mrmojorisin75

Perhaps you can momentarily ditch your obsession with the past and link to a recent example. Me, I see Liverpool's owners desperate to sell to a cash-rich customer because they can't refinance their debt, and the club with the Premiership's second-richest benefactor operating a sell-to-buy policy because even an injection of £600 million (!) hasn't been enough to buy sustainable success for Chelsea.

http://www.journallive.co.uk/nufc/nufc-latest-news/2009/02/12/joe-s-nufc-future-is-in-doubt-61634-22912391/ wow

Please please please tell me your not suggesting taking out loans to buy players ?? You do realise this is how Leeds ended up where they are don't you ? i would think he means to structure the payments on the existing debt in order to have some cash available for players

think UV's got a point here in a sense, and i know he won't agree with this next part but shepherd imo had fucked up and went too far with what he was doing, had he been allowed to continue in the same manner we'd be truly fucked ashley, on the other hand seems to be overreacting to this, in a sense...he doesn't have to copy what FS did by any means but something in between would have been surely acceptable for most people? for example the infamous debt that needed paying back, what was to stop ashley paying that back with a structured loan of his own that could have been financed/repaid however he wanted within reason? nothing that i can see other than he's a cash payment kind of guy as UV also says all of these decisions were now made before the financial collapse, and while i applaud the principle behind "we own such and such a player 100%" its not viable for us is it because he doesn't have enough cash to own enough good players 100% and we're on the precipice of relegation because of that EDIT: on the taking out a loan thing on the face of things he's saving a few million in interest payments by not owing a bank the cash, but he stands to lose millions more if we go down 'cause he doesn't have, or won't provide, the cash to strengthen the team as it needs to be...all his choices to be fair

He chose to pay off the debt in full rather than pay off some and invest more in the team. He is choosing to arrest the clubs losses by slashing costs rather than trying to increase profits. He chooses to pay up front for players rather than spread payments like most other clubs do, thus increasing the losses made by the club in the first years of this changed strategy, and reducing the amount available to spend on incoming players. You cannot tell me he could not put more money into the club if he wanted to, so he is chosing to gamble on our Premiership status with a small depleted squad, just like he did last year. He chose to employ the managers and directors he has which have us in the current state. He chose to put the club up for sale causing unrest and turmoil, and then not accept any of the bids. Non of this was forced on him. None of these decisions are down to the previous board or the financial climate. They are all his chosen course of action. can't agree with the bit in bold to be honest, not fully, but you make some excellent points there and yes things could be being done even at this stage, the bit about paying for players in full is a good one - fine if you have the cash and can buy the players you need when you need them, but no so good in our case apparently

liked this so much i thought it might as well be used again in an applicable situation!

qualifying for the Champions League ? Do you honestly think Shepherd was going to get us back into the Champions League? In 2001 do you regret the fact we didn't: Cut back on signings and not brought in Bellamy & Robert Sell the likes of Dyer for a good profit Let injury prone Shearer's contract run down so he could leave on a free and we could get his high wages off the bill (after all, we had a ready made replacement coming through from the youth team). Get someone like Vinnie Jones in to buy and sell players over Robson's head. If it pissed off Robson and he left, should we have replaced him with someone like Dave Basset. 1. No. 2. No. 3. No. 4. No. 5. No. PS. The year is 2009. Then you're a hypocrite for praising Mike Ashley for performing those equivalent actions by choice, not necessity, now. I applaud you for finally having the courage to admit it. please elaborate on this bit in italic

"Should results go awry, a firefighter figure will be brought in to try to avert the threat of relegation." this is the bit i really like...never read suck fuckin nonsense in my life, if there is a shred of truth in it ashley is a total and utter lunatic

The reason we got Kinnear is we were offering an awful package of 6 games in charge to a club that was going to be sold. I dont think we need to aim *quite* so low this time. so you expect to see a forward thinking appointment then, one that might incur compensation from another club? more optimism than me

