Colos Short and Curlies

Long term I agree, but........ For our remaining home games the crowd need to be expecting miracles and support the team in this vein. Its kind of a positive feedback loop, the team and crowd will build each other up and the results will follow. We can't afford and 'wait and see approach' in SJP in the next few months

http://www.skysports.com/Images/skysports/experts/phil_thompson.jpg

So who reckons Berbatov will be knocking on Ferguson's door demanding his dream move to play under Shearer this summer?

The segment they've just had on with the black lad from The Mirror, talking about how the timing of this story f***ed up the London Press who were all out congratulating themselves at the British Press Awards last night, only for this to be "a story of such magnitude...it's rare that England get knocked off the back page on the day of an England match...but Newcastle have definitely done it" small club, eh? G20 has even been shifted in place of our news Dollar is on the way up. I bet the FTSE posts gains today. All down to one man.

This is wrong. I'm a 28 year old accountant. I'm supposed to be level headed but I've got up this morning believing in football again. How and why can this club produce sugar rush moments on such a regular basis?

I can see Beye being given the armband if/when Owen is not on the pitch

Before Management finally does in that little bit of hair which prevents a full on egg frontal?? http://www.thespoiler.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/shearer2.jpg

Nah, started a 1, staying a 1

Keegan's appointment was during the day wasn't it? I remember Adrian Durham breaking it on Talkshite when I was driving home so I'd say between 4 and 5pm

Realised he's made a mistake a running into departures?

I just wonder if Shearer has been pulling any strings from the inside.....

All we need now is for Lampard and Terry to get crocked tomorrow to complete a wonderful 24 hours

Only man who could potentially save us really. Hopefully give Owen a new lease of life

