Jump to content

Corporate Meeting with Ashley (rumours)


Guest sicko2ndbest

Recommended Posts

I don't know why everyone is believing a "my mates fathers friend" story.

 

It's not a case of just believing it, it's looking at everything that is said in light of everything we already know, or think we know, and measuring how well it stands up - plausible or bollockible. It looks around 80% the former to me.

 

The 3m a year could be an error, perhaps it was 2m or even 1m a year still to pay. Errors are possible. I'm quite sure we are not signing a NIG name player for instance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know why nearly everyone is laughing at the Coloccini in midfield theory. If the guy has an eye for a pass then why not in the holding role. Won't be the first time Keegan has found a new position for a player.

 

Most of the stuff seemed quite reasonable (plausible) to me.

 

He still has to pay £3m a year for the next few years to Deportivo for Luque - wrong

 

How do you know this is wrong?

 

Because we paid them an initial fee which was more than £500k. If anything it's more we still owe £3m over the next few years. We've already paid over £6m for him though, so I doubt we're going to give them another £9m!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have seen alot of Depor games and last season Colo played many games as an dm. And I can say that he isn´t that bad at it. probably better than Butt. Still I think we need he´s qualities at the back.

 

for me. the text seems to deep and quite sense to be completely bollocks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know why nearly everyone is laughing at the Coloccini in midfield theory. If the guy has an eye for a pass then why not in the holding role. Won't be the first time Keegan has found a new position for a player.

 

Most of the stuff seemed quite reasonable (plausible) to me.

 

He still has to pay £3m a year for the next few years to Deportivo for Luque - wrong

 

How do you know this is wrong?

 

Because we paid them an initial fee which was more than £500k. If anything it's more we still owe £3m over the next few years. We've already paid over £6m for him though, so I doubt we're going to give them another £9m!

 

Agreed, bold is a likely scenario. Doesn't make the entire thing a work of fiction then does it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know why nearly everyone is laughing at the Coloccini in midfield theory. If the guy has an eye for a pass then why not in the holding role. Won't be the first time Keegan has found a new position for a player.

 

Most of the stuff seemed quite reasonable (plausible) to me.

 

He still has to pay £3m a year for the next few years to Deportivo for Luque - wrong

 

How do you know this is wrong?

 

Because we paid them an initial fee which was more than £500k. If anything it's more we still owe £3m over the next few years. We've already paid over £6m for him though, so I doubt we're going to give them another £9m!

 

Agreed, bold is a likely scenario. Doesn't make the entire thing a work of fiction then does it.

 

 

To be fair, I only claimed two bits were wrong ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very plausible.

Ashley has put NUFC on a stable financial footing and is starting to get serious about running it in a business like way instead of the circus we had become where we were every tabloid and Sky TVs favourite for filling column inches.

Ashley is a consummate winner, he may not be in this to make money but he will want to be a winner.

 

Stuff like this is exactly why it is worth looking at decent forums, let's face it you would never get the truth in the Sun or the Gaurdian. Mind you this forum probably has a bigger readership than the Guardian nowadays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not neccessarily bollocks, but it has had to go from his friends fathers mate to his friends father to his friend, and then to him before he posts it, so a lot of info may have changed.

 

A bit like the bible I guess, and virtually every other thing read or spoken about on the planet.

If information was never passed on more than once we'd be living on a very quiet very ignorant planet.

 

Of course sort the wheat from the chaff and decide for yourself, but this post has a lot more credibility than anything I've read in the press for a while. In my opinion that is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/nufc/newcastle-united-news/2008/08/12/nufc-owner-mike-ashley-lifts-lid-on-takeover-72703-21516411/

ASHLEY has revealed the mechanics of his Toon takeover.

 

“It was the quickest I’ve ever done a deal of that size – we’re talking only a few days. I was told there was an opportunity to acquire Sir John Hall’s stake in Newcastle United, that he may be a seller but only if somebody acted without any delay because he didn’t want to cause any form of disruption for the club.

 

“The last thing Sir John wanted was a long drawn-out affair because he feared that wouldn’t be good for Newcastle United.

 

“The deal was put to me on a Saturday. By the Monday, in advance of speaking to Sir John, I’d deposited the equivalent of money we hoped he would accept for his shares at the lawyers and on the Tuesday the deal was effectively done.

 

“By Wednesday (May 23, 2007) the announcement was public and that was the first anyone, including the media, knew about it. Once I was told about it, it was done very quickly. Sir John was ready to act if I was and it was a very straightforward process.

 

He adds: “Maybe I could have bought a smaller club, but it just wouldn’t have been the same challenge. It’s like settling for the high jump when really you want to do the pole vault – you want more excitement so you go higher.

 

“I was being offered the chance to own one of the jewels, one of the diamonds of the Premier League. There was no hesitation, why would there be?”

Link to post
Share on other sites

my mate was there, not all that in the OP is true.

Ashley said what's the point in selling Smith as it's only 3million and we have a small squad and no-one to replace him with

and there will be 2 more signings

he has a 5 year plan for the club

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/nufc/newcastle-united-news/2008/08/12/nufc-owner-mike-ashley-lifts-lid-on-takeover-72703-21516411/

ASHLEY has revealed the mechanics of his Toon takeover.

 

“It was the quickest I’ve ever done a deal of that size – we’re talking only a few days. I was told there was an opportunity to acquire Sir John Hall’s stake in Newcastle United, that he may be a seller but only if somebody acted without any delay because he didn’t want to cause any form of disruption for the club.

 

“The last thing Sir John wanted was a long drawn-out affair because he feared that wouldn’t be good for Newcastle United.

 

“The deal was put to me on a Saturday. By the Monday, in advance of speaking to Sir John, I’d deposited the equivalent of money we hoped he would accept for his shares at the lawyers and on the Tuesday the deal was effectively done.

 

“By Wednesday (May 23, 2007) the announcement was public and that was the first anyone, including the media, knew about it. Once I was told about it, it was done very quickly. Sir John was ready to act if I was and it was a very straightforward process.

 

He adds: “Maybe I could have bought a smaller club, but it just wouldn’t have been the same challenge. It’s like settling for the high jump when really you want to do the pole vault – you want more excitement so you go higher.

 

“I was being offered the chance to own one of the jewels, one of the diamonds of the Premier League. There was no hesitation, why would there be?”

 

You know all that's quoted from the official mag, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This idea of the big-name signing which is being kept quiet has been doing the rounds. I'm prepared to dream. SWP or Berbatov, I wouldn't be fussy.

 

In a weird way I reckon it would be feasible to have done a deal for Berbatov on the quiet.

 

Spurs don't want to sell to Man U, so leaking any details to the press would be counter productive to them.

 

Its in our interest (and control) not to speak out.

 

The agent could be paid a 'professional fee' to keep schtum.

 

Can't see us signing Dimi however, just speculating on would we be able to keep it under wraps

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...