Montey

If supporters want to take action against Ashley they need to realise what the value of NUFC is to Ashley and attack that value. The value that NUFC has to Mike Ashley is all about raising and improving the profile of Sports Direct, the club is a branding and awareness tool (marketing) to raise and improve the profile of Sports Direct. It's a bonus that the club makes Ashley a profit, but that's not the principle value the club presents to Ashley - hence impacting the profitability of the club won't be as effective. If people want to remove Ashley they need to remove the value the club provides to Ashley. This means that where the club provides a positive marketing outcome to Sports Direct today, fans need to attack that marketing value so that it lowers the brand value and sales revenue of Sports Direct. Sports Direct needs to see its association with NUFC as toxic to the Sports Direct brand - this is when Ashley will sell. This is why Ashley has reacted, through player purchases and new managers, when people have started protesting outside of Sports Direct stores. Supporters need to take action to ensure that every Sports Direct sign, advertisement, event, store, etc has a negative message coming from NUFC. This needs to be done with a large amount of energy and persistence so that Ashley knows that this isn't going to blow over and the only way to save Sports Direct is to disconnect it from NUFC. Mike Ashley doesn't give a stuff about NUFC, its failure or success. Mike Ashley only cares that Sports Direct is succeeding and he will react to protect that.

In Mike Ashley's broader business career, has he ever sold a company he owned? Is it possible that part of the problem is that Ashley doesn't actually know how to effectively sell a company and keeps stuffing it up? The stories coming out now certainly look like an attempt to start providing excuses for why a deal fell through.

I think "weirdly very quiet" is better than if there was continuing leaks. (Assuming there is any truth to this thing happening) things were happening very quietly for up to 6 months before it was leaked - so hopefully things going very quiet again is because they're back working on getting the deal done. If things were noisy I think it would mean either the negotiations were ongoing, but now they're using the media as part of the negotiation process (this never helps commercial negotiations), or it would be to announce the deal was off or never happening. Hence, I think quiet is good/better.

Are we all remembering to keep an eye on Companies House? https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06861426/filing-history https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06254688/filing-history #nufc

I normally, in life, am pretty conservative and consequently take a "better the devil you know" approach to change. But, sometimes a devil is such a see-you-next-Tuesday that I'd rather have a go with a new devil.

ewwwww, the dicks touched!

This was entirely predictable. Interest in the club has finally started to properly decline, which threatens the revenue streams of the club (gate receipts, sponsorship, television, brand value, etc). Consequently, Ashley reaches for the lie he's succeeded with for the past 5+ years - leak a takeover rumor to one of his media lackeys.

We need a crowd-funding campaign to buy Ashley an unlimited supply of bacon. For once, lets get high-cholesterol doing a good thing for humanity!

I can only see a coordinated plan of action against Sports Direct, designed to drive Mike Ashley into financial ruin or legal troubles, as being effective against him. Sports Direct is his only interest as it is his primary source of income and wealth; if Sports Direct falls then Mike Ashley falls. It effectively needs a declaration of (metaphorical) war against Mike Ashley and Sports Direct - we need to gain allies in other club's supporters for mass boycotts, protests, and other actions against Sports Direct, designed to (legally) drive his business into financial ruin. Mike Ashley needs to get the message that "if he doesn't leave NUFC he will face utter ruin" - he will not get that message until actions start to hit the Sports Direct bottom line.

Their only tweet. Fuck off, man. "Joined June 2011" - that's a hell of a long time for someone to hold onto a Twitter account just to wind up NUFC fans. Edit: Some suggesting that the Twitter account has likely changed its name recently. In other words, account was created in 2011 - but as something else and has been renamed for the purpose of a wind-up.

I strongly believe that any action has to impact the televising of games. If boycotts, occupations, or protests don't impact the broadcasting of the game then the TV station has no obligation (and is unlikely to) show the fan's actions. Even chants have limited value because the broadcaster just turns down the effects-microphones. The televising of games will not show protests before or after the games (they have ignored them previously). This is why I like the idea of a en-mass pitch invasion at the beginning of the Arsenal game. It doesn't need to convince many people to be effective (100 would be enough, 1,000 would be sensational) - by comparison if a boycott doesn't have at least 10,000 participants it won't look like much of a difference on television. If the game kick-off was delayed by 10 to 15 minutes it would be on all broadcasts and would be on the news as well.