This is fantasy imho, i would like to believe it but god no. So the players that arrived in January they are going to be over the moon for the new employers to have lied to them. Ashley when he took the club off the market he had time to appoint a manager before January. He didn't. There are no big benefits of lying to supporters, players, whole nation so you can attract Kevin Nolan and Ryan Taylor. Love it how you made this thread as i wouldn't reply to you in the Q&A and now only reply to my comments. Obsessed little man aren't you? mackems.gif It was brought up a few times on that thread not just that instance. Many people seem to share your opinion, so what you complaining about. The fact you call my opinion 'fantasy' or 'Delusional'. Just accept i have a view, it doesn't match yours and there's no point trying to get a rise out of me by being a tit about it. You have an opinion sure i don't get how you can be 99% sure of it or as 'good as certain' that is all. Required some explaining to be honest. I would like to believe it but don't buy into elaborate conspiracy theories. I think i've got a solid opinion about this board, most of which cannot be proved until it happens. But like the summers fiasco, i called it months before happening. Again just a hunch from what i've seen, but think this is what is happening - no proof, no one has any either way, just opinions. I respect others not having the same, it bothers me not, i have my own, some will agree, some won't, but i had all this bullshit aimed at me in the summer when i was telling people something was wrong, and that it wasn't smoke without a fire over Ashley/Wise/keegan and transfers, and got called worse than s*** about it. A Side issues but: I also believe when it comes to court, KK will come out looking like a dick - again it cannot be proved until it happens. KK is nowhere near as smart as he thinks, and these bastards legally are classes above him and do their business lacking emotion, KK cannot do that, impossible for him too, and when it all comes out, he'll not just lose financially, im worried for him how much face he loses from it as well. These statements back it up, they won't talk about it, they don't have to curry favour, they don't need too, KK either totally lost it fistycuffs stylee or he knew of the DOF appointment; it was written in his contract and hasn't a leg to stand on. Back to JFK, i'm 99% cert he's gone, before his health problem around 70% this was the case, but even if its not, he's gone on these grounds and any potential contract (im am wrong) will be retracted by now. Agree Toon taylor it would be madness imho to give Joke Inhere a contract on the grounds of health but aside from that it is his general lack of tact with the media and how he portrays himself which must concern the people above him and how we look from the outside. missed that TT post, pretty spot on with the assessment of the KK affair imo, reckon they'll make a mug of him myself

start racking brains for unattached managers who would take a job to get back into football a la tyme! someone who knows how could make it a poll...here's mine: 1. big ron 2. george graham 3. bruce rioch (presumably unattached)

he'd better be ready for the championshit

one game man, jesus Even if we just get Raylor in it's enough. WE FINALLY HAVE A SET PIECE TAKER FFS. WE FINALLY SCORE FROM A CORNER. Raylor is warrented a starting place for his set piece imo. we've played one game with them both, lets see how they stand up after 20 then maybe they'll be on the road to be classed "spot on" is my point

Agreed, i'd join a proper supporters club but at the moment they are meerly afront for an Ashley out group from what i've read/listened too. With recent events or lack off, do you not think they are justified in wanting Ashley out? Looking at the state the club is in I think they are holding the clubs interests at heart by attacking the man that's caused it. Think most of you have been hooked again by this 5 year plan bollocks, just remember a leopard never changes it's spots. As I remember recent events they shouted "Ashley out" then Ashley said "OK I'm getting out" then the world's financial markets collapsed and he couldn't get out. Right now the REALITY is he's here for the forseeable future, so the best thing for the immediate, short and medium term future of NUFC may be to drop the ridiculous "cockney mafia out" stance and look for pragmatic ways to go forward. As you say "a leopard never changes it's spots" - so it's highly unlikely this so called NUSC will move away from it's single agenda driven protest. Very true! and the only way I see that changing is if Ashley's plans start paying dividends, but if not then he deserves all the flack that's coming his way. To be honest I don't like Ashley or what he has done to this great club, but if he does start to turn it around and we do see improvement then he'll get my full backing again. I ain't holding my breath Take your pick. - From The Grauniad. Accounts recently published by Newcastle, for the year to June 2008, show how much more generous Ashley's contribution has been already, with debts paid off and £100m loaned interest free to the club, compared to the millions relentlessly earned from the club by the Halls and Shepherds. When Sir John, the Gateshead shopping-centre magnate, took over Newcastle, he promised that the club would herald north-east regeneration and revive the "Geordie nation". Whatever the outcome of that, the club certainly became hugely profitable for Sir John and his family. The Halls and Freddy Shepherd, who became a director alongside them, took no salaries for the first few years, then made up for it in 1996: Sir John was paid £836,803, Douglas Hall £793,612 and Shepherd £750,000. The accounts said the payment "recognises the fact that the directors received no remuneration prior to this year". Shepherd, who staunchly defends his and the Halls' record of achievement at Newcastle, acknowledged that after the club floated on the stockmarket in 1997, they never contributed money for the club to invest. Before that, he said, they had guaranteed loans – documents at the time noted that £3.5m of the club's borrowings were guaranteed by the Halls' company, Cameron Hall, and that Cameron Hall had loaned the club money, at 11% interest. The latest accounts provide a final reckoning on the Shepherds' and Halls' era because they sold all their shares to Ashley in June 2007 and have also resigned as directors. Altogether, the two families made an extraordinary £145.8m from their years of involvement – the Halls made £95.7m, the Shepherds £50.1m, mostly in salaries, dividends and ultimately selling their shares. The Halls had already made £20.35m from selling portions of their shares before Ashley paid £55m for their remaining stake. Shepherd did not want to sell – he had steadily bought more shares – but was effectively forced to – Ashley paid Freddie and Bruce £38m. Shepherd did not receive a pay-off when he resigned as a director in July 2007 but Douglas Hall, paid a £494,655 salary package in 2007 via a Newcastle United company registered in the tax haven of Gibraltar, was entitled to two years' pay in compensation and received an additional £1.17m when he resigned. The unrest and despondency on Tyneside now make it easy to forget how Ashley's arrival put a smile on local faces, a new owner who watched matches with supporters, drank on the Bigg Market and had £1bn in his pocket, too. The accounts show that having bought the club for £134m, Ashley paid off borrowings of £43m and cleared the overdraft, lending the club £100m on which he has chosen to waive interest. He has not declared a dividend nor paid himself a salary. In short, he has put a chunk of his considerable fortune on the line, and not taken a penny out. guardians no use; it needs putting in suitably shitkicker thick tabloid headlines for the fuckwits to take it in i was going to spoof it but simply don't have the ability to put the situation into as simple terms some people need to get it through their heads maybe MA/DL should devise their own banner as part of the communication with fans improvements, what could it be? maybe "-30m is not a profit" in 6 foot high letters, that'd be a start

