Ashley has failed Newcastle United.

[fredbob]

Clever peice of work that, but again, taken completely out of context. The first quote is specifically relevant to why we werent in a good position to appoint a new maager of decent quality because we had nothing to offer which made our club an appealing club having sacked the previous legendary manager in extremely poor circumstances.

 

The second quote is a more generaly view which underlines the reasons why the board didnt do a fanstastic job overall, becasue at key times the board made terrible decisions which set the club back more than it should of. This second quote is only minimally linked to SBR- the topic we are discussing, whereas the first quote is directly linked to the fallout after SBR was sacked.

 

 

Just like to point out that it was you who questioned me as to whther i wanted to keep SBR and i said yes, because i thoughtand always thought that had we kept SBR we would be in a much better situation than we are now no the argument is turning to the manner in which he was sacked which wasnt my main point.

 

We both agree that the manner of the sacking was wrong, yes? I beleive the manner of the sacking set the club back becasue it made the job extremely unnattractive because of the circumstances and is the key reason as to why we are in the situation we are in now. You dont think that the club was set back by these decsision.

 

I think that SBR should of been given a chance to turn things around because he was a great manager who done amazing things for us, he was kicked out at the first sign of "trouble". You dont becasue he would of stayed for longer than he should of and he ended up getting cancer so that would of been a hinderence for the club.

 

What more is there to this debate?

 

Try this then

 

Only Spurs and City have gone foreign, and they both picked up managers who were either out of work and familiar with the premiership, or looking to work in the Premiership and biding their time for a job to come up.

 

It's not like there's a whole host of top foreign managers queing up.

 

There are a fair few who have said they want to come to the premierhship, its only the Liverpool job which looks like it will be availbale and appealing to big managers, the next one from that is ours,

 

Houllier

Lippi

Van Gaal

Scolari

Mourihno (said he wants to come back sooner or later)

Hitzfeld

Capello

 

They are all managers in recent times who have said they would like to come to the premiership, not saying that they would come now but just saying the names are out there.

 

p.s Im aware of some of the peoples circumstances, just reiterating that its an appealing league which top class managers want to come to.

 

The fact is is that managers want to manage in this league, its become an ambtions for a lot of managers becuase of the hype and money around the premiership nowadays.

 

If you ask me if it were possilble for a top class foriegn manager to be appointed for nufc, despite todays performance id still say yes because the oppurtunity to manage one fo the big big clubs is becoming rarer and rarer so its a case of the next best thing. Which without a shadow of a doubt is us.

 

Are you now going to argue that we were a more attractive proposition to a top manager as a club that just finished 14th, 7th, 14th who'd had 3 managers in as many years, the last of which lasted half a season, than one which had just finished 4th, 3rd, 5th simply because of the "manner" in which we sacked the previous well respected manager? How is the "manner" in which we got rid of Allardyce any better?

 

You are the one who keeps bringing up the manner of the sacking, I only mention it because you seem to place such an emphasis on it - "I beleive the manner of the sacking set the club back becasue it made the job extremely unnattractive". I don't have a problem with it, and in fact I think (and thought at the time) we should have replaced him in the Summer. I realised that it would have been a very brave and unpopular decision at the time though and replacing him at the end of the season (as was the plan) was a decent compromise which would have allowed us to openly look for a new manager throughout the season (as it was out in the open that Robson was going to be retired from the job).

 

 

Wow, that is a lot of effort for a pretty poor post again, completely missing the point...again. Do we have something better to offer a new manager now? Well yes we do, we have the new set up of Spurs and the potential finances of Chelsea so again, comparing nufc 2008 with nufc 2004 is massively skewed.

 

If we had the finaces or the set up to offer a new manager the what we can do now, then, then i would have to agree it would of been a more accpetable decision.

 

I still dont understand the footballing justifications of sacking a manager who's just finished 5th.

 

 

To me the plot reads legendary manager finisihed 4th , 3rd, 5th having staved off relegation 5 years previously gets sacked, he has been humiliated and undermined many times, the club doesnt have a fantastic record with longevity and managers, does a top class manager (which we needed) want to come here?

 

or Jan 2008

 

New board, clean slate, potentially big finances and a new set up who have sacked the manager not appointed by them in questionable circumstances?

 

Are you still saying im wrong to think that we should of stuck with SBR for at least antoher years to see what may of occured or are you that certain that we would of been releagated?

