manorpark

That is fantastic, TRULY fantastic, an absolutely perfect combination of two "failed" businesses. I'll say it again, It is absolutely P E R F E C T . . . both of them are not quite out of business yet, but it can't be long !! I reckon Teesside Airport will GO first. Two classic business failures !!!!!

I still keep reading stuff like that! I know footballers are (said to be) not very bright, but I actually do think that a reasonable percentage of them are bright enough to be able to see 'beyond the next pay packet' and are able to work out that in the near future there isn't going to be anywhere better to be than at Newcastle United - no matter what happens at the end of this season.

ALL objectives are words, that is how they are set and explained. Achieving objectives (not what is being talked about here for obvious reasons) takes time. As with any new business, 'ballpark expenditure' is a somewhat flexible thing, rarely ever remotely adhered to, and in this case those figures were only given to satisfy some very particular ears!

I think they have been quite clearly explained by the new owners. Apart from the fact that it is also quite obvious, even if they hadn't already explained them.

It is EXACTLY like those !!! I understand that our new owners intend to operate less frantically at first, at least partially because of the much stronger FFP rules that are now in place. But in every other way - principally in the 'aims and objectives' of our new owners - it is exactly the same as Chelsea, Man City and PSG.

NEWCASTLE SPORTING CLUB - https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/inside-meeting-launched-newcastles-bid-13762268

It was absolutely no different - no less intense - for ANY generation of Newcastle United supporters who experienced that era, and the shortly afterward Sir Bobby Robson era. No difference at all.

Yes indeed . . .

Sorry, I make my own judgements in life. Other peoples opinions (whether 'global' or not) are indeed of interest to me, but they rarely play a major part in how I make my own judgements.

As we experienced during the long takeover process, it is possible to remove "possibility" from the equation based on a knowledge and understanding of the calibre of those involved. It is exactly the same here, indeed it is actually about those 'exact same' people !!!

Never done that in my life, not going to start now. Sorry!

We will, of course, be having a huge say in what happens in our game, in our league. Not all powerful forces in the world are (what you describe as) "cunts". It is not automatic.

The way you phrase things reveals how you must think. The use of the phrase "gloss over" is simply not relevant to, or descriptive of, the actual facts of the situation you are meant to be describing. Where do you get these thoughts (and phrases) from? I shouldn't react to it !!!!!

We will NEVER be one of the 'cunts' - Triffic !!!! Other than 'in your head' I suppose, because you must want us to be cunts. "Cunts" are people who are a certain type, and behave in a certain way. I do not ever see Staveley/Reubens/PIF ever wanting to be be "Cunts" . . . it isn't automatic you know. Our club will not, can not, be "cunts", but we will PUNCTURE the egos of a lot of "cunts".

It will not change immediately, but the most delightful thing about our takeover is that WE will change that around completely, in due course. YES, the sheer certainty of that happening (and it being US that do it) is the best thing about it !!!! HAPPY DAYS . . .

Not sure about 'matching' Spurs and Arsenal, we were well ahead of them, and by now we would/should have been a very long way ahead of them . . .

I don't know what they will do exactly, perhaps what you say or perhaps something else, but I know that Staveley/Reubens/PIF did not buy us to finish second, or anywhere in amongst the dross. So they will do something to defeat this. And I personally cannot W A I T to see what it is !!!!!!!

In a very successful and prosperous City Centre, such as ours, any "distance views" of anything in that City Centre are unlikely to last for long. Due to the lack of development of the temporary car park in front of St James' Metro Station, we have actually had these views (of SJP) for a lot of years. One way or the other that 'gap site' will be built on sooner or later. Already there are tall new buildings next to the Strawberry Pub, and currently there are even more tall new buildings being constucted 'around' the Strawberry as the Headquarters of Home Group Ltd. https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/strawberry-place-home-group-headquarters-and-vita-student-accommodation-newcastle-various-u-c.981402/post-176383855 Gap Sites in City Centre locations are always just temporary, no matter how much some of us may want some of them to remain.

Which is why those very enthusiatic part-owners of NUFC will not do that.

IF the Reubens choose to buy the land under discussion, above St James' Park Metro Station, NOW - then it will be for stadium expansion purposes only.

Leazes Terrace is FANTASTIC, in my opinion. Not sure where they could move it to but if anyone could afford to do it our new owners could. However, it would never get planning approval.

Next to Newcastle Racecourse in Gosforth Park has been SO often mentioned in the past !! NO - let's stay in the City Centre.

An empty hill with the Angel of the North Sculpture stuck at the top of it is about as 'inappropriate' an idea for the City Centre that it is possible to imagine !!! Space is too expensive, too much in demand in the City Centre. It works fantastically well out in a country area next to the A1, it is actually great there to welcome people to (the start of) 'home' if you've been Down South.

In 2010 I wrote a detailed article about the 1972 proposals, that you are describing, over on the Newcastle Forum of Skyscraper City . . . https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/newcastle-as-it-might-have-been.1009531/post-53665235

I don't agree with any of that, none of it at all.