So who's going to buy the club?

[Mick]

 

I don't think that, I don't know nor care.  Its irrelivant to me how good Mike Ashley is at picking winners at the bookies.  My only problem with it is that he's got no problem with gambling (real gambling not making a solid investment like NUFC) hundred of millions of pounds yet he's not willing to take the same kind of risk with even a quarter of the money at NUFC.

 

He said he'd put £20 million a year in, that's more than anybody else has done before.

[Teasy]

Really?

 

Our share price history.............

 

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/4543/sharepricese9.jpg

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/4543/sharepricese9.1aad2a0ba7.jpg

 

Oh please, share prices?  They were notoriously inflated, the club was worth £200 million when Ashley bought it (based on the actual settled price at the time and with the debt added on).  A a year later its in ruins, no manager and Ashley hated and chased out of the club, yet now its going to sell for £280 million.  Considering what's happened shouldn't the club be worth well under £200 million?, that is if its at such a big risk of losing value.

 

You're on the wind up aren't you?  mackems.gif

 

Unless you're absolutely clueless.

 

 

 

Again tell me where I'm wrong?  What you're doing at the moment just screams "I don't want to agree but I've got no idea how I can argue with you".  Take a page out of Mick's book.

 

Bringing up share prices from nearly 10 years ago is such a weak argument.  Again just look at what he's paid for the club, the state the clubs in, and then ask yourself do you really believe he's going to take a loss when selling?  If the answer is no then ask yourself why the fuck not if it was such a risk. 

[Teasy]

 

I don't think that, I don't know nor care.  Its irrelivant to me how good Mike Ashley is at picking winners at the bookies.  My only problem with it is that he's got no problem with gambling (real gambling not making a solid investment like NUFC) hundred of millions of pounds yet he's not willing to take the same kind of risk with even a quarter of the money at NUFC.

 

He said he'd put £20 million a year in, that's more than anybody else has done before.

 

He said he did yes, where did it go?  Not on transfers, not on wages considering they're well covered by revenue.  Not on yearly debt payments because he says he already paid the debts.  Not on past player transfers because there's more money coming in from past transfers then going out.

[Baggio]

 

I don't think that, I don't know nor care.  Its irrelivant to me how good Mike Ashley is at picking winners at the bookies.  My only problem with it is that he's got no problem with gambling (real gambling not making a solid investment like NUFC) hundred of millions of pounds yet he's not willing to take the same kind of risk with even a quarter of the money at NUFC.

 

He said he'd put £20 million a year in, that's more than anybody else has done before.

 

He said he did yes, where did it go?  Not on transfers, not on wages considering they're well covered by revenue.  Not on yearly debt payments because he says he already paid the debts.  Not on past player transfers because there's more money coming in from past transfers then going out.

 

There is now (apparently) but back in July there was a difference of £25 million that we owed out (apparently) perhaps there's your answer.

[ChezGiven]

 

 

No idea what you're on about with number one.  He was forced to pay off debt, the club changing ownership triggered that, something he's never refuted.  To talk about relegation as a risk when he came in would be mental quite frankly, if you take consider that to be a risk of the same level as share betting (something that's actually gone tits up for him as well I might add) then I don't know what to say to you, don't go near a bookies maybe?

 

You think he's lost more on share dealing than he's made?  mackems.gif

 

I bow to your superior financial knowledge. 

 

I don't think that, I don't know nor care.  Its irrelivant to me how good Mike Ashley is at picking winners at the bookies.  My only problem with it is that he's got no problem with gambling (real gambling not making a solid investment like NUFC) hundred of millions of pounds yet he's not willing to take the same kind of risk with even a quarter of the money at NUFC.

 

All you're posts are devoid of any understanding of finance. Dont let that stop you though.

 

Here is something to chew over

 

The relationship between risk and return is a fundamental financial relationship that affects expected rates of return on every existing asset investment.  The Risk-Return relationship is characterized as being a "positive" or "direct" relationship meaning that if there are expectations of higher levels of risk associated with a particular investment then greater returns are required as compensation for that higher expected risk.  Alternatively, if an investment has relatively lower levels of expected risk then investors are satisfied with relatively lower returns.

 

This risk-return relationship holds for individual investors and business managers.  Greater degrees of risk must be compensated for with greater returns on investment.  Since investment returns reflects the degree of risk involved with the investment, investors need to be able to determine how much of a return is appropriate for a given level of risk.  This process is referred to as "pricing the risk".  In order to price the risk, we must first be able to measure the risk (or quantify the risk) and then we must be able to decide an appropriate price for the risk we are being asked to bear.

 

 

Your idea that he is 'taking the same risk' when betting on the markets is just stupid and shows that you dont understand what your are posting.