 

You seem more intent on finding a contradiction from me than proving your point.

[NE5]

So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious.

 

Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992.

 

surprised you even ask this Dave, when a quick IP check will show you that I live nearer to where you do than Tyneside just now !!

 

 

 

[fredbob]

So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious.

 

Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992.

 

surprised you even ask this Dave, when a quick IP check will show you that I live nearer to where you do than Tyneside just now !!

 

 

 

 

So is that a yes or a no? Because i cant see anything in your answer which suggests you do or dont have a link to the old board and Shepherd.

 

Still not answering the question. It would be easier if you just lied.

[NE5]

So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious.

 

Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992.

 

surprised you even ask this Dave, when a quick IP check will show you that I live nearer to where you do than Tyneside just now !!

 

 

 

 

So is that a yes or a no? Because i cant see anything in your answer which suggests you do or dont have a link to the old board and Shepherd.

 

Still not answering the question. It would be easier if you just lied.

 

fredbob, its very amusing that you think anyone who doesn't slate the old board for saving the club from bankruptcy, the old 3rd division and qualified us for europe more than everyone bar 4 teams, only does so because they "know them personally".

 

I'm not going to say what you want to hear, sorry, but I know you won't believe me anyway, so there is no point is there 

 

BTW, I'm not a lawyer or a politician, and they always tell the truth. 

[Syrette]

STILL not answering the world's simplest question. Looks like a definite "yes" to me.

[ChezGiven]

When are the people saying we were going bankrupt going to address the statistics in the links that UV provided?

[NE5]

STILL not answering the world's simplest question. Looks like a definite "yes" to me.

 

oh dear.

 

I used to know someone at the club but I've never met Fred in my life.

 

 

 

[NE5]

When are the people saying we were going bankrupt going to address the statistics in the links that UV provided?

 

a tremendous question, possibly the easiest in the world 

[Syrette]

STILL not answering the world's simplest question. Looks like a definite "yes" to me.

 

oh dear.

 

I used to know someone at the club but I've never met Fred in my life.

 

 

 

Ah. Got it.

 

http://www.nufcmismanagement.info/img/doug.jpg

 

 

[NE5]

STILL not answering the world's simplest question. Looks like a definite "yes" to me.

 

oh dear.

 

I used to know someone at the club but I've never met Fred in my life.

 

 

 

Ah. Got it.

 

http://www.nufcmismanagement.info/img/doug.jpg

 

 

 

no shit sherlock 

 

 

[fredbob]

I take it you 2 know each others identities?

[fredbob]

So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious.

 

Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992.

 

surprised you even ask this Dave, when a quick IP check will show you that I live nearer to where you do than Tyneside just now !!

 

 

 

 

So is that a yes or a no? Because i cant see anything in your answer which suggests you do or dont have a link to the old board and Shepherd.

 

Still not answering the question. It would be easier if you just lied.

 

fredbob, its very amusing that you think anyone who doesn't slate the old board for saving the club from bankruptcy, the old 3rd division and qualified us for europe more than everyone bar 4 teams, only does so because they "know them personally".

 

I'm not going to say what you want to hear, sorry, but I know you won't believe me anyway, so there is no point is there 

 

BTW, I'm not a lawyer or a politician, and they always tell the truth. 

 

Honestly speaking, if you told me that you genuinely had no link to the board or Freddy Shepherd then id believe you,i'd of have no choice but to believe you. However the fact that you cant and wont answer a simple question directly suggests that theres more to it.

 

Scared that you may lose credibility if theres an obvious bias in your history?

 

Like i said, it would of been easier to lie.

[NE5]

I take it you 2 know each others identities?

 

you mean he's fred and I'm bob ?

 

 

[Dokko]

I'd hate to see what NE5 has seen as a toon fan, i really would. I doubt i'd be a football fan right now, i think i would have given up.

 

No wonder he rates the FS reign, in comparison it was living a life of luxury, however, it doesn't mean that he got a lot of things wrong in his time, for me he wasted some great chances to move the club even further forward, but in the end we stayed the same, only racking up a mountain of debts.

 

NE5 is right though, the current regime has a lot to do to achieve what he did. CL football again, that's going to be mighty tough, even more so after a shaky start.

 

 

 

 

[NE5]

So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious.

 

Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992.

