Ericz

Mr. NE5 is avoiding my questions. Can I seek Mr. NE5 to explain himself since he appears to be the member in question? In my humble opinion, he appears to be selecting those questions which he is able to answer and which put him in a more favourable position than questions which is unfavourable to his stand. Or maybe I could be wrong and he merely overlooked my questions accidentally. In that case, I sincerely apologise and hope that he will be able to provide me with the answers to the respective questions. More importantly, "In any case, the issue is done and dusted. The old board is gone and what remains is the new board. What matters now is the new board. You can choose to reminiscence and live in the past if you want to. Tell me, by you valiantly defending the previous board like that and maligning the new board, are you helping the current Newcastle United situation? Are you trying to dis-harmonise the support for the new board? or are you intentionally creating more controversies for the new board and in turn Newcastle United? What is your motive? Does buying the season ticket necessarily relates to supporting the club? And who knows whether have you genuinely bought them. Everybody can say he/she have renewed their tickets. Explain your motives for valiantly defending the previous board and maligning the current newly takeover board, in turn attempting to dis-harmonise confidence in the current board and at the expense of the club itself."

Yes, Newcastle United past 3 - 5 seasons (the aforementioned achievements) were simply not good enough. I cannot foretell whether Mike Ashley will do better. Only time will tell the truth. However, if the old board is inefficient and ineffective, out they go. The same philosophy works for me in student council, student committee, corporate work, legal work and almost anywhere. It is practical but it is the best way to sort things out and I did provide a reasonable time period. I hope I answered your question and you are satisfied with my answer, Mr. UV.

For your information Mr. UV, my post did also mention that, "And overall, is the successes/progressions on par value with the other clubs?" I hope you did manage to read my entire post and that statement in particular. I did intentionally worded it in such manner for your infomation. Assuming that you do manage to take into account that statement, if you want to compare ourselves to the likes of Middleborough, Sunderland... of course the successes/progressions is on par value with those clubs or even of greater value. However, if you regard us as comparable to Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool... what do you say? Do I need to answer that for you? Where do you think our club should be comparable to? Also, let us not forget that the club was previously a Champions League club, it was one of the more feared club in the English Premier League but for the past few seasons, our performance in the table had been dwindling. Granted, it may be the old board that brought us there however they have outlived their efficiency and effectiveness and can no longer keep the club competitive. It would be more respectful and desirable if they decide to change the board themselves to rejuvenate the club but they didn't. It's not our fault that to this stage, they were being indirectly forced out. I think we already gave them enough face and likewise, their achievements are already appropriately placed in the record books and trophy room. I seriously hope that you don't think of us as Middleborough, Sunderland counterparts etc. We can only be the best if we compare with the best, not with some second raters. Aiming to oust second raters, we will still be second raters. We must have the hunger and ambition to be at the top with whatever means which is legally available.

NE5, what successes/progressions has the previous board brought in the past 3 - 5 years? And overall, is the successes/progressions on par value with the other clubs? Tottenham appointed Martin Jol and eventually Juan de Ramos, Liverpool appointed Raffael Benitez, Chelsea appointed Jose Mourinho... who did the previous board appoint? *say their names out loudly* I don't care how you guys want to argue it out but if there is no decent end-result after a certain period of time, say 3 - 5 years, then the previous board is no longer efficient and effective. What the previous board have done/achieved previously is in the past. There is no room for sentimental values. Sentimental values are left in the trophy room and that is all. They might have run out of ideas, they might have fail to adapt to today's world, sticking with their old methods of doing things, they might not have go on to upgrade their knowledge and themselves. Either way, it doesn't matter anymore. If something is inefficient and ineffective, it's time for a change. That is how the world goes today and how business goes today. We change and upgrade anything that is inefficient and ineffective. The same applies to players, manager and the board. As for the new board, if there's no successes/progressions over the next 3 - 5 years. I will say the same things too. In any case, the issue is done and dusted. The old board is gone and what remains is the new board. What matters now is the new board. You can choose to reminiscence and live in the past if you want to. Tell me, by you valiantly defending the previous board like that and maligning the new board, are you helping the current Newcastle United situation? Are you trying to dis-harmonise the support for the new board? or are you intentionally creating more controversies for the new board and in turn Newcastle United? What is your motive? Does buying the season ticket necessarily relates to supporting the club? And who knows whether have you genuinely bought them. Everybody can say he/she have renewed their tickets. Explain your motives for valiantly defending the previous board and maligning the current newly takeover board, in turn attempting to dis-harmonise confidence in the current board and at the expense of the club itself.

