Mick

Honestly, you're clueless.

Check the opening post.

I don't understand where you get the first sentence from. As for the old lot, they'd gone as far as they could and were going backwards. Unlike you with Ashley, I allowed Hall and Shepherd time to turn things around but they couldn't do it and they had clearly run out of ideas, something which Sir John admitted.

Having the 17th biggest income (dropping for a number of years) is not enough when the costs of servicing your debts are greater than the income and that doesn't change if you refuse to accept that or not. Ashley might not have been able to spend more, I don't know how much you are worth but I'll guess most of your wealth is tied up in your house, try spending it. As an example, say you have £200,000 tied up, go down to your local car sales tomorrow and try to buy a £20,000 car and tell them you're worth £200, 000 which is tied up but you'll pay them once the house is sold. I can assure you that you'll drive home in your old car. I don't half admit that I wanted them to back Keegan, I fully admit that I wanted that, in reality you don't always get what you want out of life and have to live knowing that. That isn't a stance that I've changed but I have an understanding that maybe what I wanted might have been impossible.

I'm not making up excuses for anybody, what I'm saying is true. If you know how we'd have paid our bills without Ashley then let us know how. Regarding Keegan, once he arrived I thought that they would have backed him and allowed him to take us forwards, they didn't for some reason, possibly because they couldn't. Personally, I'd be more than happy to see Keegan spending what money we had as I trust him based on what he's done here before. Edit, I'm sure Keegan was questioned after coming back about leaving previously and claiming that the job wasn't what it said in the brochure and said that this time he wasn't given a brochure.

You can't answer it, can you? We weren't in a position to splash cash and you've seen yourself how poor a job Allardyce did. We were in no position to wait for success to come along, the last set of accounts covered virtually 6 months of Allardyce who was failing and 6 months of Keegan who wouldn't have been here without Ashley. Think about it, nothing really could have been done by the previous shareholders to have brought about some instant success as we had nothing to offer anybody to entice them here and that is why Sir John jumped ship.

You answer my question about how our shareholders would have made up the difference between money going out and money coming in if Ashley hadn't bought the club, which I asked before the one you've just asked and I will answer it. I'll also provide a link to where you've asked about, and was given an answer about the success of Hall and Shepherd, again.

If anyone has a quote where they say there was more debt than they expected I'd love to see it. I know Shepherd has claimed they didn't do due diligence, has anyone in the club? Until then I can't say he's lying, just passing the buck despite everything having been made clear according to Mort, the man involved from the get go. Found it.... Can you clear up exactly what your point is?

I've answered that before and pointed that out many times, you know the answer.

You can't find links to what I say so you now claim to read minds.

He thought we'd finish above Arsenal last season when we had Allardyce.

Very few but a lot are currently struggling and Liverpool are potentially in the s***, times have changed and I doubt that they'll all survive the financial mess we're currently going through, certainly not without a great deal of pain.

He was given less than 24 hours to agree to buy the club and he took the bait, it is his fault but he's paying for that stupidity so I'm not holding that against him until it starts costing me. We can only go by what the Man City owner said, he's the only source of information that we have but I don't see what he had to gain from lying. If anything fans of Man City could take it that they weren't first choice.

We benefit from that, even if only because we're still able to go and watch a game because without Ashley that wouldn't have been guaranteed, far from it.

Ashley was aware of £70 million of debt, he wasn't aware that he would have to pay the money back for the ground so soon. As for you being certain that he was only here to sell the club as soon as possible, how does that fit with the new Man City owner claiming that he was interested in us but Ashley wouldn't return his calls?

We don't own the club but it's still ours and I have no problem with NUSC taking that view.

He is keeping us afloat, our club.

I don't see what difference that makes and I can't ever remember anybody claiming that it wasn't his club either.

Nobody beats that.

If you're going to do that then I'm going one step further. I'm doing what you've suggested but I'm also letting mine drip down the front of my football shirt and then I'm spreading it all over.

This isn't what you wanted to hear, I've never had a one.

I've never disappeared yet so why start now, and like I keep saying, I stand by what I've said in the context in which they were made, what about my sig?

No doubt you have proof to back that claim up? No, I thought not.