 

surprised you even ask this Dave, when a quick IP check will show you that I live nearer to where you do than Tyneside just now !!

 

 

 

 

So is that a yes or a no? Because i cant see anything in your answer which suggests you do or dont have a link to the old board and Shepherd.

 

Still not answering the question. It would be easier if you just lied.

 

fredbob, its very amusing that you think anyone who doesn't slate the old board for saving the club from bankruptcy, the old 3rd division and qualified us for europe more than everyone bar 4 teams, only does so because they "know them personally".

 

I'm not going to say what you want to hear, sorry, but I know you won't believe me anyway, so there is no point is there 

 

BTW, I'm not a lawyer or a politician, and they always tell the truth. 

 

Honestly speaking, if you told me that you genuinely had no link to the board or Freddy Shepherd then id believe you,i'd of have no choice but to believe you. However the fact that you cant and wont answer a simple question directly suggests that theres more to it.

 

Scared that you may lose credibility if theres an obvious bias in your history?

 

Like i said, it would of been easier to lie.

 

As has been pointed out, I can back up my comments and "opinions" with stone cold facts so the whole question is irrelevant.

 

 

[fredbob]

So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious.

 

Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992.

 

surprised you even ask this Dave, when a quick IP check will show you that I live nearer to where you do than Tyneside just now !!

 

 

 

 

So is that a yes or a no? Because i cant see anything in your answer which suggests you do or dont have a link to the old board and Shepherd.

 

Still not answering the question. It would be easier if you just lied.

 

fredbob, its very amusing that you think anyone who doesn't slate the old board for saving the club from bankruptcy, the old 3rd division and qualified us for europe more than everyone bar 4 teams, only does so because they "know them personally".

 

I'm not going to say what you want to hear, sorry, but I know you won't believe me anyway, so there is no point is there 

 

BTW, I'm not a lawyer or a politician, and they always tell the truth. 

 

Honestly speaking, if you told me that you genuinely had no link to the board or Freddy Shepherd then id believe you,i'd of have no choice but to believe you. However the fact that you cant and wont answer a simple question directly suggests that theres more to it.

 

Scared that you may lose credibility if theres an obvious bias in your history?

 

Like i said, it would of been easier to lie.

 

As has been pointed out, I can back up my comments and "opinions" with stone cold facts so the whole question is irrelevant.

 

 

 

Still no direct answer. Fair enough. Ill leave you to it.

 

The plot thickens.

[Dave]

So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious.

 

Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992.

 

surprised you even ask this Dave, when a quick IP check will show you that I live nearer to where you do than Tyneside just now !!

 

 

 

 

Erm...

[Thespence]

Anyone care to some up where we are at with this thread?

 

And what questions are we/you waiting to be answered & by who

[Liam Liam Liam O]

So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious.

 

Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992.

 

surprised you even ask this Dave, when a quick IP check will show you that I live nearer to where you do than Tyneside just now !!

 

 

 

 

Erm...

 

I don't think that is a yes or a no

[madras]

Anyone care to some up where we are at with this thread?

 

And what questions are we/you waiting to be answered & by who

dunno. i think when it reaches 50 pages it should be given it's own forum.

[TRon]

As long as the chairman learns from his mistakes, something which Shepherd never learned to do, I'll be very happy.

 

At the moment, *the only mistake hes made is not sacking Big Sam sooner and bringing Keegan in before the opening of the January transfer window.

 

The significant mistake, amidst all the transfer strategy cautiousness delivered by Mort & Ashley which has already been cited, which may well bring about our relegation.

 

That mistake is the one that counts the most. That one month will go down as a 'not to do' blueprint for other clubs to go by. If we survive the drop, and if Keegan isn't sufficiently backed - surely promises must've have been made when considering the manner in which Keegan originally left - in the Summer as far as i'm concerned Ashley can bring in the scaffolders have them remove his "...... Direct" advertising and sell-up & bugger off, sooner rather than later that is.

 

*Yet some many people still can't see the point. I guess 'not being Freddy Shepherd' is one factor, along with all the other stuff ie. Ashley's "i stand as the leader of Toon Army - i bleed as they do" warcry in the press and by getting down & dirty in the terraces and generally coming across as your everyday grassroots supporter.... and the debt reduction issue is also a relevant point, which weighs in Ashley & Mort's favour at the minute.