I can't remember the club being in over £250m of debt under FS like. Now it is and boy are we paying for it. The debt levels under FS were worrying but manageable all the same. Unlike Ashley who it appears doesn't recognise at all the seriousness of the situation we are in, FS did hence the appointment of Sam Allardyce, a manager capable of doing wonders on a small budget and building from the bottom up. Oh and when the club goes down.... it will make the level of debt we were in under FS seem like pennies. So much for Ashley's plan eh. We are not £250 million in debt. Ashley paid about £130 million for the club and has loaned at least £120 mllion since. The amount paid for the club is not debt. The question that will not go away, it has been asked on here several times but no one can answer it, is how would the previous board have financed the club if they had still been in control? The glib answer that all successful football clubs have debt does not cut it, other clubs have debt because someone is prepared to lend it, meaning that they can demonstrate to the lender that the debt is secured and has a prospect of repayment. Who would have loaned us more money in the situation we were in? It is like you have a 100% mortgage on your house, everything in your house (furniture, kitchen appliances etc) and your car are bought on HP - plus your annual income is less than than your annual costs. Now go and find someone to lend you some money in the current climate to allow you to speculate to accumulate... There are people on this board, like me, who aren't Ashley believers. In my case I think he is a chancer who made some money floating a chain of downmarket sports retail shops at a grossly inflated value. He has bought us to show off to his mates and is now way out of his depth. We all know that there are indefensible actions relating to the Ashley regime. But until someone answers the above fundamental question about the previous regime it is hard to put the current shambles into perspective. superb post quayside, gets to the heart of the matter...i'm with you on all points is it possible for someone to get a clock up on the banner of the site adding up the days/hours/minutes 'til this question is answered? it'll need to run pretty fucking high mind It's a trap! Okay, at the risk of being banned for talking on a taboo subject and upsetting some people: It's a false assumption that the club would have had to pay out the same £50-£60m above it's income in the last 2 years that Ashley has loaned the club. Factors affecting the club's losses in Ashley's time: 1) Wages are the largest outgoing. The year prior to Ashley wages were £62.5 (71.8%). Last year they increased to £70m (70.4%), and this year according to Llambias they will be around £76m (76% of a £100k turnover). That's an increase in wages of £21m over the 2 years. Remember, the wage bill Ashley inherited included "high earning wasters" such as Parker, Dyer, Emre, Luque, Carr, Babayaro, and also Solano. If their supposed wages are to believed, that's almost a third of the wage bill he inherited right there. These players are all gone yet the wage bill has still risen both in absolute terms (by over 20%) and relative to turnover (in spite of a £18m per year hike in the turnover from the TV revenues) under Ashley. 2) Player purchases - Ashley's decision to pay up front for players has increased the amount we have had to pay out for players in his first 2 years even though we have had a negligible net transfer budget. I did this rough calculation before we knew Coloccini actually cost £12.5m rather than £10m, but for a rough figure it will do: So due to Ashley's pay up front policy, up to this point we have probably paid around £25m more in advance than if we had continued to pay in instalments for players. This is money that we would not have had to loan from banks, but would be effectively loaning from the selling club. 3) Allardyce - There's no way Shepherd would have sacked Allardyce in his first year, so the £6m(?) payout would not have been necessary, not in the first year at least. [i'm no fan of Allardyce, but I think if he hadn't been working for someone who didn't really want him there, he wouldn't have been looking over his should wondering when he was going to be sacked all the time and would perhaps have been less cautious in his approach than he was which was his ultimate downfall.] 4) Loan repayments - For last year the early repayment charge on the stadium debt was around the same as we would have paid in interest on the whole debt so that cancels out any benefit from Ashley's takeover. This year however, we are around £7m better off if the loans to Ashley are interest free. 5) Reduced match day income- you can argue some of this is down to the credit crunch or that it's due to a build up of suffering from years of having to endure only UEFA cup football, but surely Ashley and his appointments have to take some of the blame for the reduced attendances and corporate box sales this year, and the lack of any decent cup runs to bolster the income. Having said that I'm not even going to try and quantify this. So, guestimates all, but that's 21 + 25 + 6 - 7 = ~£45m additional expenditure so far which is purely down to the decisions and actions of Ashley and his employees, NOT attributable to some ill defined "state of the club when he bought it", "spiralling debt", "heading into administration" argument implying the current situation was inevitable anyway. When people talk about Ashley turning around the club's finances I just shake my head in disbelief and wonder what the hell they're basing it on. Does it simply boil down to the fact he's currently covering the debt and has a pipe dream of finding a bunch of wonderkids who are going to save us? Ignoring the abysmal staffing decisions he's made which in themselves are financially disastrous for the club, as far as I can see it he's also running the club in an increasingly worse way financially than ever before. How he has the nerve to constantly complain about the old board getting the NR sponsorship money up front and then in the next breath ask for 3 year's advance season ticket money from supporters is beyond me. Getting 5% of your future annual income up front is a terrible way to run things but trying to get 30% of your future income up front is perfectly fine? If we have any financial problems it was and is due to the wages not the debt. The debt was £70m. Of that, £45m was a fixed long term loan for the stadium expansion which easily paid for it's own interest repayments. I hope no-one is going to say that was a bad idea, that we should have saved up until we could pay for it in cash, or should have paid it off as soon as possible instead of putting the money into the squad which eventually got us back into the CL. That leaves £25m attributable to the running of the club over the previous 15 years. Is that the sort of debt the 13th or so richest club in the world can't afford to have? Something which is going to cause it to go into administration within months if Mike hadn't come along to save us? I know 1 injury ravaged season where we don't qualify for Europe is enough for some to declare that the sky is falling in, but I personally doubt it was. Ignoring the impending financial implications of relegation due to his negligence, can someone explain to me why they think Ashley is running the club so well financially even if we do somehow manage to stay up? Only going to comment on the NR/Season ticket point... There is a big difference in paying out your fixed sponsorship fee at the front end of the sponsorship period and trying to fix a currently variable income stream. We were guaranteed £x million from Northern Rock over 4 years. This under normal cicumstances would be received in 25% lumps (or maybe a larger up front payment and 3 smaller installments). We were not guaranteed that season ticket holders would renew each year, therefore by offering a slighlty reduced fee for taking a 3 year ticket you are fixing that income and removing uncertainty in your cashflow. We don't know if the season ticket money will be spent in one go, it certainly won't hit the profit in one go.

I would rather us play with ten men than with Ameobi, to be honest. Which we almost are, if we're starting Owen as well. Shirley Owen and Shola would equate to playing with nine men? Effectiively 7 with Butt as he is like giving Chelsea a 12th man

Seems like the Mail has cobbled together two quotes from different dates to try and make a story. Personally, I think Bruce would come IF we avoid relegation. A big if at the moment. I think they are freh comments. By preparing for preseason he will mean arranging friendlies etc. Shows just how far we have dropped now that Bruce is looking like a good option. Whilst everyone will agree in part, Bruce has also proved over the past 12 months that he is a better manger than he was 4 years ago, so there is a bit of pull and bit of push to thinking he is a decent option now

surely that must go for more mature players aswell then. i agree with your 2nd bit. Sort of, though it's a lot easier for supporters to know if were buying quality or dross. It doesnt change the glaring whole in Ashley's club saving youth policy. Its not just Europes elite that are scouring the world for the best kids. All clubs have scouts, dressing the job up with a fancy title doesnt make our system superior to anyone elses. Most supporters thought we were getting a bargain with Duff. Going further back most fans thought we were getting the real deal with Shaka, and Barton was going to be a great right back. A lot of Villa fans were extatic with Milner. Juan Veron anyone? Shevchenko? Counter that, a lot of fans thought Bobby was mental paying £6m for Bellamy etc etc There's no guarantees with young or old players, even Michael Owen has overall been a flop for us. I do agree about the required standard of the coaches, the one area we have seriously overlooked

