before, and the revenue won't be affected in the slightest. so do you think we should have kept on borrowing,creating more and more debt until either success or bankruptcy ? (i've covered the debts others,i've said fred done well for a while,i thought dalglish was a good appointment and was got rid of too early..................................is there anything i haven't covered in your usual non-answers ?)

that projected loss relies on the big gamble of avoiding relegation. personally i think ashley would have been better served releasing a bit to help the chances of staying up in order to protect his initial investment. we are getting somewhere here. where are we getting ? i'm quite happy for ashley to spend his personal cash on improving us but i wouldn't dream of having a go at him for not spending even more of his personal cash. can you tell the difference between that and borrowing more and more from the banks ?

we seem to have choices for a change. the biggest concerning the right. i'd be tempted to keep taylor at right back as imo he played well there against the mackems and does actually look to get forward and attack from there,his height and strength could be needed against an everton side who like to play a bit on dead balls in the absence of yakubu. leaving duff or raylor for wide right. haven't decided yet and will probably even change my mind on staylor before the game itself. (as in the case of milner who,for all they aren't great i don't think he or taylor are anywhere near as bad as some on here seem to think)

i wished you'd used a different colour....anyway,here goes. point 1).....ie quietly supporting the team etc....what i meant was if we were top 6 no-one would be complaining about lack of communication etc. 2) we know what needs to be done ?----do we ? outside of appointing a better manager than kinnear few will agree will on anything apart from disliking wise and Llambias on a personal level without actually knowing what they do. 3) the bit about keeping an appointment with the arabs.................the ashley side of the story is that they already had a meeting and were offered a derisiory price. turned it down and went on the hoy. i have no reason to believe one story or the other..........do you know different ? Do you know that its NOT the way things happened - why would they say it if it wasn't true ? If can't mak their chances of getting the club on the cheap any better..?In any case, as someone who has been in business for themselves, I know that I NEVER broke an appointment, nor did I expect others to do so with me. As to point 2, yes, many of us DO know what needs to be done because its hardly rocket science - you appoint a DECENT MANAGER, agree a BUDGET with him, and provide him with a decent SCOUTING NETWORK to find future players...he then vets them and decides if they are HIS kind of player before signing them...you do NOT try to undermine him by appointing some guy who wasn't half the player that the manager was, or has nowhere near the managerial experience, over his head as so-called DOF ; NOR do you appoint someone who ran a Casino previously as your Chairman, esp if he has the charisma of a sideboard.... Had ANY of these things been done correctly, we would probably not have been in the dire position in which the club finds itself......and these points are just for starters. a) i don't know but we have two conflicting stories with no evidence,therefore until i get evidence i'll believe neither. b) i've said about kinnear aswell. as for the budget..how do you know they didn't. as for undermining keegan i'll await the court case to see if he was playing power games aswell (he has form) c) we still don't know what the relationship between wise and keegan was. d) appointing a casino boss as chairman.....why not ? take a look at most prem clubs chairmen and see if they are through and through football men ? ashley and his team have made massive mistakes. kinnear long term being the biggest. You are obviously happy with the status quo and the Board - I am NOT... You have your view, I have mine and we'll NEVER agree..I hope, for your sake, you are right, because, assuming you are younger, you are going to have to live with the actions of Ashley & Co for a lot longer than I am ...! typical response of the anti-ashley brigade. i'm not happy but i'm not blaming either. a) they took over from a shitty position. b) i'm not happy about kinnears appointment either c) i haven't got a clue about the remit of wise or Llambias so can't really make a judgement. i can't be right or wrong as what i've said all along is people are jumping in and making conclusions based on sod all and i'm not prepared to do that. if somebody does well i'll praise (i did with fred and hall) if somebody does poorly i'll criticise (as before unfortunatly). the biggest mistake they've made is kinnear. i could understand bringing him in for 6 weeks or so till the club was sold but oncde it became clear there was no sale he should've been thanked and replaced. in my view that was bigger than keegan leaving.

i wished you'd used a different colour....anyway,here goes. point 1).....ie quietly supporting the team etc....what i meant was if we were top 6 no-one would be complaining about lack of communication etc. 2) we know what needs to be done ?----do we ? outside of appointing a better manager than kinnear few will agree will on anything apart from disliking wise and Llambias on a personal level without actually knowing what they do. 3) the bit about keeping an appointment with the arabs.................the ashley side of the story is that they already had a meeting and were offered a derisiory price. turned it down and went on the hoy. i have no reason to believe one story or the other..........do you know different ? Do you know that its NOT the way things happened - why would they say it if it wasn't true ? If can't mak their chances of getting the club on the cheap any better..?In any case, as someone who has been in business for themselves, I know that I NEVER broke an appointment, nor did I expect others to do so with me. As to point 2, yes, many of us DO know what needs to be done because its hardly rocket science - you appoint a DECENT MANAGER, agree a BUDGET with him, and provide him with a decent SCOUTING NETWORK to find future players...he then vets them and decides if they are HIS kind of player before signing them...you do NOT try to undermine him by appointing some guy who wasn't half the player that the manager was, or has nowhere near the managerial experience, over his head as so-called DOF ; NOR do you appoint someone who ran a Casino previously as your Chairman, esp if he has the charisma of a sideboard.... Had ANY of these things been done correctly, we would probably not have been in the dire position in which the club finds itself......and these points are just for starters. a) i don't know but we have two conflicting stories with no evidence,therefore until i get evidence i'll believe neither. b) i've said about kinnear aswell. as for the budget..how do you know they didn't. as for undermining keegan i'll await the court case to see if he was playing power games aswell (he has form) c) we still don't know what the relationship between wise and keegan was. d) appointing a casino boss as chairman.....why not ? take a look at most prem clubs chairmen and see if they are through and through football men ? ashley and his team have made massive mistakes. kinnear long term being the biggest.