 

This idea that because we couldn't buy in the January transfer window, we have endangered the club's Premier future sounds damning, but when you look at the actual circumstances it was perfectly understandable. The money wasn't going to be released to Allardyce because we didn't want to buy any more Smiths, Bartons or Nolans etc. He was sacked for abysmal results during an easy early fixture list (KK's now suffering the consequences). Keegan couldn't get in the players he wanted in a very short space of time, and here we are.

 

What could we have done differently? Kept Allardyce which would have meant starting again in the summer. Is that the argument?

 

not making excuse after excuse for not recognising a serous situation and putting the club in danger of relegation would be a start.

 

Quite amazing the hypocrisy on here. People slating Shepherd for not splashing cash every time we lose, then complaining about debts and saying Ashley did right not to waste money on a team in relegation trouble.

Then we have the sacking of a manager at a "bad time", where the last regime was absolutely slaughtered for it.

 

It would really appear that being a fat bastard who eats all the pies is the ultimate crime, and  you can get away with anything else.

 

 

 

So your objections are

 

1) That Allardyce was sacked at a bad time, meaning you must believe that appointing Keegan was a mistake, seeing as Allardyce should still be boss in your own words. In which case:

 

2) Allardyce should have been given serious money to spend in January, regardless of the fact he wasted £18m on Smith, Enrique and Barton?

 

This is where you're reasoning seems to be leading. Fair enough but your hypocrisy is astounding as you were more than happy enough at the time when Keegan was appointed. Once again people making arguments armed with shitloads of hindsight.

 

Hindsight in what exactly ?

I have ALWAYS said there is no such thing as a "bad time" to boot out a manager who has to go, nor is there any such thing as a "bad time" to appoint a new one if he's the right man. Look through my posts if you don't believe me. This is absolutely proven by the fact that I disagreed with loads of people who constantly moaned on about the fat bastard getting his timing wrong, and other such bollocks, see Allardyce having all the summer to "plan", the new board having all summer to "plan" [which a huge amount of people insisted would see us in good stead this season. You tell me what has happened. So much for "timing" and "planning".

 

Yes I'm happy with Keegan. If he stays.

 

No I'm not happy with the comments coming out of Ashleys mouthpiece which seem to be saying that the club are operating a sell to buy policy, and appear to be hoping that we are going to find the best young players all over the world before anybody else and win loads of trophies in 10 years time when they all become the new Gazza. Aye, right.  mackems.gif

 

The club failed to respond to an increasingly serious predicament ie a looming relegation battle, whereby Ashleys mouthpiece said a month or so before the transfer deadline that if the club buys any players they would be players for the future.

 

If YOU can't see these points, its YOUR problem, but continue slating the fat bastard for eating all the pies while the replacements struggle to match the results, european qualifications and league positions the club gained under the old regime and continuing to delude yourself they are "better" just because you don't like the fat bastard.

 

Basically, they aren't as good as the old board until they have proved it by virtue of those european and Champions League qualifications. This is not rocket science. Neither is the fact that they have so far shown only a distinct lack of awareness of what it takes to do it.

 

 

 

Do you always talk out of both sides of your mouth? Nice party trick 

 

 

 

pretty staightforward really, its the personnel that count not the timing.

 

I thought I'd made it clear enough but obviously you aren't even bright enough to understand that.

 

Nice of you to - predictably - ignore the rest of the post, being factual information that doesn't suit your "opinion"

 

 

 

I'm just talking about this season and how to determine if Ashley and Mort have failed the real test which is the point of the thread which is why I said

 

 

This idea that because we couldn't buy in the January transfer window, we have endangered the club's Premier future sounds damning, but when you look at the actual circumstances it was perfectly understandable. The money wasn't going to be released to Allardyce because we didn't want to buy any more Smiths, Bartons or Nolans etc. He was sacked for abysmal results during an easy early fixture list (KK's now suffering the consequences). Keegan couldn't get in the players he wanted in a very short space of time, and here we are.

 

What could we have done differently? Kept Allardyce which would have meant starting again in the summer. Is that the argument?

 

so if you can answer by showing how you would prefer it to have been done we can mve forward.

[NE5]

So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious.

 

Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992.

 

surprised you even ask this Dave, when a quick IP check will show you that I live nearer to where you do than Tyneside just now !!

 

 

 

 

Erm...

