fredbob

Not sure if this helps:

Ashley (not him personally) did go through the books and he knew about £70 plus million of debt, he didn't go into enough detail at that time to discover that £millions of future income had been spent or that certain loans had clauses for early repayment if the club was sold. The reason for him putting in extra money has nothing to do with checking or not checking the books. If you insist. It only makes him an even bigger fool. The business needed capital investment. Ashley’s like a man who bought a flashy car but can’t afford the petrol. Its nothing of the sort.

Ashley (not him personally) did go through the books and he knew about £70 plus million of debt, he didn't go into enough detail at that time to discover that £millions of future income had been spent or that certain loans had clauses for early repayment if the club was sold. The reason for him putting in extra money has nothing to do with checking or not checking the books. didnt SJH put a deadline on the sale of his shares as well, or have i made that up?

Sentimental fool.

have you read the figures?? how can ashley take a dividend when he is financing the running of the club at the moment??? company directors take dividends out of loss making companies all the time. Haven’t you seen the news recently? yes public company where they don't use there own money at all to buy the club etc the figures show ashley is keeping the club alive with his own cash, so why would he take money out then He hasn’t put any money in, he’s lent the club £100m. His own money. 70 for the debt, and 30 to keep the club going (plus another £10 million on top in June according to the OP). Ashley bought the club without checking the books and got well and truly shafted. If he hadn’t paid off the outstanding creditors he could have seen his £135m investment go down the pan. Yet your lauding him to the high heavens for saving his own skin and asking us to pay for it. Last years accounts count for s*** anyway. It’s next years accounts that will show if you’re blind faith in Ashley is warranted or sorely misguided. My money would be on the latter as losing lots of customers very rapidly tends to do bad things to the balance sheet. Saving his own skin and newcastle united? As a fan surely you appreciate that? Wouldnt these accounts suggest that it might be a bit premature of these fans who are walking out on the club they "love"? There now seems to be a definite method to his madness?

The communication in general is shite and that includes information about debt repayment, I'm not surprised that people forget about it when the club contradicts itself and people pick up on what is said. Fair point.

This isn't the right thread but, the PR has been shit since Llambias became MD. 100% agreed. Sorry, i thought you were talking specifically about the communication of debt repayment, my mistake.

Yes he should have to, the consequences of not getting you message across is clear for all to see. Theres actually a fair few of us who've been towing this line for about a year now, (including you) so it did get through, Mort did communicate this to us, but it wasnt belevied or understood. Whos fault is that?

Should he have to though? Mort did go into a decent amount of detail about how much he'd pumped in, that should of been enough. The sad thing, is this still wont be recognised as a great thing for the club. Lets just hope that Wise et al pull in a great shift in the summer with a managers who's on board with these ideas.

How would the 3 year season ticket deal tie into all this? How will it affect the finances?

Ah ok!

/whats changed?

I'm sorry but that is possibly the worst post I think you have ever posted on here. Of course he was expecting payback for his loan, we all knew that from day one that if he was a sensible businessman, the money was only going to be given in an assumption that the £100m was going to be given back to him via an increased valuation of the club. And quaysides OP makes it clear that he has underwritten a £20m loss in the past year, hence giving that £20m a year he promised. With that in mind, it is clear that it is unrealistic to expect anyone coming in to do much difference unless they are genuine multi-billionaires who want some personal glory. All Ashley's faults must therefore by with regards to his handling of management affairs, as opposed lack of investment. Sorry mate, but how many times have we heard people praise ashley for putting his hand in his pocket to clear our debts? a thousand times? ten thousand times? this is just a big YOURE WRONG to all those ashley arse lickers. funny how great financial brains like LLLO missed that one, yet i suggested it over a year ago. clearing debt can be great if the club is up for sale as it means the new owners dont have to address that and inherit a club with a good balance sheet. this doesnt apply in our case as ashley wants this money paid to him. it can be good for a second reason - avoiding interest and loan repayments means money can be put back into the club for the manager to spend - once again, this doesnt apply to us. for us fans, you know, people who watch football being played on a football pitch, it can be good if having a reduced debt consequently improves our on field performance. i dont need to tell you that this has not happened. the £20m loss is primarily player amortisation, a paper loss. if owen moves into the last year of his contract the club would lose, say, £4m from the value of a year of his tenure at the club, something restricted to the balance sheets rather than cash flowing out of the club. in fact, £17.8m of that £20m is player amortisation. as with previous accounts which saw us make something like a £30m loss, this was reduced to £300,000 once amortisation and trading was taken out of the equation. the club is making a small loss, nothing substantial, which is no suprise considering how poorly the club has been ran on the field in shepherd's final years and the entirety of ashley's reign. the way to improve this is to invest in the managerial & playing staff. any business that wants to move forward has to go into debt, you have to make expenditures in the short-term to reap the rewards in the medium to long term. if ashley is not prepared to do this he should bugger off. trying to run a premiership club on a shoestring is counter-productive - you end up in situations like the one we are in currently, and it could get worse. those who like to defend ashley any chance they get need to wake up and realise this. Fucking hell, where do I start? Second entry for worst post of 2009. is "entry for worst post" something thick people say when theyve had their arse handed to them on a plate cos they cant think of a proper argument? aye, thought so. Look at you go, go one son, crush that grape. Its the way you're lashing out that highlights the inpetitude of your posts, a stark contrast from the normally articulated, calm and sobering johnnpd. How is what Ashley has done with this debt any different to what Abramovich has done with Chleseas debt when he took over? I dont understand how those who say the debt has been paid of are wrong if its acknowledged as being the case at a different club with the exact same form of repayment? Surely you arent going to go down the "Abramovich has invested heavily route" as a form of retort?

