Jump to content

It's Sunday, it's half twelve, it's number one... it's ASHLEY TO SELL UP!


Wullie

Recommended Posts

There might be something in this, who knows?

 

But put it this way, there are a few things that are in the newspapers pretty much every day or week, and we are one of them. Lampard, Kaka, Robinho, Arshavin, Drogba, Ronaldo, Barry and Adebayor would have swapped clubs about 300 times between them this summer if these people had a clue. As it is not one of them has moved yet. Coincidence?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The one thing I'm worried about if Ashley sells...

 

What happens to the big Sports Direct banner?????

 

He's probably tied us into some onerous leasing contract similar to the warehouse one he is reported to have discovered that was rumoured/reported/denied when he took over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

bluelaugh.gif

 

 

 

geordies?.....strictly small fry in the football world. Always have been, always will be. As for loyal, large, passionate fanbase, don't make me urinate myself, average league gate prior to the 'keegan revolution'....12000, some gates at 4000, similar to leeds. A one club provincial city with no divide should be pulling 70,000 but your ground like leeds' was never built for that cause you know you'll only fill it once a year when man united fill it for you. If Manchester had one club, instead of the dozen or so in its conurbation, you would be looking at 140,000 gates, united, city, bolton and oldham combined averages total 150,000. Now that, my part time geordie dreamers is a real passionate footballing area. Only London, Gtr Manchester, and Merseyside can boast this, so crawl back to your north eastern urban wasteland and keep dreaming of the odd league cup.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

ha ha, what a load of utter bollocks!

it aint gunna happen. For many, many, many reasons!

 

 

Care to elaborate on the reasons it won't happen?

I think Ashley has made it fairly clear that, for the right price, he would sell the club pretty quickly.

So, I don't understand why every report of a sale is treated with derision on here

 

It's the NOTW, they don't print the truth ever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

He's probably tied us into some onerous leasing contract similar to the warehouse one he is reported to have discovered that was rumoured/reported/denied when he took over.

 

We don't have a warehouse contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

He's probably tied us into some onerous leasing contract similar to the warehouse one he is reported to have discovered that was rumoured/reported/denied when he took over.

 

We don't have a Warehouse contract.

 

Yeah I can't quite see Taylor turning up for training in an evening cocktail dress.

 

Maybe Burtons though to go with the cost cutting

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

He's probably tied us into some onerous leasing contract similar to the warehouse one he is reported to have discovered that was rumoured/reported/denied when he took over.

 

We don't have a warehouse contract.

 

That means we can afford a Sport Direct banner one then.  I bet that's what he wanted the 3 years season ticket money for.  The theiving bastard  :angry: :angry:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah I can't quite see Taylor turning up for training in an evening cocktail dress.

 

Maybe Burtons though to go with the cost cutting

 

If this story is true we could see Taylor turning up for training wearing a Sari.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That means we can afford a Sport Direct banner one then.  I bet that's what he wanted the 3 years season ticket money for.  The theiving b******  :angry: :angry:

 

He's looking to take the season ticket money and run, tomorrows headlines by the Sun.   :snod:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah I can't quite see Taylor turning up for training in an evening cocktail dress.

 

Maybe Burtons though to go with the cost cutting

 

If this story is true we could see Taylor turning up for training wearing a Sari.

 

Racist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That means we can afford a Sport Direct banner one then.  I bet that's what he wanted the 3 years season ticket money for.  The theiving b******  :angry: :angry:

 

He's looking to take the season ticket money and run, tomorrows headlines by the Sun.   :snod:

 

That's almost poetry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://blogs.notw.co.uk/photos/uncategorized/2008/08/02/keegan.jpg

 

:aww:

 

http://www.binarydollar.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/yao.jpg

 

They even included an exclusive photo of the second asian giant they were talking about. 

 

He's pretty big but I don't know if I'd call him giant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Racist.

 

:coolsmiley:

 

It could have been worse, I could have been born a jock. 