 

I don't think that is a yes or a no

 

aye, you've got to say either yes or no 

[NE5]

As long as the chairman learns from his mistakes, something which Shepherd never learned to do, I'll be very happy.

 

At the moment, *the only mistake hes made is not sacking Big Sam sooner and bringing Keegan in before the opening of the January transfer window.

 

The significant mistake, amidst all the transfer strategy cautiousness delivered by Mort & Ashley which has already been cited, which may well bring about our relegation.

 

That mistake is the one that counts the most. That one month will go down as a 'not to do' blueprint for other clubs to go by. If we survive the drop, and if Keegan isn't sufficiently backed - surely promises must've have been made when considering the manner in which Keegan originally left - in the Summer as far as i'm concerned Ashley can bring in the scaffolders have them remove his "...... Direct" advertising and sell-up & bugger off, sooner rather than later that is.

 

*Yet some many people still can't see the point. I guess 'not being Freddy Shepherd' is one factor, along with all the other stuff ie. Ashley's "i stand as the leader of Toon Army - i bleed as they do" warcry in the press and by getting down & dirty in the terraces and generally coming across as your everyday grassroots supporter.... and the debt reduction issue is also a relevant point, which weighs in Ashley & Mort's favour at the minute.

 

This idea that because we couldn't buy in the January transfer window, we have endangered the club's Premier future sounds damning, but when you look at the actual circumstances it was perfectly understandable. The money wasn't going to be released to Allardyce because we didn't want to buy any more Smiths, Bartons or Nolans etc. He was sacked for abysmal results during an easy early fixture list (KK's now suffering the consequences). Keegan couldn't get in the players he wanted in a very short space of time, and here we are.

 

What could we have done differently? Kept Allardyce which would have meant starting again in the summer. Is that the argument?

 

not making excuse after excuse for not recognising a serous situation and putting the club in danger of relegation would be a start.

 

Quite amazing the hypocrisy on here. People slating Shepherd for not splashing cash every time we lose, then complaining about debts and saying Ashley did right not to waste money on a team in relegation trouble.

Then we have the sacking of a manager at a "bad time", where the last regime was absolutely slaughtered for it.

 

It would really appear that being a fat bastard who eats all the pies is the ultimate crime, and  you can get away with anything else.

 

 

 

So your objections are

 

1) That Allardyce was sacked at a bad time, meaning you must believe that appointing Keegan was a mistake, seeing as Allardyce should still be boss in your own words. In which case:

 

2) Allardyce should have been given serious money to spend in January, regardless of the fact he wasted £18m on Smith, Enrique and Barton?

 

This is where you're reasoning seems to be leading. Fair enough but your hypocrisy is astounding as you were more than happy enough at the time when Keegan was appointed. Once again people making arguments armed with shitloads of hindsight.

 

Hindsight in what exactly ?

I have ALWAYS said there is no such thing as a "bad time" to boot out a manager who has to go, nor is there any such thing as a "bad time" to appoint a new one if he's the right man. Look through my posts if you don't believe me. This is absolutely proven by the fact that I disagreed with loads of people who constantly moaned on about the fat bastard getting his timing wrong, and other such bollocks, see Allardyce having all the summer to "plan", the new board having all summer to "plan" [which a huge amount of people insisted would see us in good stead this season. You tell me what has happened. So much for "timing" and "planning".

 

Yes I'm happy with Keegan. If he stays.

 

No I'm not happy with the comments coming out of Ashleys mouthpiece which seem to be saying that the club are operating a sell to buy policy, and appear to be hoping that we are going to find the best young players all over the world before anybody else and win loads of trophies in 10 years time when they all become the new Gazza. Aye, right.  mackems.gif

 

The club failed to respond to an increasingly serious predicament ie a looming relegation battle, whereby Ashleys mouthpiece said a month or so before the transfer deadline that if the club buys any players they would be players for the future.

 

If YOU can't see these points, its YOUR problem, but continue slating the fat bastard for eating all the pies while the replacements struggle to match the results, european qualifications and league positions the club gained under the old regime and continuing to delude yourself they are "better" just because you don't like the fat bastard.

 

Basically, they aren't as good as the old board until they have proved it by virtue of those european and Champions League qualifications. This is not rocket science. Neither is the fact that they have so far shown only a distinct lack of awareness of what it takes to do it.

 

 

 

Do you always talk out of both sides of your mouth? Nice party trick   

 

 

 

pretty staightforward really, its the personnel that count not the timing.