I don't get what you mean. If you reduce the operating costs you already cover the drop in income, because income is used to pay the operating costs.. Plus when you sell the player you not only reduce costs through cutting wages but you also bring money in through transfer fees (if you get a fee that is). My point is we won't need to sell half the squad to break even if we reduce the costs enough to begin with. Im not surprised. It confuses the hell out of me. Theres three separate losses in the event of relegation. The fall in TV revenue (£44m) The fall in gate receipts and corporate stuff (£19) The predicated operating loss if wed stayed up (£7m) Grand total of to break even next season if we go down, £70m. Now forget Owen. His wages have already been paid upfront with the Northern Rock sponsorship money, and having him off the wage bill would have already been factored into the predicted £7m loss for next season. The same goes for Viduka and probably Geremi who is also out of contract at the end of the season. So if we are to break even we have to find £40m (after parachute payments) to break even. <pause for inevitable quibbling> He's creating an efficient business mate. Doesn't really matter what league we are in or anything, he's just creating an efficient business. Many people on here wanted this. So they ought to be happy with it. Good old Mike, and the "plan" he had which his predecessors never had, ever. We might get some good away trips at Blackpool, Bournemouth, Southend and Plymouth in the next few years. who ? as i remember it most just saw that we couldn't just go on racking up more and more debt year on year. as plenty other clubs have come to realise. why bother? I could say the same. Particularly when you - and he - knows perfectly well that my statement that the vast majority of this board disagreed with me is true, and thought that Ashley looking to make profits rather than show ambition on the pitch was the way to go. This is what sets Ashey apart. The performance of the team isnt the driver for his business. Hes looking to make his money in other ways. Its a revolutionary approach to running a PL football club of NUFC's size. Is that tongue in cheek? I've been as supportive of Ashleys way of running the club this season, but he has one idea of how to bring success and money into the club and that is to have a structure in place which will uncover 6 or 7 young gems who will either be moulded into a team or moved on. To the side of this is the need to remove large earners with low impact (Viduka et al). This has on the surface all gone pear shaped this season and I can't even begin to defend the current situation but below the first team this is continuing. There is very little evidence that he is looking at making money through Newcastle in any other way respect your opinion mate, but honestly in reality it doesn't work like this in football. Football only works on the "how well are you doing on the field" principle. Completely agree with the last sentance, I was merely pointing out what Ashleys plan hinges on and that is becoming more and more hoping that we get a Man U style crop of kids coming through, or at worst an Arsenal situation where we get one true gem (Fabregas) and a number of players who will 'do a job' in the first eleven. If it comes off we're laughing, but its one hell of a risky plan, albeit maybe necessary in the current climate. I guess this summer will answer a few more questions, once Owen et al are off the payroll MAYBE we will sign the necessary number of (£8-£10million bracket) players to compete in the leage, and MAYBE we will get the right manager in. Also remember there is no summer tournament to inflate players prices, again its a MAYBE but maybe a number of deals fell through due to this last summer (Turan for example)

I don't get what you mean. If you reduce the operating costs you already cover the drop in income, because income is used to pay the operating costs.. Plus when you sell the player you not only reduce costs through cutting wages but you also bring money in through transfer fees (if you get a fee that is). My point is we won't need to sell half the squad to break even if we reduce the costs enough to begin with. I’m not surprised. It confuses the hell out of me. There‘s three ‘separate’ losses in the event of relegation. The fall in TV revenue (£44m) The fall in gate receipts and corporate stuff (£19) The predicated operating loss if we’d stayed up (£7m) Grand total of to break even next season if we go down, £70m. Now forget Owen. His wages have already been paid upfront with the Northern Rock sponsorship money, and having him off the wage bill would have already been factored into the predicted £7m loss for next season. The same goes for Viduka and probably Geremi who is also out of contract at the end of the season. So if we are to break even we have to find £40m (after parachute payments) to break even. <pause for inevitable quibbling> He's creating an efficient business mate. Doesn't really matter what league we are in or anything, he's just creating an efficient business. Many people on here wanted this. So they ought to be happy with it. Good old Mike, and the "plan" he had which his predecessors never had, ever. We might get some good away trips at Blackpool, Bournemouth, Southend and Plymouth in the next few years. who ? as i remember it most just saw that we couldn't just go on racking up more and more debt year on year. as plenty other clubs have come to realise. why bother? I could say the same. Particularly when you - and he - knows perfectly well that my statement that the vast majority of this board disagreed with me is true, and thought that Ashley looking to make profits rather than show ambition on the pitch was the way to go. This is what sets Ashey apart. The performance of the team isn’t the driver for his business. He’s looking to make his money in other ways. It’s a revolutionary approach to running a PL football club of NUFC's size. Is that tongue in cheek? I've been as supportive of Ashleys way of running the club this season, but he has one idea of how to bring success and money into the club and that is to have a structure in place which will uncover 6 or 7 young gems who will either be moulded into a team or moved on. To the side of this is the need to remove large earners with low impact (Viduka et al). This has on the surface all gone pear shaped this season and I can't even begin to defend the current situation but below the first team this is continuing. There is very little evidence that he is looking at making money through Newcastle in any other way