has anybody ever seen NE5 ?

i wished you'd used a different colour....anyway,here goes. point 1).....ie quietly supporting the team etc....what i meant was if we were top 6 no-one would be complaining about lack of communication etc. 2) we know what needs to be done ?----do we ? outside of appointing a better manager than kinnear few will agree will on anything apart from disliking wise and Llambias on a personal level without actually knowing what they do. 3) the bit about keeping an appointment with the arabs.................the ashley side of the story is that they already had a meeting and were offered a derisiory price. turned it down and went on the hoy. i have no reason to believe one story or the other..........do you know different ?

that projected loss relies on the big gamble of avoiding relegation. personally i think ashley would have been better served releasing a bit to help the chances of staying up in order to protect his initial investment.

whos ashley ?

Mort said they had a 5 yr plan when they took over, its not looking too good if this is the situation we find ourselves in almost 2 years into the plan If they are now embarking on a new 5 year plan now then surely having a 62 year old manager with a history of health problems was not a good start!! Surely it needed a young manager to see the yr plan through. I think we can only resign ourselves to the idea that they are either clueless or couldn't care less. Sad business. But change will come it always does. or even that they had a 5 year plan but have miscalculated. dull but more realistic.

yes but it starts afresh every year Otherwise in 2013 they would have to go to the Chronicle and tell them we have a 1 year plan pretty sure the "5 year plan" is just an attempt to cash in on the contempt for capitalism at the moment.

yes but it starts afresh every year

oh yes there was. (panto voice)

This is exactly my question to NE5, and he will not answer it except to say Ashley is a clueless knobjockey etcetera etcetera Looks like you're right. Oh well. He won't answer because he can't answer it. Just keep on harping back to the 70's and 80's and the glory champions league nights which none of us have the slightest clue about. eeerrr.....exactly. Now, toonlass. I know I said this yesterday, but rather than get accused by somebody of "derailing the thread" when I didn't, I'll at least make it debateable now that its gone in this direction. Genuine question. You have yourself, Colos short and curlies [sorry if thats not quite right mate I still think of you as Scott parkers 60's haircut], madras, whatthefunk, taking the side of outright prudency in one corner. In the other, you have me, UV, Spence [maybe], johnnypd, and one or two others in the other, and Dave sort of in the middle but wavering over to "our" side because he's very bothered by the current position and other things. We were all very pleased when Keegan walked through the door, weren't we ? [apart from one or two like ozzie and Baggio who have expressed their opinions of him ie quitter and all of that bollocks, IMO]. Why were you pleased. Was it because you envisaged the club spending some money to back him and getting back into europe and better ? If that were still the case, what would you now be saying ? Also - if Ashley had kept Given, and spent say 20m quid not just to get away from the foot of the table, but with a concrete desire to improve the fortunes of the club, which also improve the financial position if these new players are successful [which is the key]. What would you be saying ? Would you be pleased, or would you be saying that we shouldn't be doing this because of the debts ? I'm going out now, I don't give a toss about the snow. I don't want to derail, but hopefully there will be some good honest replies. madras's prudency ?...MADRAS'S PRUDENCY ? (in a brian blessed type voice) i have no problem with taking on debt and taking a risk.............they done it and failed which leads me to............. i think they ran up more debt than was sustainable (or at least more than it was safe to add to). answer the darn question. as a couple of others have alredy pointed out it seems that he has answered it in his own way, but its not ok for ashley to be undertaking a period of modest re-building because he's just starting out and has no track record we can judge his intentions on, whereas the previous owners did, so it would have been ok for them to do it. only half of what i am getting at as ne5 never seems to have understood the position fred left us in let alone ashleys actions since taking over of which even i am critical of some.

This is exactly my question to NE5, and he will not answer it except to say Ashley is a clueless knobjockey etcetera etcetera Looks like you're right. Oh well. He won't answer because he can't answer it. Just keep on harping back to the 70's and 80's and the glory champions league nights which none of us have the slightest clue about. eeerrr.....exactly. Now, toonlass. I know I said this yesterday, but rather than get accused by somebody of "derailing the thread" when I didn't, I'll at least make it debateable now that its gone in this direction. Genuine question. You have yourself, Colos short and curlies [sorry if thats not quite right mate I still think of you as Scott parkers 60's haircut], madras, whatthefunk, taking the side of outright prudency in one corner. In the other, you have me, UV, Spence [maybe], johnnypd, and one or two others in the other, and Dave sort of in the middle but wavering over to "our" side because he's very bothered by the current position and other things. We were all very pleased when Keegan walked through the door, weren't we ? [apart from one or two like ozzie and Baggio who have expressed their opinions of him ie quitter and all of that bollocks, IMO]. Why were you pleased. Was it because you envisaged the club spending some money to back him and getting back into europe and better ? If that were still the case, what would you now be saying ? Also - if Ashley had kept Given, and spent say 20m quid not just to get away from the foot of the table, but with a concrete desire to improve the fortunes of the club, which also improve the financial position if these new players are successful [which is the key]. What would you be saying ? Would you be pleased, or would you be saying that we shouldn't be doing this because of the debts ? I'm going out now, I don't give a toss about the snow. I don't want to derail, but hopefully there will be some good honest replies. madras's prudency ?...MADRAS'S PRUDENCY ? (in a brian blessed type voice) i have no problem with taking on debt and taking a risk.............they done it and failed which leads me to............. i think they ran up more debt than was sustainable (or at least more than it was safe to add to). answer the darn question.