 

I thought I'd made it clear enough but obviously you aren't even bright enough to understand that.

 

Nice of you to - predictably - ignore the rest of the post, being factual information that doesn't suit your "opinion"

 

 

 

I'm just talking about this season and how to determine if Ashley and Mort have failed the real test which is the point of the thread which is why I said

 

This idea that because we couldn't buy in the January transfer window, we have endangered the club's Premier future sounds damning, but when you look at the actual circumstances it was perfectly understandable. The money wasn't going to be released to Allardyce because we didn't want to buy any more Smiths, Bartons or Nolans etc. He was sacked for abysmal results during an easy early fixture list (KK's now suffering the consequences). Keegan couldn't get in the players he wanted in a very short space of time, and here we are.

 

What could we have done differently? Kept Allardyce which would have meant starting again in the summer. Is that the argument?

 

so if you can answer by showing how you would prefer it to have been done we can mve forward.

 

 

1. So you think a relegation struggle - our first one since before 1992 - is a success then ?

 

2. I've explained this before. I don't believe Keegan wouldn't have had a quick look, realised what we needed and just paid the money for the best player at a micky mouse club like Blackburn [for example], which even if he is only directly responsible for one point [although it would be more but I'm saying this to make a point] could make all the difference and so immediately pay his transfer fee back.

 

As I've said, the last board was slaughtered for not spending cash every time we lost a game, and for not  spending cash in the summer of 2003 when it was perfectly understandable that they had stretched themselves to get back into the top spots already. So please explain the difference, apart from ignoring the point that losing our premiership status would be an absolute disaster.

 

 

 

 

[quayside]

 

if, on the other hand, you are paying out more than you have coming in,building up more debt can be ruinous.

 

It only goes up to 2006, but how are these clubs still in operation with year on year losses?

 

Villa

Blackburn

Everton

Man City

Boro  

 

 

 

Football clubs are no different to any other business. If continuous losses are made over a number of years then the losses have to be funded by someone. That can be done in 2 ways - by borrowing or by equity finance.

 

You would need to look at the balance sheets of all of those clubs to see how they are funded. I haven't done that but the information is available if anyone can be arsed to find it. Man City and Villa were plcs before their take overs so I would guess that they were funded by external debt (as opposed to loans or equity from the owners). Blackburn is funded by the Jack Walker Trust, Boro by Steve Gibson (and consortium I think). Everton is privately owned by a number of people - the major players are Kenwright with 25%, the Gregg family have about 23% and John Woods 19%. But I don't know how they are funded - looking at some of the stuff on UV's link about them it suggests they have had a few financial problems over the years.

 

Going back to Newcastle. You can clearly see that the losses have been funded by external borrowing and the previous shareholders hadn't put anything in (at least not for several years). Nothing wrong with that but at some point the club would have to generate positive cash flows sufficient to pay off that debt as it fell due. And recent cash flows had been negative. It's stating the obvious but success on the pitch is the most sure fire way of making a Premiership football club pay its way. How you define success depends on the size of the club and its infrastructure. For Wigan or Fulham say it might just be staying up, but for us its more than that.      

[Mick]

 

 

1. So you think a relegation struggle - our first one since before 1992 - is a success then ?

 

2. I've explained this before. I don't believe Keegan wouldn't have had a quick look, realised what we needed and just paid the money for the best player at a micky mouse club like Blackburn [for example], which even if he is only directly responsible for one point [although it would be more but I'm saying this to make a point] could make all the difference and so immediately pay his transfer fee back.

 

As I've said, the last board was slaughtered for not spending cash every time we lost a game, and for not  spending cash in the summer of 2003 when it was perfectly understandable that they had stretched themselves to get back into the top spots already. So please explain the difference, apart from ignoring the point that losing our premiership status would be an absolute disaster.

 

 

 

 

 

I could have sworn that Shepherd told Bobby Robson that he didn't think that Robson could keep us up when he appointed him.  We looked as if we could go down under Souness and it didn't look too good under Roeder.  To say this is the first relegation struggle is rubbish, it will probably end up as our worst finish in the Premiership, it isn't our first relegation struggle.

 

Keegan has said that he decided not to bring anybody in so I find it amazing that you still bang on about him not bringing anybody in, especially with the history of Keegan and this club, do you think Keegan is a liar?