UV

It's not a world of difference, it's just a matter of scale. We wouldn't be able to hold onto one of the best players in the world in their position, of course we wouldn't. However Enrique is not one of the best players in the world in his position. He's good, and he's better than average in this league, but he's not in the top 10 left backs in the world. If it's really about the ambition to win things for Enrique, then we can't begrudge him leaving for a club in England, Spain, Italy or Germany who are in the CL, and I wouldn't blame the club for selling him in the Summer either. However if he goes to a club who are only realistically going for a Europa League place like Liverpool or Villa, then it's partly about the money for the player, and completely about the money for the club. I know there are some who would hate him for that, but personally I don't begrudge any player moving for money, 99.9% of us in the same position would do exactly the same and you're kidding yourself if you think differently. In that situation, a club with our resources in one of the best leagues in the world shouldn't really be struggling to keep hold of him if we think he's worth it. Enrique as a player is about at the same level as we should be as a minimum as a club.

There were plenty more high earners who came along later. What do you think the wage bill stands at? I thought it was generally agreed it was around the £50m mark on promotion. We'll have a better idea when last year's accounts come out.

And positives? Financial stability is the only real positive so far. I'm not even sure I've said anything positive about Ashley in this thread. Any financial "stablility" - and by this I think people are talking about the club making a profit - will have come about thanks to the increased TV revenues, and not through Ashley's great financial acumen. We'll have to wait for this year's accounts in a year or so to know for sure, but I think we'll see that the cuts in the wage bill (which I hope we can agree has come at the expense of weakening the squad even if there is an argument that the first team is better) are actually less than the drops in other revenue streams since he took ownership. ie without the increased TV revenue we'd be worse off even with the wage bill cuts. In 2007 the wage bill was £62.5m, revenue was £87.1m, of which £25.9m was media revenue (TV money), and we spent £5m more than we received. This year the wage bill is estimated as £50-£55m?, so around a £10m reduction, and we should receive over £50m in TV money, so over £25m increase. We damn well should be better off financially even ignoring the transfer market profits. I put stability in inverted commas above, as I think the weakened squad increases the chance of relegation if we have a year with a bad injury list and/or players lose form, so the finances of the club are actually less stable IMO. The only stability comes through the fact he can fund any losses himself, and while that's not to be sniffed at, in the long run if he expects those losses to be paid back it will definitely hold the club back possibly even more-so than going into admin and wiping the debts would have done (not that I think this was inevitable or likely).

Has he actually improved, or is he still just as inconsistent as ever with a few good moments/games that make him look great on MOTD? Honestly don't know, but I think a lot of the time "he's improved since he left" gets thrown around undeservedly, just because we don't get to see the player's flaws week in week out. Pretty sure he'd be more effective more often than Gutierrez like.

Please allow me to introduce myself I'm a man of wealth and poor taste I've been around for a long, long year Stole many a man's soul and faith And I was 'round when Keegan Had his moment of doubt and pain Made damn sure that Llambias Washed his hands and sealed his fate Pleased to meet you Hope you guess my name But what's puzzling you Is the nature of my game

those that were offered it. th rest stayed as no-one wanted them or wouldn't meet their prices. Exactly. In that way we were lucky, as I think if he had the choice Ashley would have sold off more players, and we may have struggled to get promoted. Forced ambition if you like. This season we've only had an average injury list, and not all at the same time, so it hasn't impacted us so much. The players still with us who got relegated have done far better than most expected. Tiote was a good piece of scouting no doubt, but there's also luck that a player who was a sub in a Dutch team hit the ground running in the Prem, and we were especially lucky with the way Carroll developed, as going into the season our strikeforce looked terrible. so surely the things that have gone against us must be unlucky then or does it only work one way ? I'd expect a mixture of good and bad luck. This season aside from a few injuries, it's mostly been good luck on the playing front, and most of the players have hit good form. When we got relegated there was a bit of bad luck, yes, especially with all our strikers and attacking midfielders playing poorly at the same time in the second half of the season, but we should never have been in the position where a bit of bad luck was enough to get us relegated. That took help from a lot of poor decisions from the management. For a club of our means, a season of bad luck should mean a bottom half finish at worst. but it's not luck either way that the majority of our squad stayed due to being on high enough wages to put everyone else off. It wasn't luck that got us into that situation, no, it was down to Ashley's choice to give them those contracts. But once there I'd say it was fortunate (form our point of view as supporters) we were somewhat hamstrung in who we could easily dispose of, as given a free choice I think Ashley would have let more go.