Mmmmmm... how about we give the new board some time? It's pretty easy to forget that the new board just took over for not even a year

Thank you for answering my queries, NE5. Your posts do provide me some food for thoughts. All I can say is, having been and stayed in Australia, United States, Singapore and United Kingdom (Manchester), I have rarely seen a Sunderland Supporter except in United Kingdom. Even in United Kingdom, Manchester itself, it was a rare sight based on conversations with friends and observing surrounding people and their conversations. On the contrary, I have seen many Tottenham supporters, some Aston Villa supporters since the 1990s. I am not saying NE5 is wrong but could it be a misconception because he has friends who happens to be Sunderland supporters or who happens to live in the Sunderland area? Because, internationally, there really doesn't seem to be a lot of Sunderland supporters compared to Tottenham and Aston Villa supporters. Surely, Sunderland does have the potential to become a big club if they have sustained successes, however, the same goes with all other clubs I feel. It is a global trend these days that there are this bunch/group of people who will take every opportunity to 'jump ship' to support a winning club. As for the old board, they are not definitely not total failure. Everything has its pros or cons. It is rare to find total cons with a group or with an individual. They have virtues which are good too, however, people on this board may just be looking at the overall result, never mind the process the old board has brought us through. It is a habit for people these days to be only concerned with results and not the process. As much as I do like scrutinizing the process, the end-result is ultimately what matters. Sentiments do not have much value in today's world for most people contrary to the past I feel. Again, this is a global trend. I hope you (NE5) are not offended by my post. Like I have previously mentioned, I am not saying that you are wrong. I do admit that there might be other matters that I do not have as much or adequate knowledge on compared to yourself, and that is exactly why it is definitely good to learn through a positive discussion. By any chance, are you referring to 'support' as chairman/financial/backing the manager kind of support?

The Mackems have a bigger and better support than Villa and Spuds? I'm genuinely a bit lost. Are you being sarcastic or for real? Mmmmm how so do they have a bigger and better support?

Another alternative perspective for Mike Ashley: - The amount are fictitious. Ronaldinho: £30 million Transfer Fee + £200,000 per week Salary = Might return to his best in the future A young potential talent: £1 million Transfer Fee + £4,000 per week Salary = Might be one of the best in the future The former definitely has a higher stake compared to the latter. With one Ronaldinho, it is like putting all the eggs in one basket. Isn't the world into diversification these days? Mike Ashley seems to be into that judging by his investments/shareholdings in various businesses. It's spreading out the risks/opportunities. Ronaldinho isn't a huge pull for me to be honest. I asked some of my friends (both males and females). The males don't find him a huge icon (not these days). The females don't find him attractive at all. Football is important but looks is equally important. Assuming Ronaldinho is on a salary of £200,000 per week for 3 years, that is equivalent to approximately £10.6 million annually. If he does well, his stocks will of course fly but if he performs badly in the 1st season, his stocks will fall in the 2nd and 3rd season, not to mention, he will command a much lesser transfer fee or no one will come in for him due to his high transfer fees and high wage demands. That might become a liability. Tough call. Note: It would be good if we are able to have a record of his shirt sales during ( a ) When he is at his peak of his career ( b ) His shirt sales for the past 6 months As for Manchester City Supporters, put it this way, Ronaldinho or no Ronaldinho, majority of the supporters who purchase imitation shirts will still carry on purchasing imitation shirts of his (These days, imitations look exactly like the real thing, credit to China?). Supporters who purchase genuine shirts will still carry on purchasing genuine shirts (No extra profits made). Of course, new/existing supporters may be attracted to purchase a Ronaldinho shirt (but how many are there? Enough to make up £10.6 million a year together with advertisements etc?). Need more precedents I think. As for other commercial exploitations on the Ronaldinho's brand name (i.e. advertisements, box sales etc), I am fairly certain a large amount of them have been sold out for the next season. So would that mean money-making potential for next season will be curtailed? Assuming he does not do so good, average for the 1st season, would commercial partners still be willing to pay high amount for the Ronaldinho's brand name in Ronaldinho's 2nd and 3rd season? Again, tough call. Of course, if he succeeds, the rewards are fantastic. It's pretty much the same with a bright young potential/talent succeeding, however, the chances can be said to be lower individually but there are more 'baskets' (meh, we definitely need an actuary to formulate a formula and calculate the probabilities based on statistics.). The stakes won't be that high as well. A big club can undercut/resort to economic duress on youngsters and their minor parent clubs but against a big player and a big club, is economic duress possible? mmm...