I'm sorry but that is possibly the worst post I think you have ever posted on here. Of course he was expecting payback for his loan, we all knew that from day one that if he was a sensible businessman, the money was only going to be given in an assumption that the £100m was going to be given back to him via an increased valuation of the club. And quaysides OP makes it clear that he has underwritten a £20m loss in the past year, hence giving that £20m a year he promised. With that in mind, it is clear that it is unrealistic to expect anyone coming in to do much difference unless they are genuine multi-billionaires who want some personal glory. All Ashley's faults must therefore by with regards to his handling of management affairs, as opposed lack of investment. Sorry mate, but how many times have we heard people praise ashley for putting his hand in his pocket to clear our debts? a thousand times? ten thousand times? this is just a big YOURE WRONG to all those ashley arse lickers. funny how great financial brains like LLLO missed that one, yet i suggested it over a year ago. clearing debt can be great if the club is up for sale as it means the new owners dont have to address that and inherit a club with a good balance sheet. this doesnt apply in our case as ashley wants this money paid to him. it can be good for a second reason - avoiding interest and loan repayments means money can be put back into the club for the manager to spend - once again, this doesnt apply to us. for us fans, you know, people who watch football being played on a football pitch, it can be good if having a reduced debt consequently improves our on field performance. i dont need to tell you that this has not happened. the £20m loss is primarily player amortisation, a paper loss. if owen moves into the last year of his contract the club would lose, say, £4m from the value of a year of his tenure at the club, something restricted to the balance sheets rather than cash flowing out of the club. in fact, £17.8m of that £20m is player amortisation. as with previous accounts which saw us make something like a £30m loss, this was reduced to £300,000 once amortisation and trading was taken out of the equation. the club is making a small loss, nothing substantial, which is no suprise considering how poorly the club has been ran on the field in shepherd's final years and the entirety of ashley's reign. the way to improve this is to invest in the managerial & playing staff. any business that wants to move forward has to go into debt, you have to make expenditures in the short-term to reap the rewards in the medium to long term. if ashley is not prepared to do this he should bugger off. trying to run a premiership club on a shoestring is counter-productive - you end up in situations like the one we are in currently, and it could get worse. those who like to defend ashley any chance they get need to wake up and realise this. Fucking hell, where do I start? Second entry for worst post of 2009.

Wow. Interesting. Well if there is one thing no one can accuse Mike Ashley of, it is letting players go on the cheap. Every player sold under this regime has brought in more than I thought they would. For £12 million I would have to say bye bye Given. No point having the best goalie in the prem if your defence and midfield are dodgy. He'll make 5 odd world class saves a game only for us to lose 3 - 0 anyway! It's stupid. I wouldnt feel right if Milner went for £12m and Shay did as well.

Hence the stories of all of our top players being available for the right price and who can blame them? These so called top players haven't got us anywhere near Europe which means they just aren't worth their wages. Why not get them out and bring in younger players for half the price and half the wages? Providing you can of course identify those who have the talent to perform in the first team. It's all making a lot more sense now. Ashley should have just been more open about all this from the outset. You don't get anywhere as a football club by selling your best players and then bringing inferior ones in to replace them. And havent these "top players" conclusively proved that they arent worth it. Top 4 wages, top 15 perfromances.... By referring to top players I thought it was obvious by mentioning people like Given, Martins, Beye etc Not the players like Duff who are on top 4 wages but giving top 15 performances. Obviously not though. Thats pretty subjective dont you think? Surely you need an objective measure, that being the type of wages they're on and whther they represent the value.

Fucking hell!