Smith Is s***, but by all accounts played an important part in getting us back up. apparently true and not really cos of much he done on the pitch. Smith was a very important part of our excellent defensive record in the first half of last season. He was also part of the team that beat Villa 6-0

those that were offered it. th rest stayed as no-one wanted them or wouldn't meet their prices. Exactly. In that way we were lucky, as I think if he had the choice Ashley would have sold off more players, and we may have struggled to get promoted. Forced ambition if you like. This season we've only had an average injury list, and not all at the same time, so it hasn't impacted us so much. The players still with us who got relegated have done far better than most expected. Tiote was a good piece of scouting no doubt, but there's also luck that a player who was a sub in a Dutch team hit the ground running in the Prem, and we were especially lucky with the way Carroll developed, as going into the season our strikeforce looked terrible. so surely the things that have gone against us must be unlucky then or does it only work one way ? I'd expect a mixture of good and bad luck. This season aside from a few injuries, it's mostly been good luck on the playing front, and most of the players have hit good form. When we got relegated there was a bit of bad luck, yes, especially with all our strikers and attacking midfielders playing poorly at the same time in the second half of the season, but we should never have been in the position where a bit of bad luck was enough to get us relegated. That took help from a lot of poor decisions from the management. For a club of our means, a season of bad luck should mean a bottom half finish at worst.

those that were offered it. th rest stayed as no-one wanted them or wouldn't meet their prices. Exactly. In that way we were lucky, as I think if he had the choice Ashley would have sold off more players, and we may have struggled to get promoted. Forced ambition if you like. This season we've only had an average injury list, and not all at the same time, so it hasn't impacted us so much. The players still with us who got relegated have done far better than most expected almost to a man. Tiote was a good piece of scouting no doubt, but there's also luck that a player who was a sub in a Dutch team hit the ground running in the Prem, and we were especially lucky with the way Carroll developed, as going into the season our strikeforce looked way below average at best.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/8595655.stm If we finish mid table, and with the high number of games we have on TV, we should easily get over £50m.

The average price I would guess is around £900 for adults. Top is £1695 but the cheapest is £650. The waiting list shot up when the first announcement for a new stadium was made, there were obviously going to be a lot of seats becoming available. Until Spurs say we stay at WHL and there will be no new stadium, I don't see the waiting list evaporating, and I am convinced that there will be a new stadium somewhere. I suppose whether the waiting list will drop off will depend on how much those waiting want a season ticket. Must have wanted them enough to pay just to get on the list. Levy Sounds like the best scam ever, bring in half a million a year and just keep stringing the move out. How long has this list been going?

I like how we've gone from being a "trophy signing" club to being a trophy sale club, and it's being spun as a good thing. IMO Ashley's been as lucky as fuck this season and last. We'll see how it all pans out in the future, and if we do well in the next couple of seasons I'll give him credit for it. FWIW I hope you're right about the direction of the club. They say there's a first time for everything.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/apr/08/chris-hughton-newcastle-premier-league 8/4/10 to 16/8/10 = 3 players signed before the season started, 2 frees and one for £2m? None of them signed as starters, one of whom was unfit for a month and one who would be injured for the majority of the season. Touché. And then a few more came in later in the window like Moyo, Ben Arfa, and Tiote. Come on UV, we may have had all the time in the world to plan, but I think it's fair to say a lot of players and clubs will hold out for as long as possible to see if any better offers/clubs come in. There is no reason at all to believe negotiations didn't begin well before any deals were actually finalised. 5? I count 2, and one of those almost turned up on our doorstep by accident. Stealth edit I see. The point was about early planning for the next season. I'd only call Tiote & Perch scouted and planned buys, Gosling & Campbell were opportunistic signings, and Ben Arfa just landed at our door (quite literally). I'd say we've been very, very fortunate with the way things have turned out this season rather than it's come about through great planning. Do you remember how well we planned over the Summer for our year in the Championship too?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/apr/08/chris-hughton-newcastle-premier-league 8/4/10 to 16/8/10 = 3 players signed before the season started, 2 frees and one for £2m? None of them signed as starters, one of whom was unfit for a month and one who would be injured for the majority of the season.

Owner/Chairman A + Manager B + transfer spend > Owner/Chairman A + Manager B - transfer spend It's not aerospace engineering.

Would this not have involved the lender performing a major credit check - due diligence in effect - and finding out that the club was about to become insolvent and uncreditworthy? How does that significantly change the valuation? It might affect a purchaser's ability to buy the club, but not the valuation (though not Ashley as he voluntarily paid off debts which were not payable immediately and voluntarily pays for players up front).

It's a mystery http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/2006-2011.html It's almost as if they spend lots of money on transfers to improve the team, thus improving revenue through higher league position, better performance in cups and Europe, increased support, bigger sponsorships, etc It's almost like that, but it can't be because that way doesn't work.