Remember, Football is a business today. Mike Ashley earns the money through his successes and he probably feels that the risks are not worth-taking through his usual way of business analysis and experiences. Also, there may not be people around willing and able to convince him otherwise (Maybe they don't know how to or don't wish to offend him or even both.) As much as I do see your viewpoints, however, as a cautious person myself, I feel uncomfortable spending a large fortune on Ronaldinho who is unable to guarantee returns. As for Patrick Viera, it really depends on the price and the information gathered. Of course, I'm not saying you are wrong but if I am paying something out, I expects something back eventually and that might be what Mike Ashley is thinking. Arsenal's business model looks to be pretty sound as the club is running on its own and the shareholders are reaping dividends annually and their annual share prices are going up. From a business point of view, that is where I want to be. A secured investment that is able to reap high dividends (higher than annual inflation rate or/and pounds annual devaluation) at low-risk. Football is a sport, a passion for some but a man still has to feed himself somehow and money is never enough. (Just a realistic point of view) It is easy for all of us to say buy this player, buy that player.. but where it really comes to our own money and the amount is significant, it really is another story altogether. PS: I'm just trying to guess how the Ashley man might think or feel about the whole situation (or rather put myself in his shoes). I may be wrong.

US and UK murdered many people without trial too, right? What is trial? Who is to say who is fair or not fair? Is a trial necessarily going to be fair? Are the laws of US and UK better than Thailand's? Which Government of the day is completely not corrupted? I've said it once and I shall repeat again, law is not about morality (Morality is subjective... whose morality shall we based it on?). Law is about following rules... black and white. For those grey areas, it is opportunities to be taken advantage of, with possible risks of course. Whoever is not found guilty is not considered as breaking the law. Who cares about newspaper? They are just views of another person. Correct or wrong, with agenda or not, is very very hard to tell. Every government has its black sheeps, is more or less corrupted. It's only to what degree and how much is being surfaced hahahaha What is important is they are able to bring the country forward at the same time. During Thaksin's reign, Thailand has indeed do better than they do now. As I am a utilitarian, I think looking from that point of view, Thaksin had done well in his reign. However, I don't think we are interested to go into politics or information about Thaksin's reign on this forum. The message is he is an astute businessman and to pay a huge price for signing Ronaldinho, he must have done his calculations. And like what the member before me have mentioned, in the field of business, he has a near 100% record. Time will tell. On another note, I do not mind if we take calculated risks. Taking pure risks without any calculations in the world today is relying merely on luck and it is not wise in today's world.

Thaksin is a shrewd businessman. I am sure he knows what he is doing. Right or wrong, only time will tell. At the moment, all I can say is he must have done some maths. On the other hand, it can also be down to management style and business philosophy. Yellow-skins are willing to take more risks than Europeans in general. Mike Ashley tends to be more cautious in his approach in managing the club. Again, right or wrong, only time will tell. As for Ronaldinho, whilst he is a good player in the past, currently, he may not be the best and will he return to the best is a big question mark? His shirts are certainly not the best seller too. David Beckam in the past commanded a lot more shirt sales and advertising opportunities and that is why Real Madrid was smart to sign him. Also there are other questions to be asked in Ronaldinho's situation... i.e. How many clubs are willing and able to pay his transfer fees and wage demands? Manchester City are willing to because they have an agenda behind. (What calculations they are making? I'm not intelligent enough to tell the whole story to be honest. I don't think it's that simple.) Personally, I would rather Newcastle United steer clear of Ronaldinho (but partly because I'm not a very big risk taker). I still lament the fact that we missed out on Lassana Diarra. With the amount of money splashed out for Ronaldinho, we can perhaps do more with new and young upcoming players who have unfulfilled potential. Money makes the world goes round and I strongly believe in that. It's the same with soccer today. Soccer is run as a business now. (Edited my post - PS: I'm a yellow-skin. It's a fact. I don't think there's anything racist in it. (Or maybe I should use the term 'Oriental in descend'? - Don't wish to do double-posting in such a short period of time.)

I still lament the fact that we missed out on Lassana Diarra. I really think he's class and his age is right too. -sigh- As for Modric, I have not watch him play often to be convinced.

Most people will dislike this comparison but I feel Didier Drogba can/will fill up Alan Shearer's role pretty well. I think he's easily one of the best striker in the world right now. (Of course, it's probably unrealistic as I cannot imagine Didier Drogba coming to and playing for Newcastle. However, I really think he deserves a very high wage compared to many/all of our high wage earners today.) As for a speedy partner, Obafemi Martins is definitely one fast player.

I will have commit the same mistake too. The truth is Alan Smith is actually quite prolific for Leeds at a young age with Mark Viduka as his partner then, never mind the quality of his goals. However, he seems to have lost his gloss over the years. Then again, in recent years, England players are often over-rated. That partially led England to its demise I feel.

I wonder will Martin Petrov be leaving Manchester City and whether can we tempt him to Newcastle? I love seeing him play for Manchester City and I hope that we may be able to take advantage of their plight in some ways.

