Wullie

But putting aside Ashley's personal wealth, should a club of our size not be able to fund transfers of its own accord? These latest figures don't make good reading and show what a mess Shepherd left us in but they do show a club shorn of debt (other than to its owner which we can ignore for the time being) which makes us one of the very few in the league in that state iirc. Seeing as much of the "loss" is this amortisation business, which is a paper loss rather than cash, these figures look to me (as someone who knows jack shit about it so please put me right) like we are one of the few clubs who can actually afford to spend rather than the other way on - especially when they don't include three season's worth of ST money from at least 25000 people (my guess). Can someone explain to me: if we can't afford to buy anyone, how the fuck can anyone else (obvious exceptions, Villa, City, Chelsea apart)? I'm not sure that the three years worth of season tickets will make a huge difference. If the club is smart, that will be going on their accounts per year, because it's stupid to put it all on one year, meaning that in one year we're going to have lots from season tickets, yet in other years we're going to have nothing. Plus, with the stadium hardly selling out these days, there's somewhere between 5,000 - 7,000 tickets going spare, which at 35 quid a pop (on average) is somewhere between £175,000 and £245,000 each match that's not getting paid in, that would have been in previous seasons. But in previous seasons, a large percentage of the ticket cash was paying off a mortgage which no longer exists. Also I can see that the club might register the season ticket cash over three years on the books but again, that's a paper issue - the cash doesn't magically disappear for a year before a third of it pops up next summer to go on the books again. That cash should be being used to secure our Premiership future because we'll lose far more than that if we go down, not least in the amount of people who either won't renew or will cut off their direct debit.

Player amortisation isn't a paper loss, if we buy a player for £10 million over 4 years then it's shown on the accounts as £2.5 million per year. We could also be paying the transfer fee over the whole period of the contract. As for how others can afford transfers, no idea other than they're probably borrowing and have a surplus between money coming in and money going out. We've got no room to borrow as we have more going out than coming in so we have nothing to pay a loan back with. It is a paper loss in that it doesn't affect the amount of cash currently in the kitty to buy players. You're right in that it does if the fee is being paid in installments that reflect that amortisation but in that case we should also be receiving cash from other clubs for the players we've sold - I don't know whether that is treated on the books in the same way (e.g. when we sold Dyer, did it go on the books as £8m or £2m every year for four years?)

But putting aside Ashley's personal wealth, should a club of our size not be able to fund transfers of its own accord? These latest figures don't make good reading and show what a mess Shepherd left us in but they do show a club shorn of debt (other than to its owner which we can ignore for the time being) which makes us one of the very few in the league in that state iirc. Seeing as much of the "loss" is this amortisation business, which is a paper loss rather than cash, these figures look to me (as someone who knows jack shit about it so please put me right) like we are one of the few clubs who can actually afford to spend rather than the other way on - especially when they don't include three season's worth of ST money from at least 25000 people (my guess). Can someone explain to me: if we can't afford to buy anyone, how the fuck can anyone else (obvious exceptions, Villa, City, Chelsea apart)?

I meant "stupid" spending really - I don't honestly know how the what I think of as over moderate spending last summer or the reluctance now fits in with those bids you mention which showed exactly what I wanted - reasonable but neither excessive or inadequate. I think they show that he was willing to invest in the summer but only on the players that fit in with his system and policy which provide some form of safefty net in light of the precarious financial situation, in my opinion he realised the absolute importance of making sure whatever money spent was spent as wisely as possilbe. Ive maintained throughtout this thread that these account sheets shouldnt excuse him from not spending and going on a Bolton style budget but they highlight the importance of how he spends his money. If Milner hadnt gone, or if we actually did buy Schweinsteiger we wouldnt be having this conversation. Thats how flimsy this argument actually is. Signed for Villa. Still at Bayern Munich. Is there anything that will shake your faith in the Good Lord Ashley? Selling Given and Harper this month? Getting relegated? Playing in red and white? Your logic is inpenetrable mate, only becasue its so crap. f*** the debts Ashley you tit, spend the f***ing money. who cares if it puts us into adminastration should it go wrong. If you cant see that as a club werent in a position to spend £100m on players even if we wanted to then thats not my problem, the facts and explainations are riddled throughout this thread. The figure I put forward was £25m. and where was this £25mill to come from ? How do other clubs buy players? Genuine question, I know nowt about finance but I know Liverpool and Man Utd are swimming in debt but still spend big money on players. Why have the administrators not been called in there? they have operating profit, makes it easier to finance But don't Liverpool have a debt stretching into the hundreds of millions? In 2006 they turned a profit of £7m (can't find more recent figures) - unless they've found a massive profit-making exercise in the meantime, I can't imagine the banks are too happy with that.