And also partly base their beliefs on statements released by the Ashley regime after it first took over. They seemed credible enough people at the time, but in light of subsequent events, these claims should also be revisited... Not saying they weren't bad, they clearly were, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that point was spun to breaking point. As I recall a number of the debts were called in due to the change in ownership, which obviously would make things look worse. I'm not saying the cash injection wasn't very welcome, but talk of the club not existing is laughable. Yep, that's right. Even if some find it laughable, we had favourable loans based upon debtors having faith in our old administration. For whatever reason (not trying to criticise in this instance), they withdrew their credit when Ashley bought us. Sorry but that is a very glib dismissal of the poor financial legacy of our previous owners. I've spouted long and hard on this subject elsewhere on this board. Not going to do so again - especially on a Jose Enrique thread ? It's true. Our structured debts suddenly got toploaded due to a security clause, when that happens by surprise it's liable to make any situation worse than it was before. You don't need to preach to me about problems the old regime did have, though, I'm converted. I really didn't want to go into this but: Structured debt is fine whilst you are generating positive cash flows and can meet the loan repayments that are in the structure, and the interest payments due on the loans. During 2007 the club was not generating positive cash flows so fresh funding was needed. There was nothing left to borrow against as all the clubs assets and future revenue streams had already been used as collateral (in the case of the training ground it had been used twice). The interest rates on the loans were extortionate reflecting the risk perceived by the lenders. The club's balance sheet showed an insolvent position which in itself would have given rise to the issue of whether accounts could be prepared with the club being a going concern. In order for the accounts to be prepared on a going concern basis the auditors would require proof that the club could continue trading for the foreseeable future, and this is in a scenario where cash flows are negative, fresh finance is needed and there are no assets to borrow against. In the end Ashley gave an undertaking to keep it going and provide whatever finance was needed - and so the 2007 accounts were prepared on a going concern basis. If he hadn't been around to do that can we assume that the previous majority shareholders would have given that undertaking? And btw once a set of accounts are given a going concern qualification (let alone are not prepared on a going concern basis) structured creditors have a right to foreclose. Not certain administration but it was certainly worthy of concern. To better understand, I'd like to get some definitive answers to the following questions. 1) What was the size of the negative cash flow in 2007? 2) What was the size of the increased TV revenue in 2008? 3) Can you explain the following note from the accounts considering we had no remaining assets to borrow against: 4) What was the accounting valuation of the playing staff in 2007 which is part of the valuation of the club leading to the insolvent position? Considering we have subsequently sold players on the playing staff in 2007 for around £90m in transfer fees do you consider the accounting valuation of the playing staff of a football club to typically be an accurate figure? Should an insolvent trading position be reached is it out of the question to revalue a company's assets? 5) The typical mortgage rate in 2007 was 6.5%. What do you consider an "extortionate" business rate of interest at the time, and how much of the club debt was over that rate? 6) What was the actual size of the debt when Ashley bought the club? How much more into debt had the club spiralled since 2001 when the stadium expansion was complete? 7) What precisely was withheld from the publicly available 2006 accounts and only available on due diligence which would cause someone to pay the equivalent of £200m (price + debt) for a business which most now consider it was obvious to see was shortly destined for administration, and could therefore have been very soon picked up for a fraction of that value?

Woke up to a radio report that Man U want him in the Summer for £12m. Looks like it comes from here: http://www.caughtoffside.com/2011/02/10/manchester-united-plot-12m-newcastle-united-wide-man-bid/ Interested in Tiote too. and so it begins...

We weren't in it in 08/09 either. We were 20th in last year's list. Not according to the table in this report. Perhaps they used preliminary figures in the 2010 report. Were our accounts published by the time the report was produced? In Jan 09 Llambias was predicting revenues of £100m. When the accounts came out though the reported revenue was only £86m, so we obviously didn't do very well against the forecasts in the remainder of the reporting period, missing out on an important £14m payment from somewhere. http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_GB/uk/industries/sportsbusinessgroup/d039400401a17210VgnVCM100000ba42f00aRCRD.htm That table is missing Atletico Madrid @ 18 with 105 Euro turnover. They must have added them later.

This is something to praise him for?

We weren't in it in 08/09 either. We were 20th in last year's list. Not according to the table in this report. Perhaps they used preliminary figures in the 2010 report. Were our accounts published by the time the report was produced? In Jan 09 Llambias was predicting revenues of £100m. When the accounts came out though the reported revenue was only £86m, so we obviously didn't do very well against the forecasts in the remainder of the reporting period, missing out on an important £14m payment from somewhere.

We weren't in it in 08/09 either.

