Teasy

I'm very happy with how things are going on the pitch at the moment but there are plenty of reasons to be concerned given Ashley's track record of getting pretty much every major decision since he arrived wrong. This is a man who, when faced with a relegation battle last season sold two important players, made a profit on sales and hindered our chances of survival. Logic dictates he'd keep the team together to give us the best shot at going up but history suggests he may well not. There are plenty of reasons to be happy at the moment but it would be naive in the extreme to not be concerned about what will happen in January. Regardless of what you believe re: finances he's shown himself time and time again to be utterly clueless with regards as to what's going on out on the pitch. That was nowt in comparison to his disastrous managerial appointments. Zog wasn't important IMO either, he was impotent if that's what you mean. IMO we'll sell nobody and bring in another loan or two. If we're very very lucky we'll sell Barton and some club will be desperate enough to take Geremi on a free, but unfortunately thats just not going to happen.

Defending the tw*t to hilt as usual. Not renewing at a time like this is obviously down to Ashley dragging the club into the dirt and turning it into a laughing stock. Stop trying to defending the indefensible, it's foolish.

Back from where?

Fantastic logic that like

Newcastle East End wore red and white verticle stripes but Newcastle United never did. Our first strip was a full red shirt with red socks and white shorts.

Yeah he's got experience of being a liability for England. Harper is better then most of the shit England have available in goal. He got trashed by some last season simply because he wasn't as good as Given, which is ridiculous. Especially since he hadn't played regularly before being thrust into a relegation battle. For all the shit finishing we've seen in this league this season Harper has still made some brilliant and crucial saves and looked extremely solid, I see no reason why he shouldn't get his chance in a friendly.

What does him not leaving the day after the transfer deadline prove? The bloke went to Notts County for various reasons and he left for various reasons. IMO he wasn't in it for nothing but the money or he wouldn't have fucked off so quickly, people who are in something for nothing but money don't tend to walk out quickly when the money is as promised. If you don't agree then great, but its my opinion. If you're trying to convince me that you're sure he went there for one reason and one reason alone and then also left for one reason and one reason alone then I'm just not going to bother anymore. By the way, lots of articles claimed he was either going their as a player-coach or with the promise of becoming a player coach, wether he ended up in that role I don't know for sure, I do remember Errikson mentioning it though.

Seems to me he went there for three reasons. Money, the ambitious plan they fed him and to get into coaching. When the reality of the situation didn't match the promises he fucked off. I bet the money was actually the only thing that did match his expectations

The fact he went there in the first place would make me have serious doubts about his hunger. He dropped three divisions for nothing but the money. We have our best defensive record in donkey's years, a settled back four for the first time in absolutely ages. What we need is cover in case of injury. Not a big name who will expect regular games and possibly a first team salary to go with it. Again, how can he have gone their for nothing but the money if he then walked away? Obviously if he only wanted the money he'd have stayed. Didn't say we should sign him by the way. I just can't see the logic in saying he went to Notts County purely for money.

ok mackem, but we arent getting 12000 seats. i have no doubt we could take that if given it. Its alright, he's totally wrong anyway.

How does walking out on a £40k a week contract make it obvious that he was just after a final pay day?

Where did you find the info on their wage bill ect? They honestly had a £90m wage bill?!

We were well enough run financially for a long time, buts things got out of hand very quickly, so there's always hope Not likely though, for all the noise in the media and around Football every transfer window about the Spuds spending big they usually sell as many players as they bring in.

They made a big profit on some of his players, yet that big profit still wasn't enough to stop them from basically going bust due the wages Redknapp had players on. Nobody could argue that whoever was running the club at the very top wasn't ultimately responsible for that due to the fact that they allowed Redknapp to offer those wages. But I do agree that Redknapp seems to have been the catalyst for a lot of clubs getting into a lot of trouble over the years. He seems to spend and spend until the club is on the brink and then leave for another victim, lets hope the pattern doesn't change with the Spuds

Lets make that decision based on a trial rather then assumptions based on things we know little to nothing about. He probably won't be good enough, in which case their's no loss at all.

He was still better then Ameobi, who in the Championship is brilliant, give him a trial IMO. If he's useless we tell him to move on, if he's any good we offer him a very small 6 month contract, we'd then have two left wingers instead of just one.

Why wouldn't you want to bring in a player for nothing (no fee and no wages as your suggesting) in a position were we currently only have one option?

They look like a better Footballing side but also a softer side then us with less quality individuals. I also thought we did well at their ground, they were the team at home and they couldn't beat us despite their goal being quite lucky.

Or maybe he was simply asked a question about the summer/January/transfers in general and just answered it? Not conspiratorial enough?

