Chris_R

An option to buy doesn't mean we'll buy. We all know he's going back after the next few months.

I have to strongly dispute this. You can't just terminate someone who is good at their job and then prove that's legitimate at tribunal. Especially if you've offered them a new contract! AND done it to everyone else on the payroll too. Like I said earlier, I've been through this twice myself. Successfully. Once against one of the biggest North East employers who thought they could bully their staff and that nobody would dare stand up to them. You simply cannot change someone's contract without their permission. Anyway, Ashley's a cunt. Let's get back to something we all agree on!

Some people are hired for a certain amount of time. Proper specialist programmers for example. In entertainment folks might be hired for X amount of shows. Normally in retail, customer service etc there is no end date as such once hired. Yeah, fair point. Forgot about contractors.

That's not strictly true. Employers can go extreme and do something called 'Terminate and re-engage' where they basically terminate your contract and offer you the new one. If you don't accept it, you don't have a job. As I said, that's extreme but they can do that But that termination is unfair dismissal. Take them to court and you will win unless they can show that had a valid reason to terminate you.

To say a little more on this, I get that employers often try to change people's contacts, often to terms which are worse for the employees. I also get that many employees feel they have to sign these contracts. But you don't. You can just say "no" and insist you work under the old terms. Any attempt to sack you for that or terminate your contract would count as unfair dismissal.

Where do you work where your contract has an expiry date on it?

2 loan threads. There's something of a difference.

From what I've heard they wont have many staff left to fill them, leaving in their droves because of the new contracts. Why don't they just refuse the new contracts? I've done that twice at separate employers. Nobody can just change your contract unless you agree to it. What happens then? Can’t they just sack you for not agreeing to a contract? No.

From what I've heard they wont have many staff left to fill them, leaving in their droves because of the new contracts. Why don't they just refuse the new contracts? I've done that twice at separate employers. Nobody can just change your contract unless you agree to it.

I don't understand how anyone can pay to go to the matches and willingly put money in MAs pockets, especially if they're not happy with what he's doing with the club. He's mugging you off and laughing in your face - quite literally if you see the TV pictures - and you're paying him for the privilege. Have some self-respect, ffs.

Perhaps, but would you rather have Joselu or Mitrovic as backup?

Cheap stock, cheap rent, no real effort to keep them open This. If he pays £xm for stock stores containing >£xm stock, he's quids in no matter what. He needn't care what happens to them once he's in profit on the venture.

He'll do what he always does and bid £20m for a shop with £50m of stock. Doesn't matter if it dies a death after that. guesswhowinsagain.jpeg

Well it's not like he can have a problem with people telling outright lies, is it. Even if he does, just post him a picture of a fishing rod and he'll I'm sure he'll just laugh it all off and say "Oh, you guys!"

Or maybe a tripadvisor review of it. would take a lot to do damage 100 people leaving 1 star reviews takes it under 4.0. 99 now.

It just needs to be made that owning NUFC is toxic to him. Either financiall,y directly to NUFC, or because of the reputational hit he'll continue to take which will knock-on to SD etc financially. Money is all he cares about, until we become more of a problem than a benefit, he's going nowhere. But collectively we can do that.

Well probably not, but just because he's (relatively) rich that doesn't mean he won't try to make his business venture work. If he didn't care about making more money, he'd not have started that business in the first place. That's kinda how these things work?

He's too famous to need Ashley to shill his stuff. He's a very popular person in his own right and any company would fall head over heels to get Ferdinand's brand. Are you Rio Ferdinand? I was genuinely just thinking the same. Doesn't matter what companies were or were not falling head over heels to stock Ferdinand's stuff, the fact is that he signed with Ashley. Exclusively. He cannot sell his tat anywhere else. At all. So if he's nasty to Mike, Mike can just keep it all in boxes out the back and not put it on the shelves. If he's nice to Mike, it gets front-of-shop space and a window display. It's all clear as day to anyone with a single brain cell that Ferdinand has a massive conflict of interests when talking about Newcastle United as a pundit. Stop treating everyone as idiots by trying to suggest otherwise.

Well he clearly does need Ashley, as he has an exclusive agreement to sell his tat at Ashley's tat shops. Also it's CBs. Never use apostrophes when you pluralise things. But irrespective, Ferdinand being a good player in his day doesn't sell merchandise now. There's no intrinsic link which I'm aware of between an ability to play football and an ability to design clothes.

Again, this is willful misrepresentation. There is a link between Sports Direct and NUFC, there is no link between Ferdinand's merchandise and NUFC Wilful misrepresentation? Do me a favour. We're an empty vessel of a club which only exists to advertise Sports Direct. It's the only purpose of NUFC under Mike Ashley's ownership. To suggest the 2 entities aren't linked is just laughable. Ferdinand's merch has no relation with NUFC. SD does. How can you all be so obtuse? Ashley owns both. If he is nasty about how Ashley looks after NUFC, there's a good chance Ashley will stop SD from stocking his tat. Conversely if he supports Ashley's running of the club, Ashley will be pleased and will give him some shelf room. Surely that's easy enough for anyone to see? I don't even know why I'm bothering to try to explain it to you because you're so clearly on the wind-up. No human being is actually this thick.

Again, this is willful misrepresentation. There is a link between Sports Direct and NUFC, there is no link between Ferdinand's merchandise and NUFC Wilful misrepresentation? Do me a favour. We're an empty vessel of a club which only exists to advertise Sports Direct. It's the only purpose of NUFC under Mike Ashley's ownership. To suggest the 2 entities aren't linked is just laughable.

Yet when we shut up shop, all the commentators whine.

Can we please stop talking about cocks in a thread that's supposed to be about Sunderl oh, sorry, my mistake. Carry on.

It's quite simple really: There is no bid, this is all nonsense and spin designed appease the fans and to allow another transfer window to pass without us doing any of that silly "transfer" stuff. Once you accept that, everything that happens, every leak, and every article in the papers all makes perfect sense.

And £10 gets you the badge by itself