I meant "stupid" spending really - I don't honestly know how the what I think of as over moderate spending last summer or the reluctance now fits in with those bids you mention which showed exactly what I wanted - reasonable but neither excessive or inadequate. I think they show that he was willing to invest in the summer but only on the players that fit in with his system and policy which provide some form of safefty net in light of the precarious financial situation, in my opinion he realised the absolute importance of making sure whatever money spent was spent as wisely as possilbe. Ive maintained throughtout this thread that these account sheets shouldnt excuse him from not spending and going on a Bolton style budget but they highlight the importance of how he spends his money. If Milner hadnt gone, or if we actually did buy Schweinsteiger we wouldnt be having this conversation. Thats how flimsy this argument actually is. Signed for Villa. Still at Bayern Munich. Is there anything that will shake your faith in the Good Lord Ashley? Selling Given and Harper this month? Getting relegated? Playing in red and white? Your logic is inpenetrable mate, only becasue its so crap. f*** the debts Ashley you tit, spend the f***ing money. who cares if it puts us into adminastration should it go wrong. If you cant see that as a club werent in a position to spend £100m on players even if we wanted to then thats not my problem, the facts and explainations are riddled throughout this thread. The figure I put forward was £25m. and where was this £25mill to come from ? How do other clubs buy players? Genuine question, I know nowt about finance but I know Liverpool and Man Utd are swimming in debt but still spend big money on players. Why have the administrators not been called in there?

Bellamy's only signed for them so he can play against us again and increase his tally. He'll probably sign for the mackems after the match.

We'll get beat and anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't got the first fucking clue what they're talking about.

I can't understand why everyone is so pissed off. Apart from the fact that it was obvious this would happen, no manager worth his salt would take a job where dennis wise's hand is up his arse moving his mouth. Rather kinnear than someone who doesn't give a toss. The only thing we need to concern ourselves is the parasite at the top.

It was a poor showing all round but there weren't many, if any, better on the night.

I can't believe people on this board pretend that they watch Rennes games.

Can't believe anyone is surprised.

Apart from the fact that even Ashley wants to watch entertaining football. I'm not convinced. You need good players for that. Yeah, I'm sure he spent all this money on the club (in the first place at least before you start on about transfers) to watch a dull side. No he bought it to make more money. The football played is irrelevant as long as it's cheap. Ah OK. And you know this how? From his actions since he bought the club. It's fairly obvious if you don't take every opportunity to stuff yourself up his hoop. you could make the argument that his actions since taking over have drove the value of the club down,less incoming monies, making it less likely he'll make money on his investment. Less incoming money how? The Sky money is the same for everyone and he's already got most people's season ticket money. how many do you think would have renewed had we been top 6 as opposed too how many already have ? i'll bet if we do make an operating profit it will be minimal. The majority have already renewed because of the KK effect. Spending the money required to get us into the top six would have just been a waste as far as Ashley's concerned. 10,000 more 3-year season tickets is less than £15m. Why bother? I think the profit will be massive because there's no longer a mortgage to pay off - all ticket cash goes direct to the club now.

Apart from the fact that even Ashley wants to watch entertaining football. I'm not convinced. You need good players for that. Yeah, I'm sure he spent all this money on the club (in the first place at least before you start on about transfers) to watch a dull side. No he bought it to make more money. The football played is irrelevant as long as it's cheap. Ah OK. And you know this how? From his actions since he bought the club. It's fairly obvious if you don't take every opportunity to stuff yourself up his hoop. you could make the argument that his actions since taking over have drove the value of the club down,less incoming monies, making it less likely he'll make money on his investment. Less incoming money how? The Sky money is the same for everyone and he's already got most people's season ticket money.

Apart from the fact that even Ashley wants to watch entertaining football. I'm not convinced. You need good players for that. Yeah, I'm sure he spent all this money on the club (in the first place at least before you start on about transfers) to watch a dull side. No he bought it to make more money. The football played is irrelevant as long as it's cheap. Ah OK. And you know this how? From his actions since he bought the club. It's fairly obvious if you don't take every opportunity to stuff yourself up his hoop.

Apart from the fact that even Ashley wants to watch entertaining football. I'm not convinced. You need good players for that. Yeah, I'm sure he spent all this money on the club (in the first place at least before you start on about transfers) to watch a dull side. No he bought it to make more money. The football played is irrelevant as long as it's cheap.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/article2136903.ece?OTC-RSS&ATTR=Football I would absolutely love to wipe the smug smile off his fat fucking mug on Saturday.

:lol:

That rule only applies to foreign clubs. Doesn't apply to English clubs until the summer.

Why? Noone forces Redknapp to. That doesn't mean he's not a cunt for doing it. I don't like our manager doing it, it's below the belt.

Sounds like West Ham are not happy over Kinnear's comments to the press. They're within their rights too, Kinnear should cut the Redknapp bullshit out.

Where's the money gone then? I don't know. Do you? I know that Ashley via Kinnear is claiming we haven't got a pot to piss in.

Where's the money gone then?

Not a dig at you personally Wullie, but why don't you see it as paying 2 grand to support the club, rather than to fill Ashley's coffers? At the end of the day isn't that the whole point? I wish I lived in the UK to follow the team around, but life isn't that simple. The money should be supporting the club but it isn't. It's paying for one tiny fraction of Mike's casino chips on any given night. I don't give a shit about people supporting the club from far and wide, good on them. I do however have a problem with them calling me a retard because I haven't the first interest in hearing more of Mike Ashley's lies. Very easy to say when you don't sit through humiliation every week at St James' and don't pay good money to have the piss taken out of you.

Aye course you have.

You're right thomas, I am retarded for having given more than £2000 to this charlatan during a recession. Must be great not to have to bother and be able to pass judgement on those who do though.