gutierrez,martins,coloccini. Couldn’t play for another club this season. Not going to get much for an ineligible player. Martins might have raised £12m… did anyone bid for him? exp;lain to me why he couldn't play for another club. nobody bid for steven gerrard.....whats your point ? They’d have both have played for three clubs in a year? My point is that your clutching at straws. Wise would have looked like a right donkey if he’d signed players in July and sold them in January. Probably at a loss, judging by Collocini’s form. Selling Jonas might have been a bit difficult while his transfer for Mallorca was subject to a legal battle. Martins was the only one of the three who could have been sold for more than £6m+. And he probably would have gone if anyone had put a bid in. Have we rejected a bid for any player since Ashley took over? you can play for three clubs in a year,but not for 3 in a season .(hence diarra signing for pompey in january after signing for arsenal the previous august). my point is many still think the money we got for n'zogbia was fair, we got more than milner was worth and we got robbed on given. ashley has made enough mistakes without you blaming him for the weather and high tides. Calm down. I’m saying there aren’t many corners left for him to cut, and he’s already sold our most saleable assists. You can quibble about whether Coloccini’s market value is greater than Milner’s if you want, but it’s neither here or there. Player sales will be the only way to service next season's losses if we go down, and as those losses will be gigantic we’ll be left with a paper thin squad made up of kids and free transfers. And that means another relegation scrap. Not making the losses to begin with is the best way, which means getting rid of players, but only the really high earners (and the ones who ask to leave of course). Remove the biggest earners and we can take £30 million off the wage bill without having much of an effect on the team. I mean who would miss Smith, Geremi, Cacapa, Butt, Duff and Viduka? Even Barton and Owen have played so little we wouldn't really miss them.. The physio?

In all their glory: - Newcastle Vs Bolton Wanderers 1 - 0 Newcastle Vs West Brom 2 - 1 Newcastle Vs Aston Villa 2 - 0 Portsmouth Vs Newcastle 0 - 3 Newcastle Vs Tottenham 2 - 1 West Brom Vs Newcastle 1 - 3 Looking at it another way... We still have to play 3 of those teams again, and the one team we have beaten and played twice.... we won again.

Sorry but I don't agree with the OP Ashley's actions this season of course have a major bearing on where we sit today, but this season has been a long time coming. But.. Halls/Shepherd. They must take some blame for there boom or bust summer in 2005, it was irresponsible in the extreme (esecially considering who was in charge at the time) and part of the reaoson of the inactivity in the transfer market is the obligations we are currently stuck with. The players. Now I'm not including all of the players here, just thos who signed for the club becase of the big pay packet on offer and don't give value for money every Saturday. Keegan. He walked at the worst possible time and one which made no sense if his grievances were the signing and selling of players (i.e. outside the transfer window). Souness. Forcing Bellamy out of the club and playing Shearer ahead of Kluivert. Paul Robinson. Breaking Owen's foot Sven. Taking Owen to the World Cup. The fans. SJP is no longer the cauldren it once was, we are just as likely to be on the players backs than supporting them. The scenes vs Hull were frankly shameful and have contributed to the situation where JK was appointed. All hindsight I know, but all of the above contribuuted to our club going backwards and sitting where we are. Ashley appointing Keegan delayed this scenario for a season, I fully believe we would have gone down under Sam, Ashley or no Ashley. As the current owner Ashley (rightly) will be where the buck stops at the end of the season, but lets not kid ourselves that he took over a top 4 club with wonderful finances. He has gambled his reputation with us through tightening the purse strings, Kinnear was forced upon him as he was trying to sell the club at the time and again, lets be honest when JK was offered a contract until the end of the season we were slowly pulling ourselves to safety so it made sense. Another 2 years however, wrong idea. Sorry if its a bit muddled, but hopefully it makes a bit of sense

Shola Ameobi

Blackburn - Played 29, drawn 9 Newcastle - Played 29, drawn 11 Hmmmm Sorry I meant under Sam

Norwich Union Sports Centre