Any North East professional sports "journalist" relies on their connections to NUFC for their job. They will not do, or advocate for anything, that might see them locked out of the press briefings.

Have we heard any explanation for the recent senior executive departures from Sports Direct? My hope is that there is some scandal brewing within Ashley's business empire (e.g. another HMRC issue) that may bring the smoldering turd down, and cause his assets to be liquidated.

OOhhhh a stoning, I like a stoning. I'll have two sharp one's, two flat ones and a packet of gravel.

I'm actually astounded that a club who has fans willing to punch a horse has not yet seen mass destruction of NUFC property or other acts of violence against the club or senior club personnel. I am mostly pleased about this, but I am surprised (given the willingness to punch a horse!)

With it being announced that Rafa is departing the deal is either 100% done (as in all buttoned up and only waiting on the announcement) or the deal is completely off. A corporate takeover (of any description) does not survive if a key person departs mid-takeover, especially when the value of the organisation is largely driven by the contributions of that key person. No one could deny that the valuation of £350M is largely based on what Rafa has achieved over the past 3 years; if the club had not remained in the Premier League for the coming season the club's value could have been as much as halved. With Rafa departing and no clear management or squad future no one would value the club at £350M, given the prospect of being relegated yet again.

Which is why the various protests and the like don't mean anything to Ashley or have any impact on Ashley's actions unless they impact the revenues of NUFC or the marketability of NUFC. Take a look at the few times Ashley appeared to do something in reaction to fan unrest - it was only when the fan action could impact the club's profits or impact the advertising value of the club to Sports Direct. Any action that doesn't achieve one or both of these things is a complete waste of time. For example, pre-game and post-game protests don't have any impact because they are not broadcast on TV - but in game walk-outs and large banners do have an impact because they're seen on international television alongside the Sports Direct advertising. Singing against Ashley has no impact because the television broadcast barely picks it up, but large scale protests outside of Sports Direct stores with news-media in tow does have an impact because it targets his primary business.

Top 5 biscuits: Tim Tams Tim Tams Tim Tams Tim Tams and I better include Tim Tams!

To the right of the information is the statement "The information and data displayed in this profile are created and managed by S&P Global Market Intelligence, a division of S&P Global. Bloomberg.com does not create or control the content." (https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=109956209) This doesn't reflect actual events, it represents news identified by Bloomberg and associated with the Bin Zayed Group. Bloomberg is just a business news service, it is not a governance reporting agency (i.e. it's not like Companies House).

Who knows, maybe they've been officially briefed, the announcement time & date set, and they're now under an embargo so are not saying anything.

To me this is a simple case of "know your enemy". In our case it's about understanding Ashley and what his motivations are towards NUFC. I think this is fairly simple to understand, Ashley wants NUFC to advertise Sports Direct to a global audience. This means he needs NUFC in the Premiership, but that is all he needs. This is why we see minimal investment in the club and only when relegation directly threatens, or if we've been relegated it results in investment for an immediate promotion back to the top league. So what does this all mean? It means the way to get rid of Ashley is to poison the marketing value of the club. The supporters need to make it marketing poison for Sports Direct to be associated with NUFC. We've seen some evidence already to support this, because every time the fans start protesting outside of SD stores Ashley uses his media cronies to drop stories about potential transfers and/or club sales.

What about a Staveley & Kenyon joint venture takeover? Staveley as Chairwomen (getting the money) with Kenyon as Chief Executive Officer - suits both of their skills and experience. #LOL Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

If their were 20,000 fewer people in the stadium, but thousands outside the stadium chanting Rafa's name for 90 minutes during the game - this would both send a clear message to Ashley (with television pictures to show an empty stadium) and a clear message of support to Rafa (Rafa's chant being heard on the television from outside the stadium).

Rules

The guys a twit and knows nothing about companies. All incorporated companies, whether privately or publicly owned, have shares and shareholders. For example, Staveley's new company has 1 share.