Chris_R

Where's the north terrace? Is that supposedly part of the ground? I've been to hundreds of matches and if you asked me which part the north terrace was, I wouldn't have the slightest idea. Well, I could work out roughly where you mean from knowing which one the East Stand is, but I'm still not sure on the specifics and it might be worth clarifying it as I doubt I'm alone.

I couldn't disagree more. The whole brand is becoming toxic, tainted. It will definitely be having an effect and any serious investor will check every aspect of a company before investing in it.

That probably accounts for the immediate dip, yes, but not what's happened since. Professional investors react quickly, they don't take over a month to decide on things. Anyone with large volumes invested in SD would have been waiting for the results to come out and would have made a decision in minutes, maybe hours. Certainly not sitting here into the back end of August. What we've seen is a slow but sustained drop in price, which to me indicates that people are gradually losing confidence in the brand as the sustained pressure mounts.

Further to my share price post above, just think about this. If there's a connection between the protests and the SD share price, and we can argue that all day but as I say I believe there is, but if there is then look at the numbers. Before the protests kicked in, the SD share price was at a high of 436.10p. Now it's at 385.95 That's a drop of 50.15p per share There's 536.97 MILLION shares in issue Mike Ashley, according to an earlier post which I don't doubt but haven't checked myself, owns 61% of them This protest has therefore lowered Mike Ashley's wealth by £164m already. If that's not incentive enough for people to get on board with this, nothing is.

That's the key, empty stadium is unrealistic unfortunately so this is the best approach. Previously owning nufc was a benefit to SD with no major drawbacks. With the social media stuff it's still a benefit but currently must be an annoyance. The next step is to turn that annoyance into something more where it has a financial impact. This all kicked off around 18th July.... https://www.newcastle-online.org/forum/index.php?topic=99882.11450 And this has happened to the SD share price since, a share price which was previously going up.... Of course, maybe this is all coincidence, but I really don't think so. I am utterly convinced this is having an impact, it's the only notable thing which has happened to SD since 18th July which could explain this continued descent of the share price, unless someone would like to tell me otherwise? And Ashley will be 100% aware of the connection too. He'll wake up every single morning and the first thing he'll do is check the share prices. I believe there's a connection between the 2, but what's way more important is that he'll believe there's a connection too and he'll be fucking furious.

I still think you'll get filtered out. Even with VPN and browser tricks. Google are pretty smart. If they see suspicious activity in anyway, they err on the side of caution and don't charge the Advertiser. Even assuming you don't get filtered out, 3 clicks a day is going to be costing an Advertiser not very much. Especially in the context of all the genuine traffic a big advertiser might be getting - you'll be accounting for 0.00000001% of spend. My advice would be to not waste your time. Thanks for the advice but I'll carry on anyway. For all of the following reasons: 1) It's not just me doing it, there's many people doing it. The effect is not from what I'm doing personally, but from the sum of our parts. 2) I'm doing it at work, so it's not a waste of my time at all. I have a great employer who doesn't mind what I do provided my job is done, which it always is. And yes I have the same VPN option on my phone as at home, and I also have a work VPN which I can use on the desktop, which is our company's own and nothing to do with any major VPN provider 3) It makes me feel better.

Yep, slow and steady is the name of the game here. I'm going to look for maybe 2 or 3 advertised links per day. Per VPN connection.

Also I've just thought.... If everyone doing this - and there seems to be a lot of us - uses the same hashtag ie #IfRafaGoesWeGo, then it'll become viral at least at a local level each time SD tweet. So by tweeting, provided we hold up our end and use that hashtag when abusing him, SD are effectively publicising the IfRafaGoes movement and making the whole thing viral. Cheers guys.

Seems they're adopting a "carry on regardless" attitude, hoping people get bored. Personally doing this kind of stuff is the highlight of my working day, and as I'm doing it at work I'm actually getting paid for it. Until the "work" part of my job becomes more fun than abusing Mike Ashley, or the demands of my working day become so great that I don't have time to spend 5 minutes chucking some grief his way, I can't see why I'd even think of stopping.

My VPN has over 500 UK servers. I'm also "working from home" next Thursday.

Plenty of time and need to keep SD guessing. Will be another SD protest. Info to follow soon. Good stuff.

Me too mate, I'm finding it impossible to enjoy Rafa's last season with us because of this leech so I'm quite happy helping with the relentless tirade of abuse heading his way and against anyone who stands on his side, I won't stop, I just hope the majority are in the same boat too. I'm in this for the long haul, I've got plenty of free time and I'm both incredibly stubborn and incredibly patient.

I'm happy to click one SD link per day through Google. Guess it has to come up through a google search though, one they're paying for. Not just searching google for "Sports Direct" which will generate an organic, non-paid link. Anyone got any search terms that bring links up which look artificially high? Post them in here, then we can all click them once per day. Hell, I've got a VPN with thousands of different servers and I get bored on evenings, I'm happy to do a good few.