 

So could I. But there's worse things than being born a Jock.

 

And (for the record) I was born at Newcastle General.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Anth.Nufc

So IF we did sell to this dude the timing is a bit daft. surley may/june time would have been better so that we could buy players :razz: cant see it happen tho tbh.  6th richest man tho = spend spend spend

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why people are falling for this? This is the sixth time a Murdoch owned newspaper (Times, Sun, NOTW) has broken an "Ashley selling" story, starting one month after he bought the club. Only 4 weeks ago he said he had no  intention of selling. I've got no idea why they have it in for Ashley, I can only guess it's because he won't lick arse. Such revered journalists as Custis in the past , and now jailbird Shepherd have broken this story, when did Custis or Shepherd ever get a story right?

 

Where are the reports today of us buying Coloccini? I see none in the papers, is that not just a little bit strange? But it doesn't fit in with the "Ashley won't splash the cash" image.

 

It just worries me that so many people are so gullible (not on here obviously).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does seem like a lot more people are willing to feel like "there might be something in this" just because he is described as being a billionaire richer than Abramovich. Seems like people are just gagging for someone to come in and buy 20 players in a week all of whom cost nothing less than £20 million.

 

Ashley has come out and said he is not interested in selling but would  like partners to join him. I see no reason not to believe this. Another Sunday, another takeover rumour as far as I am concerned.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm missing something here, but surely the richer the person, the less point there is in buying a football club to make money? As far as I can see, the sport is awash with money, but most of it comes in and goes straight out. The clear profit being made would be small fry for Ashley, never mind someone with so much more money.

 

The point I'm making is that Ashley surely bought us for 'fun'; purely for something to do? So why would he be so desperate to sell up every other week?

 

Personally I wouldn't want an Abramovich-style spending spree anyway, despite the media assuming (as a Newcastle fan) that I would.

 

For a telecom company like Reliance that wants to be a global brand with high visibilty football is a very strong option. It's either that or the Olympics these days. Football is a very interesting vehicle as it gets the most airtime of anything on the planet, especially in Europe. The Indian bloke would look at it in that way to energise Reliance and give it high visibility especiall if he was looking to move into the Euro/Global telecom market. The cost of the club is peanuts for an operation like this.

 

What can he do with owning a club that he can't do with, say, shirt sponsorship and lots of advertising?

 

People emotionally engage with a football club, it also becomes a symbol (if run correctly) that projects the core values of the owner ie Reliance. You don't get this from adv which is has a very short term influence if any. 90% of adv doesn't work (don't tell them).

 

Still doesn't answer my question, really.

 

There aren't actually that many clubs which are owned for reasons of PR, however big the apparent reach. OK, there's Man City, owned by a dodgy politician for reasons of enhancing his popularity. But I can't think of any that are owned for branding purposes, except for the likes of Total Network Solutions. I suppose you could count Bayer Leverkusen, though that has its origins in a works team.

 

Arsenal (the Emirates brand), PSV (Phillips)...off the top of my head. But you're igonoring that this is an Indian company with 0 visibilty in Europe, imo that has to be part of the paradigm when looking at developing a brand...A brand that speaks. Owning a club is much more and says a lot more than 'buying space'.

 

Arsenal isn't owned by the Emirates brand.

 

 

I know that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, my question was about how owning a club gave you more than sponsorship does, and you quoted an example of sponsorship not ownership -- as well as PSV. What's their situation? Another works team of old? I don't know.

 

Berlusconi is probably a better example.

 

Having read a few articles about this Ambani this morning. I'd see branding for Reliance Communications as an unlikely motive. It's currently involved in some super-complex global merger where it's essentially being taken over by someone else while Ambani becomes chairman and largest shareholder of the merged entity. It won't simply be "his" brand anymore.

 

On edit: Looks like that deal's off, actually. Maybe he wants a football team because his brothe's got an IPL franchise. Maybe his brother will then buy the mackems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...