yep, club has to go into overdrive now on the recruitment front, this is the most important managerial decision the club have made for years and there is no room whatsoever to fuck this one up. we're really fucked now aren't we?

good point that like, they were pissing and moaning about him them ignoring the letters they'd sent...i'd imagine MA was taking a "don't negotiate with terrorists" approach i'd probably do the same if their only aim was to get me out of town with no viable alternative in place

one game man, jesus

from wiki: "On May 26, several media announced Deschamps had resigned as Juventus head coach following several clashes with the society" clears that up then

imagine if that's not true... will go fuckin ballistic at his next PC with a sun reporter present wish him the best anyways but in the long run it might be for the best for NUFC

see my edit, don't agree they thought it was bad though, maybe just too much?

erm i read that as Llamblias saying he was told keep his head down, due to the keegan thing EDIT: "When Chris Mort was here he was very proactive with the Press. He continuously spoke to the Press. So when I came on the board, Mike and I discussed it and we basically wanted to keep a lower profile. Then within no time at all KK happened." could be read either way, i took it as the kk thing forced them to disappear which wouldn't have happened had kk stayed...then again maybe this fucker just can't communicate well and ashley told him not to bother rather than do it badly? then brought in

have to say their "response" to Llamblias printed on .com was a right load of shite - not sure how to explain how it made me feel but they seemed to be complaining more that they've been ignored as opposed to the fans in general, maybe that's not what they meant but it's how it came across to me read like the diary of a spoilt bairn whose mam wouldn't buy him a pastie so he threw his toys out the pram like politicians who are supposed to represent the voters and end up on company boards smoking cuban cigars while their constituents go to ratshit

what i miss? he not being allowed back then?

a sprinkling of truth flavoured with a liberal portion of bullshit, is my opinion of that

We'll probably be completely fucked. Again this relates to the concern I've been pointing out. The League really don't give a flying fuck who buys the clubs, I mean the Glazer's business model entirely consisted of "ok, we don't have any money to buy the club, so what we'll do is we'll buy it with magic pretend money and then fuck the fans senseless to pay for it." How exactly did the league not have a problem with this? Christ, people point out that this is a relatively normal way of doing business, but in no other area could you increase prices threefold and expect to retain your customers because of "brand loyalty." To be allowed to buy a premier league club you should have to be able to prove that you know what you're doing, that you have a clear and fiscally responsible plan, and that you can create a sustainable future for the club which is beneficial both to fans and to the league as a whole. The "fit and proper person" test shouldn't be the ethical equivalent of a primary school spelling test. People like Randy Lerner and Niall Quinn shouldn't be held as some great illuminating beacon for football owners, they should be the goddamn standard. The fans should be at the centre of every decision the league makes, because while its true that each and every club runs a monopoly on their product (you can't get Newcastle United anywhere else) their "consumers" can only be pushed so hard financially before they'll lose interest. It's getting increasingly hard to avoid the conclusion that the Premier League's bubble is going to burst sooner rather than later, and it'll do so in spectacular fashion. all very viable points indeed mate...still i'm sure mike ashley would have probably passed a test to buy a club and look he's doing swap you one mike ashley for one glazers? just kidding like