Are you serious? We had the game won after half an hour and took our foot off the peddle. We sat back and allowed them possession and they couldn't score. Had they gotten at least one and threatened more then I might agree but they didn't. Possession (especially when its afforded too you) means fuck all if you can't turn it into goals. The fact is at no stage in the game did they ever realistically look as if they could take the lead away from us. Oh and on a side note Coloccini was absolutely brilliant, totally flawless and I was really happy to see him get the man of the match. :colo:

Before Ashley paid off the debt the club were paying out £8m a year on debts of around £80m. Even after that was paid off we were still paying more then £1.6m a year just for the overdraft facility (between £2m to £4m depending how much of it we used). So I don't see £1.6m as anything to be worried about. Though I did mention having the option to opt out of interest payments in order to keep the money in the club. If its £1.6million total outflow then fine, my worry is that it is £1.6million to the members, then another trench to service a loan and another trench to service an overdraft etc. I know I'm a negative bod when it comes to the NUST and this intiative but believe me I'm willing to be converted and if its the best way forward then I'll support them 100%. However, I can't see how we as supporters can generate enough income to get the club back to challenging for Europe without looking for outside assistance, which will come at a cost. We've all seen what happens when you borrow against banking on Europe (Luque/Owen etc) and then you don't get there. I just hope that when the plans are unveiled in their totality that a sustainable path (maybe a 5 year plan or such like) with achievable and sustained improvement are detailed along with how much in full it is likely to cost the club. We should be able to generate more income than Everton purely due to the size of the stadium, the question is though is there a plan on how to use it effectively? It all comes down to how much money the fans put in really, and also how we're run if/when we get back into the Premiership of course. For instance if we really could raise £200m (which is a major doubt) we'd then be paying out £4m a year to members but we'd have £120m in the clubs bank account. Not only would that actually generate millions in interest from the bank but it would also mean we'd have no need for an expensive overdraft and no need for outside loans. Then again if we raise £100m we'll have £20m in the bank (initially of course as shares will still be available to buy) which is still healthier then having nowt in the bank and using a large overdraft as usual. Of course we may raise £60m and all this will mean nowt. Would't have to pay out £4m a year to members either as many members will say the club can have their interest so that number could come down. Hopefully they'll include that option when they finally announce the start of the scheme.

I've been one of Coloccini's biggest fans since he arrived, but even I wouldn't exactly fear losing him. He's a player with some very good attributes but also some poor ones. I'd be happy to give him another chance in the Premiership if he wasn't on such a ridiculous wage. As it is, if we brought in Killgalon (who's a solid defender) for a couple of million and sold Coloccini for £7m that would be a pretty good deal IMO. Oh and to people harping on about money going into Ashley's pocket, wake up!

Before Ashley paid off the debt the club were paying out £8m a year on debts of around £80m. Even after that was paid off we were still paying more then £1.6m a year just for the overdraft facility (between £2m to £4m depending how much of it we used). So I don't see £1.6m as anything to be worried about. Though I did mention having the option to opt out of interest payments in order to keep the money in the club. If its £1.6million total outflow then fine, my worry is that it is £1.6million to the members, then another trench to service a loan and another trench to service an overdraft etc. I know I'm a negative bod when it comes to the NUST and this intiative but believe me I'm willing to be converted and if its the best way forward then I'll support them 100%. However, I can't see how we as supporters can generate enough income to get the club back to challenging for Europe without looking for outside assistance, which will come at a cost. We've all seen what happens when you borrow against banking on Europe (Luque/Owen etc) and then you don't get there. I just hope that when the plans are unveiled in their totality that a sustainable path (maybe a 5 year plan or such like) with achievable and sustained improvement are detailed along with how much in full it is likely to cost the club. We should be able to generate more income than Everton purely due to the size of the stadium, the question is though is there a plan on how to use it effectively? It all comes down to how much money the fans put in really, and also how we're run if/when we get back into the Premiership of course. For instance if we really could raise £200m (which is a major doubt) we'd then be paying out £4m a year to members but we'd have £120m in the clubs bank account. Not only would that actually generate millions in interest from the bank but it would also mean we'd have no need for an expensive overdraft and no need for outside loans. Then again if we raise £100m we'll have £20m in the bank (initially of course as shares will still be available to buy) which is still healthier then having nowt in the bank and using a large overdraft as usual. Of course we may raise £60m and all this will mean nowt.

Its nothing to be worried about IMO, its certainly a very generous rate of interest (for the club). For instance before Ashley paid off the debt the club were paying out £8m a year on debts of around £80m. Even after that was paid off we were still paying more then £1.6m a year just for the overdraft facility (between £2m to £4m depending how much of it we used). At first it looks like a hindrance as the club has to pay out £1.6m a year just to be owned by the fans. However as more people buy a share the club gains cash to spend while only having to pay a fraction of the interest they'd have to pay to any other investor. Though I did mention having the option to opt out of interest payments in order to keep the money in the club.

There's a common theme with Bruce's team, wherever he goes he seems to start off extremely well, but after a while he goes stale and he's teams tend to. That happened at Brum and it was happening at Wigan. I think that's partly why he's moved around so much. Not saying that Sunderland wouldn't roll us pretty badly, the signing of Bent I think is a masterstroke. They are a good prem team now and all credit to Bruce for transforming them form the crap they were last year. But I would worry about longevity of it all, if I were a Mackem (perish the thought). Sunderland are lightyears ahead of us atm. Could very well last longer than we'd all like. Better football today (relatively). More of the same and the threat of the Nolanator is looking positive They're on a brilliant run of form (a bit like Hull were for most of last season), but if anyone truly thinks they're as good as their current results might suggest they're fucking nuts. Definitely better then us at the moment of course.