[Teasy]

 

Oh please, share prices?  They were notoriously inflated, the club was worth £200 million when Ashley bought it (based on the actual settled price at the time and with the debt added on).  A a year later its in ruins, no manager and Ashley hated and chased out of the club, yet now its going to sell for £280 million.  Considering what's happened shouldn't the club be worth well under £200 million?, that is if its at such a big risk of losing value.

 

What Ashley wants and ends up getting are totally different so using hypothetical figures for an argument is fairly useless, and that would be the same if I guessed he'd get £100 million and used that to build an argument around.

 

That wouldn't really be the same considering there's absolutely no chance he's going to sell for £100 million   Fair enough he might sell for £250, so I take your point on using exact figures.  But really you can replace the £280 figure with any other figure that brings a profit or even breaks even and it still supports my point.  Do you realistically see him selling for any kind of loss, let alone a significant one?

[Liam Liam Liam O]

 

Again tell me where I'm wrong?  What you're doing at the moment just screams "I don't want to agree but I've got no idea how I can argue with you".  Take a page out of Mick's book.

 

Bringing up share prices from nearly 10 years ago is such a weak argument.  Again just look at what he's paid for the club, the state the clubs in, and then ask yourself do you really believe he's going to take a loss when selling?  If the answer is no then ask yourself why the fuck not if it was such a risk. 

 

What??!!

 

The Share Price was a direct response to this

 

 

Premiership clubs don't lose there worth over night, in fact its pretty hard to lose worth at all

 

which I quoted at the time.  So that is where you are wrong put simply.  Its a load of rubbish.

 

I've not once tried to relate ten year old share prices to Ashley's selling price.  I could have used any club's share price to illustrate football clubs losing value.  Newcastles was simply the easiest to find.

 

 

Carry on with the Straw man argument though

[Mick]

 

He said he did yes, where did it go?  Not on transfers, not on wages considering they're well covered by revenue.  Not on yearly debt payments because he says he already paid the debts.  Not on past player transfers because there's more money coming in from past transfers then going out.

 

He paid off debts within the last 12 months which came to more than £20 million.

[Mick]

 

That wouldn't really be the same considering there's absolutely no chance he's going to sell for £100 million   Fair enough he might sell for £250, so I take your point on using exact figures.  But really you can replace the £280 figure with any other figure that brings a profit or even breaks even and it still supports my point.  Do you realistically see him selling for any kind of loss, let alone a significant one?

 

His willingness to take a loss will depend on his desperation to sell because of protests and his requirement for a cash boost.

[ChezGiven]

 

Again tell me where I'm wrong?  What you're doing at the moment just screams "I don't want to agree but I've got no idea how I can argue with you".  Take a page out of Mick's book.

 

Bringing up share prices from nearly 10 years ago is such a weak argument.  Again just look at what he's paid for the club, the state the clubs in, and then ask yourself do you really believe he's going to take a loss when selling?  If the answer is no then ask yourself why the fuck not if it was such a risk. 

 

What??!!

 

The Share Price was a direct response to this

 

 

Premiership clubs don't lose there worth over night, in fact its pretty hard to lose worth at all

 

which I quoted at the time.  So that is where you are wrong put simply.  Its a load of rubbish.

 

I've not once tried to relate ten year old share prices to Ashley's selling price.  I could have used any club's share price to illustrate football clubs losing value.  Newcastles was simply the easiest to find.

 

 

Carry on with the Straw man argument though

 

'Clubs dont lose their value overnight' is quite stunning in its stupidity. A championship club is less valuable than a premiership club and that really can happen overnight.

 

A club imploding in turmoil can also happen overnight and then you end up with no one interested in the place, i.e. not valuable to anyone.

[Teasy]

 

 

All you're posts are devoid of any understanding of finance. Dont let that stop you though.

 

Here is something to chew over

 

The relationship between risk and return is a fundamental financial relationship that affects expected rates of return on every existing asset investment.  The Risk-Return relationship is characterized as being a "positive" or "direct" relationship meaning that if there are expectations of higher levels of risk associated with a particular investment then greater returns are required as compensation for that higher expected risk.  Alternatively, if an investment has relatively lower levels of expected risk then investors are satisfied with relatively lower returns.

 

This risk-return relationship holds for individual investors and business managers.  Greater degrees of risk must be compensated for with greater returns on investment.  Since investment returns reflects the degree of risk involved with the investment, investors need to be able to determine how much of a return is appropriate for a given level of risk.  This process is referred to as "pricing the risk".  In order to price the risk, we must first be able to measure the risk (or quantify the risk) and then we must be able to decide an appropriate price for the risk we are being asked to bear.

 

 

Your idea that he is 'taking the same risk' when betting on the markets is just stupid and shows that you dont understand what your are posting.

 

Do you think you're actually telling me something by posting that?, or that it even effects my point?  It would seem so considering your attempted smug condescending attitude   Of course you need to assess the risk vs the return in something before investing.  Its not something special that you needed to cut and past something for, its basic logic and doesn't effect my point at all.  He could choose to take bigger risks at NUFC with the potential for better returns, but he wasn't willing to do so.