Hence the stories of all of our top players being available for the right price and who can blame them? These so called top players haven't got us anywhere near Europe which means they just aren't worth their wages. Why not get them out and bring in younger players for half the price and half the wages? Providing you can of course identify those who have the talent to perform in the first team. It's all making a lot more sense now. Ashley should have just been more open about all this from the outset. You don't get anywhere as a football club by selling your best players and then bringing inferior ones in to replace them. And havent these "top players" conclusively proved that they arent worth it. Top 4 wages, top 15 perfromances....

Admit it. You didn't understand a word.

Has he a history of it? Debateable. Also he did lose control over transfers but still wanted to soldier on for the club he loved.... SBR was 10 times the manager Keegan was, antoher reason why i dont understadn the messiah like status afforded to Keegan. Bollox, if sbr was 10x the manager Keegan was, how come he had a lower win %,....see my sig,... Kevin Keegan Bobby Robson was a far superior manager he won 10 major trophies including the European Cup Winners' Cup, Uefa Cup, FA Cup ect he took England to the furthest they have been in a World Cup abroad ever and is the most successful Englishmen to manage abroad winning trophies in 3 different leagues Spain, Holland and Portugal. Keegan won absolutely nothing. To be fair he did win 2 division one titles, and 1 division 2 title, dont take that away from him.

At first we had "he's not even paid off the fucking debt", now we're getting "well its his own fault for not checking" you couldnt make it up. Who wants to go for "every clubs in debt"?

Great stuff quayside. Let the games begin.

Has he a history of it? Debateable. Also he did lose control over transfers but still wanted to soldier on for the club he loved.... SBR was 10 times the manager Keegan was, antoher reason why i dont understadn the messiah like status afforded to Keegan. Bollox, if sbr was 10x the manager Keegan was, how come he had a lower win %,....see my sig,... Ignore him man. Over his career of course SBR was a better manager than Keegan that can't be denied, but for us it was of course Keegan. Fucking hell, you think I'm arguing who's got the best stats for our club? Im not, the bit in bold is exactly what im arguing, if i got to choose which manager id want again, id go for SBR 10 time out of 10, becasue overall he's been the better manager, and i want the best managers at this club not the one who;s had his lucky spell here. Its like saying you'd prefer to have Solano over Beckham. (Cue - Beckham is overated...) it makes no logical sense. It was more your saying he was 10 times the manager Keegan was, which is a bit of an overstatement to make your point. We're a sensitive bunch you know. Ok fair enough, i'll tone it down.

Liverpool are self-sustaining even with the debt. Chelsea are dependent on the whims and fortune of a single man. Liverpool would lose money annually if they weren't in the CL, but Chelsea lose money annually even when they are in the CL and without debt repayments (I think). Not sure how you can say Chelsea's future is much more stable than Liverpool's. As for us, despite what the doom mongers will have you believe we were self sufficient pre-Ashley and were not about to go into financial meltdown. The debts have fluctuated over the years, and due to a period of relatively poor on field results and a need to replace the likes of Shearer they had increased in the latter years, this is true. It is also true for every other club in the league. To put it in perspective though, the debt was only a few million more in 2007 than it was back in 2001. The turnover in 2007 was £87m, the turnover in 2001 was £56m. We didn't go into receivership in 2001 and we weren't about to in 2007. If you believe the figures Ashley comes out with ("I then poured another £110 million into the club not to pay off the debt but just to reduce it" 14/09/08) the club has managed to lose £40m+ in his first year or so of ownership (the net debt at 31/06/07 was £70m in the 06-07 accounts). I'm really not sure how the club managed to lose that much when net transfer spend was at most £10m over his entire tenure and TV revenues increased by £20m per year. I guess running the club "responsibly" is expensive work, but if we're losing that much per year now under Ashley I'm not sure why you think we're more stable now than we were previously. But then again, not only are Liverpool struglling to inject big finances (the sort of finances they made need to compete with City around) but how detrimental would not qualifying for the CL be for them? Its a much more detrimental situation to be in witht he owners not persoanlly financially tied into the club then one where the owner is and less suspceptible to walk away just like that, also Chelsea are a year away from breaking even....

Has he a history of it? Debateable. Also he did lose control over transfers but still wanted to soldier on for the club he loved.... SBR was 10 times the manager Keegan was, antoher reason why i dont understadn the messiah like status afforded to Keegan. Bollox, if sbr was 10x the manager Keegan was, how come he had a lower win %,....see my sig,... Ignore him man. Over his career of course SBR was a better manager than Keegan that can't be denied, but for us it was of course Keegan. Fucking hell, you think I'm arguing who's got the best stats for our club? Im not, the bit in bold is exactly what im arguing, if i got to choose which manager id want again, id go for SBR 10 time out of 10, becasue overall he's been the better manager, and i want the best managers at this club not the one who;s had his lucky spell here. Its like saying you'd prefer to have Solano over Beckham. (Cue - Beckham is overated...) it makes no logical sense.