80

For me, it fell down here. Employing a women just because she's a women is no less sex discrimination than avoiding female employment in the first place. Of course more women is ideal (particularly the heads of women footy ) but I'm surprised the irony (of the above pledge) is lost on him. Saying that...good luck to him. Think you're taking him too seriously... He's just a stalking horse - he's never going to get elected so he's going to make some sometimes overly strong points to highlight the problems FIFA already has instead and get everybody talking. Don't agree with a chunk of his points, but I appreciate his efforts to shake things up.

The manager who signed those players is gone though. We may have got him in on loan while Hughton was here, but did HBA not sign with us permanently under Pardew? I doubt he'd do that if Hughton was the sole reason for his arrival. Shh don't say that, by Wullie's 'logic' when a signing turns out good, it must be all to Hughton's credit. Don't you know Hughton is the next Mourinho...that's why he is now managing err... Christ how dull. Dull coz you have no response? :lol: Anyway not as dull as your Hughton wank fest even after he is no longer relevant to Newcastle Hardly know why people go on about the mess the Halls and Shepherds left us in then... Guess I should lock the SBR thread too...

Of all the reason to hate Mike Ashley, that article gives the worst I've ever heard. Amazing.

£35k I thought it was said to be more like £55k p/w? Something like £3m/3.5m Euros pa. A legacy of the days early Ashley days along with Smith et al.

He's further than most from ideal when he's just plopped in alongside a random partner for a shortish period of time having not been in serious contention previously, though. There's a few possible justifications for him being a back up defender for us, but in a larger scheme of things I can see better types than him for the role. I say that as someone who wants him as first choice alongside Colo for the foreseeable future and would only swap him for a very large upgrade, mind.

Not sure Williamson has a place as a back up defender. Got to cut your cloth accordingly of course, but tempted to say he's a first team defender or no team at all.

Nice one, was searching the wrong website...

Funnily enough, I'm actually clinging to that being true. Would be like Jose and Carroll had died for our sins or something.

I think maybe a better way of putting it is Taylor's generally hastier with the ball. Better potential technique, though, and his nature does mean he can go on those mammoth dribbles occasionally...

Anyone fancy him doing a Dalglish? Not necessarily for us, if the idea gives you a heart attack. And of course I don't mean start mumbling and deconstructing good attacking teams... I'll say this at least, if the Board are that serious about normally only making internal appointments, I'd prefer him to Beardsley...

From Enrique? Don't think I've ever seen those on here. There are mostly quotes taken out of context from a radio interview he gave. They are pretty harsh but he looks indeed pissed off by all the stuff going around your club at the time. http://www.marca.com/2009/07/13/futbol/futbol_internacional/espanoles_mundo/1247478783.html "I don't even know what's happening in Newcastle, we have spent two weeks of preseason and everything it's still the same. Club's for sale, there's no owners and we don't even have a manager when we're just a month away from starting the season. It looked like Shearer was staying but truth is nobody knows what's going to happen" "Things here are not going well. I'm f***ed (sic) sporting-wise and I'm angry for the fans too, they are always supporting us and don't stop cheering in any game we play" "I'm very excited to return to Spain, there's been talk in the press that teams like Atlético are interested in me. If there was an offer from Spain I'd prioritize it above offers from other places." "In England I have a good contract, but sporting-wise I'm not well here and I'd give up money to play on a different team. I want to succeed and and there are more important things than money." That was 18 months ago, bear in mind. Thanks for that, informative. Regarding Enrique's attitude to us, it's also worth noting - especially in the light of the old interview above and what subsequently happened - that he didn't have to say the positive things about us that he did this time to La Marca. Loving the city, being ok at the club etc. - it wouldn't seem he's said these expecting them to be read in England, so I'd say his own outlook on whether he should stay at the club certainly isn't a foregone conclusion.

British, apparently. Was a nice chat with La Marca apparently, so it would seem he approves of what they published. And they published something not a fantastic amount different to what the British press took out. How do you know what was published in La Marca? You understand Spanish? Why do you try to put a negative spin instead of just taking Jose's words as published on the website? Resolved in 2 minutes and 25 seconds. Good work

It's of debatable significance, but in terms of how the finances look in the shorter term at least, it's also worth remembering we traditionally receive our transfer income in gradual instalments - the Carroll deal apparently mainly bucked this trend. In contrast, our outgoings are apparently handled in single, immediate lumps, though. So we may be due money from Martins, Bassong and others also.

British, apparently. Was a nice chat with La Marca apparently, so it would seem he approves of what they published. Wasn't it in Marca that he said the club "made promises they haven't kept." ? Yep. Compared to the very original thing the Daily Mail had in it (only about other clubs), it was actually more critical of the club.

British, apparently. Was a nice chat with La Marca apparently, so it would seem he approves of what they published. And they published something not a fantastic amount different to what the British press took out.

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. Just did some totting up, for what it's worth. Given loans in and out etc, I came to £35m or so per annum for the main squad as of today. Could be less given surprises like Guthrie's wage (revealed as £4k p/w in court, though I allowed for £10k here). Throwing in reserve and staff wages, extra bonuses and imagining I've underestimated things, maybe it would come to around £40m in total. Allowing a large margin of error, somewhere between £30m and £44m per annum, then.