"they've got a point in despising me as i tried to bleed the club of every penny possible and get a move instead of just putting in a transfer request when i wanted to move. yes, i am just a greedy,underhanded t***." Because we know that if you put in a transfer request the supporters would have understood and been happy with you leaving for more money and better prospects elsewhere. Bet he's gutted he doesn't have a Championship winners medal to go alongside his intertoto one. well going from myself,midds and many of my friends a lot of people felt this way. others may feel differently. He did put in a transfer request in the end. Not going to hold it against him for trying it on first. If anything it should have strengthened the club's position in negotiating a price with City (though not much admittedly). He saw what happened with Milner where the club asked him to keep his transfer request quiet (which was to do with them not renegotiating his contract which they verbally agreed to do when he signed it, and not about wanting to leave), and then announced it when it suited them to make it look like Milner was forcing their hand at the end of the window when clubs were interested. So I don't blame him for releasing that statement to the press and trying to be in control of the situation. Obviously it didn't do much good, as it doesn't matter how or when you leave the club, unless you're being sold to get someone better in or retire you're a "Judas mercenary c***" and will get booed when you come back, but I don't blame him for trying. he would have been in control of the situation had he put in the transfer request when he should have. i don't blame him wanting away but to do it in a way as to try and grab as much cash as possible was just despicable. no honour, no integrity, no dignity as he coulod easily have said he had put a request in. any player knows when he is signing his contract that the club may say no when he asks to leave it's part of the trade off that the clubs can't cancel it just cos the player is crap. re other players and their requests. i have no problem with milner and the only problem i have with carroll is that he's tried to spin it so he comes out smelling of roses. For all we know the club may have got more money out of City because Given didn't put a TR in straight away. Not saying this is how it happened, but it could have gone (numbers are made up): MCFC -> NUFC "We'll give you £5m for Given max" NUFC -> MCFC "Well we'll take £5m, but we're going to have to give Given £500k as a loyalty bonus because he hasn't put in a TR so that means we'll only get £4.5m. You'll have to make up the difference. Remember Barton." MCFC -> NUFC "OK we'll give you £5.5m" NUFC -> Given "We'll sell you to City but only if you give up your loyalty bonus" Given -> NUFC "OK here's a transfer request" it's possible but has little to do with his origianl engineering to get a move as if citeh were interested back then then he'd have kept his gob shut. But you just said it wasn't about him keeping his gob shut, it's about him putting himself in the shop window but not putting in a transfer request.

"they've got a point in despising me as i tried to bleed the club of every penny possible and get a move instead of just putting in a transfer request when i wanted to move. yes, i am just a greedy,underhanded t***." Because we know that if you put in a transfer request the supporters would have understood and been happy with you leaving for more money and better prospects elsewhere. Bet he's gutted he doesn't have a Championship winners medal to go alongside his intertoto one. well going from myself,midds and many of my friends a lot of people felt this way. others may feel differently. He did put in a transfer request in the end. Not going to hold it against him for trying it on first. If anything it should have strengthened the club's position in negotiating a price with City (though not much admittedly). He saw what happened with Milner where the club asked him to keep his transfer request quiet (which was to do with them not renegotiating his contract which they verbally agreed to do when he signed it, and not about wanting to leave), and then announced it when it suited them to make it look like Milner was forcing their hand at the end of the window when clubs were interested. So I don't blame him for releasing that statement to the press and trying to be in control of the situation. Obviously it didn't do much good, as it doesn't matter how or when you leave the club, unless you're being sold to get someone better in or retire you're a "Judas mercenary c***" and will get booed when you come back, but I don't blame him for trying. he would have been in control of the situation had he put in the transfer request when he should have. i don't blame him wanting away but to do it in a way as to try and grab as much cash as possible was just despicable. no honour, no integrity, no dignity as he coulod easily have said he had put a request in. any player knows when he is signing his contract that the club may say no when he asks to leave it's part of the trade off that the clubs can't cancel it just cos the player is crap. re other players and their requests. i have no problem with milner and the only problem i have with carroll is that he's tried to spin it so he comes out smelling of roses. For all we know the club may have got more money out of City because Given didn't put a TR in straight away. Not saying this is how it happened, but it could have gone (numbers are made up): MCFC -> NUFC "We'll give you £5m for Given max" NUFC -> MCFC "Well we'll take £5m, but we're going to have to give Given £500k as a loyalty bonus because he hasn't put in a TR so that means we'll only get £4.5m. You'll have to make up the difference. Remember Barton." MCFC -> NUFC "OK we'll give you £5.5m" NUFC -> Given "We'll sell you to City but only if you give up your loyalty bonus" Given -> NUFC "OK here's a transfer request"