In all honesty, my friends and myself all thinks that Graeme Souness is one of the worst managers in Football. Did he not bring Liverpool and subsequent clubs he managed down? As for Rangers (or was it Celtic?), who would not succeed with managing those teams in the Scottish League? I was devastated when he was announced as our manager a few years back. It just reeked of impending doom. As for our club being stable... mmmm I think that we changed managers too frequently, hence stability was at an issue in the past. Currently, it is really too short a period to judge. I like how Ashley and Mort handled club matters though. To be fair, we are a big club with a big stadium and the fans certainly deserves better. However, we are in decline for a while and we all need a bit of patience for the results to come to fruition. It takes a while judging at the cautious manner in which cash is going to be spent from now on. Bottom line - We were a unstable club in the past. Now, we have the foundations right for a stable club but it is too short a period to judge.

Football is a business and it should be run like one. Otherwise, it will not have survived. <<--- Face the reality, it is how the world functions today To be honest, the fans are equally blamable for the price hike in ticket prices. There's still demand for the tickets even though the prices have went up and where demand outstrips or is somewhat in equilibrium to supply even when prices are raised, why should the club not maximize their profits? I might sound to be harsh on a sport but think about it, it all make sense in this world. We can say/fantasize what we think the situation/the world should be, but what ultimately matters is what the world is... that's a fact and that's reality. Living in self-delusion and fantasy is bad. Kudos to Spurs and United. They are the ones we should mimic and build upon - sound business model.

If it is for an unconditional £70M, 4 years installment.... then NO. Factored in the annual inflation rate + the annual profitability from marketing, it would not be an astute business move. Unless ( 1 ) The money is raised + less years of installment or preferably no installment ( 2 ) Ronaldo wishes to go Every player has its price, if the price is met, Ronaldo can go. Nani is obviously waiting in the wings.

Ashley. Personally, I prefer a business and profit-making approach which will sustain the club in the long run. Undeniably, football is after all a business now. It is too early to judge Ashley's reign. I will say give it 2 to 4 more seasons.

This is certainly a good post. Nothing speaks better than statistics. To branch off James' wonderful data and narrow it down to English clubs only: 1 Chelsea 21277 6 Man Utd 14125 8 Liverpool 13677 9 Arsenal 13552 16 Tottenham Hotspur 8681 17 Aston Villa 8568 19 Man City 8504 21 Portsmouth 7797 50 Newcastle 4203 It looks like we have quite a bit to do there.

That's not true. Article 39 EC has always been subjected to debates/controversies in the European Court of Justice. It is not as straightforward as laymen think. Like I said before, as long as a reason is found, or a better way of phrasing it is found, it can be done. It's really all down to playing with words and politics. As for the member states, member states would be dumb to leave EU as EU offers alot economically. That is the primary reason why members states joined EU in the first place. It has also been proven statistically that members states in EU outperform members states not in EU by quite a wide margin. Also, member states does not need to follow every single thing EU states. There's different types of legislation (I kinda forgotten my EU law) but basically only treaties need to be followed not the rest. For the rest, they can enforce it in a way which is different from other member states. Ultimately, it is really down to playing with words and political will. That is the reality of the world.

Contrary to all, I will attempt to look at things from another perspective. What the above comments are stating are obviously looking from the employers' point of view, however, try looking at it from the employees' point of view. Living in UK these days is not an easy thing... the annual inflation rate and living costs in UK is so high. The employee has got to take care of himself too. Think about his future, about his career etc... I don't think anybody should deny him a good chance. His employer will not guarantee him a future, his employer does not guarantee him a high enough salary as compared to his peers. Ultimately, the employee is still responsible for himself. While we need to bear in mind gratefulness to his employer for glooming him to what he is today (honestly, gratefulness rarely exists in society nowadays), if the employee is not paid adequate salary, he has a right to move on for the sake of his career/future. The only thing the employer can hope for is, is an adequate compensation/transfer fee. Such is the reality of the world that everything is merely a transaction or perhaps an investment with risk. The employers must have a motive for investing in him at a young age and him joining them must have his own motive too.

The Law is just a tool to maintain law and order, the same goes with EU Law to be honest. If you refer to the European Convention of Human Rights, Rome Treaty, Nice Treaty or any primary or secondary legislation, you will realise alot of so called 'law' are subjective and can be readily open to debate. At the end of the day, Law can be changed easily. It's all politics to be honest. What is the law? It's just words that governs people's life. Law is never about moral values, justice. It's about following the rules, black and white, period. <<<< this is coming from a law student. Personally, despite contravening the current EU policy, I would not be surprised if the whole idea is approved by EU. They just have to reason it out or find a way to better phrase the situation. It's not difficult. It's just playing around with words.

Every player has its price. i.e. If Real Madrid offers 100 million pounds, it would be silly for Manchester United not to offload Ronaldo.

If England wishes to prove their pedigree, they will have to win this game. A draw isn't a good enough result. USA will be happy with a draw though. England 2 - 0 USA