Aye...

nufc.com headline: 'Barton Questioned' Bastards. Had me going for a tenth of a second, apologies for my lack of faith Joey...

As it's no longer a PLC, what gives you the impression that the club have any need to disclose this information? Whether it's to a fan or to a competitor, the club will simply tell you that it's "sensitive commercial information" and then smile politely (if that). They don't need to do that and it wouldn't be a great sign about their intentions, though... I don't see how disclosing that sort of commercially sensitive information to a group of people voicing the opinion of some of our supporters is: a) ever going to happen b) in the best interests of the club EDIT: The underlying is point is why do U4N keep coming out with unrealistic aims/requests of the club. 'Bigger' protest groups have already been and tried, it's not going to work with the current regime. Why not take heed and try and work with the club, over time, you might find some of your questions answered or at least get more out of the club than we're currently getting. They might see that revealing a good sponsorship fee has been negotiated with a separate company by a competent chairman (Llambias) will reassure supporters who suspect the club is being used to illegitimately subsidise the operations of Mike Ashley's unrelated business interests. Help unite the fans and all that, bring in some more season ticket money. Aye, and David Cameron's Big Society is going to be a sure-fire winner because it makes sense on paper. Can I have a pint of whatever you're having? I'm as optimistic a supporter as you'll find but I struggle to believe Llambias or Ashley give two hoots about whether or not you think he's taking advantage of the NUFC brand to advertise the Sports Direct brand. In fact, if you were to get the chance to say this face to face (and you hadn't already thumped him) he'd probably laugh at the irony of NUFC taking advantage of the Sports Direct business to fund the NUFC business This is not supposed to be a justification for him to do what he wants with NUFC, but he's certainly not accountable to some cynical supporters who openly express their disdain for him. I'm just saying there could be some business sense in opening up and appealing to hearts and minds, eh...

Fucking hell man, that's not short and sweet. I'll respond eventually like but that's a lot to reply to, I'm off next week like Verbal/manual diarrhoea

Yep to both. Any Spanish speakers able to say whether the Spanglish translation is a good representation of how he said things? VI, O-N...?

Very little IMO. Had we stayed up most of the big earners were still in line to leave. The main difference is we could have kept the players on lower wages like Bassong, or at least made money from them. As it is because of the relegation we lost £30m cash and all the profit from players like Bassong and Martins, so in effect we lost nearly £60m in cash and assets. Yes we've come back up with a leaner wage bill (maybe £10m less per year then if we hadn't been relegated), but our debt is now significantly bigger. Club debt has stayed the same as ashley forked out for our losses in the championship. Club's debt has risen. It's just that our debtor is our owner. It still will be paid back, and makes it harder to be sold. Er why? External lenders aren't going to even contemplate negotiating the value of their debt in a sale situation. External lenders can and do maintain previously arranged repayment structures, or negotiate new ones, though. Ashley wants it all paid back in one go. If he ends up loaning us another £20m for some reason, the sale price of the club will go up £20m. Ah - I didn't realise you'd spoken to him about this. We're chummy.

As it's no longer a PLC, what gives you the impression that the club have any need to disclose this information? Whether it's to a fan or to a competitor, the club will simply tell you that it's "sensitive commercial information" and then smile politely (if that). They don't need to do that and it wouldn't be a great sign about their intentions, though... I don't see how disclosing that sort of commercially sensitive information to a group of people voicing the opinion of some of our supporters is: a) ever going to happen b) in the best interests of the club EDIT: The underlying is point is why do U4N keep coming out with unrealistic aims/requests of the club. 'Bigger' protest groups have already been and tried, it's not going to work with the current regime. Why not take heed and try and work with the club, over time, you might find some of your questions answered or at least get more out of the club than we're currently getting. They might see that revealing a good sponsorship fee has been negotiated with a separate company by a competent chairman (Llambias) will reassure supporters who suspect the club is being used to illegitimately subsidise the operations of Mike Ashley's unrelated business interests. Help unite the fans and all that, bring in some more season ticket money.

Very little IMO. Had we stayed up most of the big earners were still in line to leave. The main difference is we could have kept the players on lower wages like Bassong, or at least made money from them. As it is because of the relegation we lost £30m cash and all the profit from players like Bassong and Martins, so in effect we lost nearly £60m in cash and assets. Yes we've come back up with a leaner wage bill (maybe £10m less per year then if we hadn't been relegated), but our debt is now significantly bigger. Club debt has stayed the same as ashley forked out for our losses in the championship. Club's debt has risen. It's just that our debtor is our owner. It still will be paid back, and makes it harder to be sold. Er why? External lenders aren't going to even contemplate negotiating the value of their debt in a sale situation. External lenders can and do maintain previously arranged repayment structures, or negotiate new ones, though. Ashley wants it all paid back in one go. If he ends up loaning us another £20m for some reason, the sale price of the club will go up £20m.

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. Clubs might have preferred to buy Coloccini and Jonas ahead of Martins and Duff... Then where would be have been? colo would only have moved if we subsidised his wages which we didn't seem willing to do. So we were lucky clubs wouldn't offer him an equivalent contract? Or we were lucky Ashley had enough money of his own that he didn't have to spend £60k subsidising to save £20k? Or Leeds were unlucky that they didn't have an investor rich enough to protect his investment? Bloody stupid thread this has turned into...