Teasy

He's getting £100m if/when, this is not going in his back pocket cos it doesnt change that figure Except that the club is in debt to him, so it's just as likely that he'll use this incoming money to pay down his loan. It really isn't, the money will go into Newcastle United's accounts, not to Ashley. Is the club somehow not allowed to pay off loans like? He could if the money is actually an up front payment, but not while he's in the process of selling the club. Nobody's going to negotiate a 80/90/100m deal for a company while the owner is selling assets and funnelling the money out. Also I'm sure the bank would have something to say if he started paying off his loans with club money while they continue to finance it with a 35m overdraft facility, like for instance "where the fucks out money you fat fuck?". If he decides to stay he'd then need that money to keep the club afloat, so there's still no point in taking the money out of the club only to have to loan it back again when the financial year ends. People will say, well he's an idiot and he doesn't follow good business practice or logic, and that might be right for the most part. But the fact is he's never taken money out of the club so I don't see any reason to assume he'll do it now.

He's getting £100m if/when, this is not going in his back pocket cos it doesnt change that figure Except that the club is in debt to him, so it's just as likely that he'll use this incoming money to pay down his loan. It really isn't, the money will go into Newcastle United's accounts, not to Ashley.

I dont think the club ever said they rejected 10m? It wasn't an official announcement but SSN said the bid had been rejected as did just about every other news source. I'd trust them over Redknapp.

Read that, and as it actually has facts in it, I'll believe it until there's some direct quotes rubbishing it It does, however it also shows a shocking lack of knowledge about Newcastle United, which would make me question how much they really know. I mean Bassong a well paid player? 40m revenue when we were at 100m last year?, the revenue drop from relegated isn't that extreme, and 65m wage bill when its obvious its far lower then that now. Hopefully the info they've mentioned on the takeover is more reliable then that.. Yes Dave, I mentioned the wage bill again

Why would be accept a 8m bid after saying we've rejected a 10m one? Could be its 8m up front and 3 or 4 more based on apearances ect

I'm off work for over two weeks from Friday and if this happens I'm drinking every night.

May we be hypothetical for just a moment. This man "Moat" is appointed. We get Shearer in, take 5m from Martins deal and potential 5m from Bassong, and invest that in Player X,Y, and Z. We get promoted to the Premier League. How do we improve on the bunch of muppets that got us promoted to stop a repeat of the season 2 back. Hire a good manager rarher then a shit one and spend the huge sums of money this club generates (13th highest turnover in world Football with no European Football and finishing 12th in the Premiership) on good players instead of highly paid shit. This club can sustain itself and compete financially if run well (not with plastic clubs like Chelsea and Man City but most others). Like others have said the likes of Wigan have done it and the money they generate would probably fit inside our revenue at least twice.

I've got no problem with that. There shouldn't be any problem running this club on revenue as far as I can see. The club generates huge sums of money in comparison to the massive majority of its competitors (in a different world to a club like Southampton). All we've ever needed is someone to run things well, for instance not put us in a position were we have the 5th highest wage bill in the country when we're regularly finishing lower mid table. Outside money would be nice (and the article does say he has U.S backing) but its not a neccesity.

You're as bad as the Daily Mail

When did Harris say that? Last time I heard him speak was yesterday in that Five Live program and he said "by the end of the month".

Joe, I just don't believe you

I just don't believe he's been offered the job recently, certainly not on a 2 year deal.

Very skeptical about this. Why would Ashley do it? No new owner would want a manager, especially a poor one, on a two year deal.

I thought it said Nolan demands transfer for a moment, now I'm disapointed

How many times can we let him get away with him putting us up for sale then taking us off the market when the heat dies down because it doesn't suit him? He puts the club up for sale season ticket sales are still strong considering our position our most valuable assets of a very small squad are then sold and he turns around and says he is willing to stick it out for another year.... He loves me.... He loves me not.... He loves me.... He loves me not.... What heat? Everyone I know had accepted what had happened to us and just wanted to see Ashley bring in a manager, preferably Shearer, and get on with things. He didn't need to put the club up for sale as some kind of ploy this time around. He just wants out, simple as that.

It wouldn't be totally impossible for us to keep a player on 50-60,000 a week IF he actually wanted to stay and was worth keeping. However I can't think of a single player that fits the bill so yeah loads of them will go unless the new owner is willing to subsidise the wage structure for a season or two. At a guess I'd say we could afford a wage bill in the thirty million range at most in the Championship based on the revenue we'd be expected to achieve (at least until the parachute payments stop). That's a huge wage for a Championship club but our turnover will also be huge for a Championship club. We've cut out about 400 thousand a week so far but our wage bill must still be in the mid fifty million range at the moment so I'd say we've got another 300 thousand a week to cut out somewhere if we're going to sustain ourselves financially.

So you think our wage bill is sustainable? Or you think the new owner(s) should be in charge of reducing the wage bill? He's right about what he said, especially about the income. It takes a massive hit and we need to find a way to ease the blow. Selling players, which brings in a transfer fee and also gets them off the wage bill, is one way of doing that. IF Ashley sells players to lower the wage bill he then has to sign players so he can sell the club with a full squad, I am sure any buyer would rather choose who is sold and who is bought themselves. Most clubs have a massive wage bill and yes relegation cost us a fortune but Ashley still owning us is also costing the club as fans are staying away from the club shops as well as not renewing season tickets. I just think the wage bill thing for the sale being held up is s**** and its ore to do with the £100mill asking price + other debts. some buyers may think "you do the spade work in getting rid of X,Y and Z then we'll see" that means they don't run the risk of carrying them should no decent deals be agreed. also the way i see it is that "other debts" covers the wages. Exactly. It means the new owner(s) don't have that burden, making the takeover for them a lot easier. It also means they could end up taking over a club with the wrong players sold and the wrong ones still here, plus no new players brought in. Its a risk either way but the best risk to take is the one your in control of yourself.

To be fair he didn't say there was no progress being made.

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php?action=post;topic=62360.9210;num_replies=9229 Silly bitch hasn't got a clue Can't even get the wage bill near the truth for f*** sake She had it right about Keegan. Maybe, though I always put that down to her throwing a bunch of negative stories at the situation, throw enough shit and something will stick eventually. However if she did know anything real at the time then she's losing it because she can't even get basic info right now, maybe she was fucking Wise or something No, she had it right about Keegan because he was telling his mates in the press (her included) one thing & then telling the supporters the opposite. Interesting, where does that come from?

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php?action=post;topic=62360.9210;num_replies=9229 Silly bitch hasn't got a clue Can't even get the wage bill near the truth for f*** sake She had it right about Keegan. Maybe, though I always put that down to her throwing a bunch of negative stories at the situation, throw enough shit and something will stick eventually. However if she did know anything real at the time then she's losing it because she can't even get basic info right now, maybe she was fucking Wise or something

Who knows, if he gets a chance he might prove to be very useful, I honestly haven't seen enough of him to say for sure that he's worse then Shola.

How long is Guthrie out for?

Thomo, have you seen your source recently? Just wondering in case something has changed and he hasn't told you yet.

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php?action=post;topic=62360.9210;num_replies=9229 Silly bitch hasn't got a clue It's the wagebill figure again isn't it? Admit it. Haha yeah that and the fact I hate the woman. I've edited my post

How do you know they made it up like? You might want to be sure before sending messages like that.