Well he's going to have a fucking horrible time then. Doesn't bother him he's sitting in Shire Brook counting his money with his fingers in his ears That's why we need to make every effort we can to reduce that money by as much as we possibly can, both by affecting his direct revenue from SD and by indirectly impacting him through his partnerships with everyone else. Owning NUFC needs to become bad for him financially when he considers the bigger picture of all his businesses. That's the only way to get rid of him, and as we've already shown by stopping SD tweeting for a month in a very simple way and with very little effort, it's definitely achievable.

I don't pay Sky a single penny, but I watch every Newcastle match. Sometimes that means I have to watch it in the Middle East. Now personally I don't tune in until kickoff to avoid this guff, but I can see how others would end up listening to it.

The end goal isn't the removal of Barnes, it's the removal of Ashley. Until that happens, it's an all-out war with no let up as far as I'm concerned.

" I've no wish to make it again to someone who sees fit to call people who disagree with them a "cheeky cunt". Erm that wasn't me Indeed it wasn't. You have my apologies for that misunderstanding.

I'm disagreeing solely with this line: "People often forget though that the biggest and best protest they can ever make is just simply walking away" I've tried making that point many times. I disagree with it because I believe protesting against his business interests will achieve more than just not turning up. I've made my point, I've no wish to make it again to someone who sees fit to call people who disagree with them a "cheeky cunt". Continue arguing if you wish, you strike me as the kind who needs to have the last word and doubtless you'll prove that shortly, but it'll be with yourself as I've got better things to do with my day.

I've read every word you've repeatedly quoted, but you're still wrong until you quote it without the bit saying "People often forget though that the biggest and best protest they can ever make is just simply walking away". That's the bit I'm saying is utterly incorrect. And it is utterly incorrect. Funny how you tried to make it seem like i disavowed any direct action though : ) 52 000 walking away on its own would rock the foundations of the club and Ashley would shit his pants asap ...without us there is no NUFC ... don't you get that yet ? Want me to walk you through it again ? Are you this patronising and condescending to everyone you engage with? Why do you need the cheap comments like "don't you get that yet ? Want me to walk you through it again ?" just because people disagree with you? Of course 52000 walking away would do what you suggest. But 52000 taking direct action would do a hell of a lot more. You are of course entitled to disagree with that.

I've read every word you've repeatedly quoted, but you're still wrong until you quote it without the bit saying "People often forget though that the biggest and best protest they can ever make is just simply walking away". That's the bit I'm saying is utterly incorrect. And it is utterly incorrect. Maybe try to read and comprehend what I'm saying?

In the age of IPTV, I’m not sure why anyone would have them in the first place. This. I'm completely baffled as to why anyone would even contemplate having Sky in this day and age.

What you're saying is utterly wrong. 200 people walking away will have no impact on his income at NUFC or any other business, and will have no impact on his decision to stay or go as our owner. That same 200 people mobilising to give all of his companies dogs' abuse online whenever they post on Twitter, protesting against his stores, posting reviews their experiences of his businesses etc will have a massive impact on those businesses, their ability to advertise and their income, and their ability to attract new clients. Scale that number up in either case from 200, the point stands either way. Don't get me wrong, not turning up is a start, but direct action is far more effective than just not turning up. If you can find the bit where i mentioned 200 people i'd be obliged I never said you did mention 200. That's my number, I even said scale it up to any other number. Or down if you prefer. It's an arbitrary example but my point stands. Even 52000 staying away will have less impact than 52000 protesting vociferously and making Ashley's life and his businesses lives a living hell. Just today the BBC ran an article titled "these clubs could run at a loss with 0 fans" or something, basically showing how little clubs rely on revenue from the stands these days. Staying away is great, it's a good start, certainly morally it's the right starting point. But we can do so much more and we absolutely should do more. Staying away on its own will do the square root of fuck all as far as removing this parasitic arsehole from the club goes. It's a fucking war, and you don't fight a war just by ignoring the enemy.

What you're saying is utterly wrong. 200 people walking away will have no impact on his income at NUFC or any other business, and will have no impact on his decision to stay or go as our owner. That same 200 people mobilising to give all of his companies dogs' abuse online whenever they post on Twitter, protesting against his stores, posting reviews their experiences of his businesses etc will have a massive impact on those businesses, their ability to advertise and their income, and their ability to attract new clients. Scale that number up in either case from 200, the point stands either way. Don't get me wrong, not turning up is a start, but direct action is far more effective than just not turning up.

Literally seen 0 rumours like this. Yeah, Bishop can't post them on Twitter for fear of getting abuse, so he's just telling people in person down the pub. You'll have to wait for it to spread, old-school style.

Maybe you're right, I don't know. I just get the feeling that the media battle is already lost, so worrying about them not being on our side is moot. Ashley and Bishop have the money, the media don't care about what the "right" side is, old style journalism and journalistic integrity is long dead. If that's the case, we're just left deciding whether to fight this machete-wielding person by sticking to the Queensbury rules, or whether we should look for a gun. (Not that I'm advocating killing, for clarity if MA etc are trawling this site looking for lawsuits. Wouldn't surprise me. It's just an analogy, not a suggestion.)