 

Don't know why you think I said he's taking the same risk when betting on the markets as he is when investing in NUFC, I didn't say that, take the time to read my posts properly in future please.

[Teasy]

 

Again tell me where I'm wrong?  What you're doing at the moment just screams "I don't want to agree but I've got no idea how I can argue with you".  Take a page out of Mick's book.

 

Bringing up share prices from nearly 10 years ago is such a weak argument.  Again just look at what he's paid for the club, the state the clubs in, and then ask yourself do you really believe he's going to take a loss when selling?  If the answer is no then ask yourself why the fuck not if it was such a risk. 

 

What??!!

 

The Share Price was a direct response to this

 

 

Premiership clubs don't lose there worth over night, in fact its pretty hard to lose worth at all

 

which I quoted at the time.  So that is where you are wrong put simply.  Its a load of rubbish.

 

I've not once tried to relate ten year old share prices to Ashley's selling price.  I could have used any club's share price to illustrate football clubs losing value.  Newcastles was simply the easiest to find.

 

 

Carry on with the Straw man argument though

 

You posted share data for the last 8 years or so, which is just irrelivant at the moment.  Football clubs are in demand and the fact is Ashley has bought a club for over its estimated value, turned it into a disaster and will now sell for a profit.  Yes, what a risk he took eh?

[ChezGiven]

 

 

No idea what you're on about with number one.  He was forced to pay off debt, the club changing ownership triggered that, something he's never refuted.  To talk about relegation as a risk when he came in would be mental quite frankly, if you take consider that to be a risk of the same level as share betting (something that's actually gone tits up for him as well I might add) then I don't know what to say to you, don't go near a bookies maybe?

 

You think he's lost more on share dealing than he's made?  mackems.gif

 

I bow to your superior financial knowledge. 

 

I don't think that, I don't know nor care.  Its irrelivant to me how good Mike Ashley is at picking winners at the bookies.  My only problem with it is that he's got no problem with gambling (real gambling not making a solid investment like NUFC) hundred of millions of pounds yet he's not willing to take the same kind of risk with even a quarter of the money at NUFC.

 

All you're posts are devoid of any understanding of finance. Dont let that stop you though.

 

Here is something to chew over

 

The relationship between risk and return is a fundamental financial relationship that affects expected rates of return on every existing asset investment.  The Risk-Return relationship is characterized as being a "positive" or "direct" relationship meaning that if there are expectations of higher levels of risk associated with a particular investment then greater returns are required as compensation for that higher expected risk.  Alternatively, if an investment has relatively lower levels of expected risk then investors are satisfied with relatively lower returns.

 

This risk-return relationship holds for individual investors and business managers.  Greater degrees of risk must be compensated for with greater returns on investment.  Since investment returns reflects the degree of risk involved with the investment, investors need to be able to determine how much of a return is appropriate for a given level of risk.  This process is referred to as "pricing the risk".  In order to price the risk, we must first be able to measure the risk (or quantify the risk) and then we must be able to decide an appropriate price for the risk we are being asked to bear.

 

 

Your idea that he is 'taking the same risk' when betting on the markets is just stupid and shows that you dont understand what your are posting.

 

Do you think you're actually telling me something by posting that?, or that it even effects my point?  It would seem so considering your attempted smug condesending attitude   Instead of copying and pasting something tell me how that effects my point?  Of course you need to assess the risk vs the return in something before investing.  Its not something special that you needed to cut and past something for, its basic logic.

 

Don't know why you think I said he's taking the same risk when betting on the markets as he is when investing in NUFC, I didn't say that, take the time to read my posts properly in future please.

 

Bolded the bit that shows no understanding of the concept i quoted for you.

 

You're the one lording round the forum as though you are some sort of financial guru without having the first clue what you are saying.

[Mick]

 

 

Do you think you're actually telling me something by posting that?, or that it even effects my point?  It would seem so considering your attempted smug condesending attitude   Instead of copying and pasting something tell me how that effects my point?  Of course you need to assess the risk vs the return in something before investing.  Its not something special that you needed to cut and past something for, its basic logic.

 

Don't know why you think I said he's taking the same risk when betting on the markets as he is when investing in NUFC, I didn't say that, take the time to read my posts properly in future please.

 

Chez and Liam O do know what they are talking about, it's what they are paid to do.

[Teasy]

 

Again tell me where I'm wrong?  What you're doing at the moment just screams "I don't want to agree but I've got no idea how I can argue with you".  Take a page out of Mick's book.

 

Bringing up share prices from nearly 10 years ago is such a weak argument.  Again just look at what he's paid for the club, the state the clubs in, and then ask yourself do you really believe he's going to take a loss when selling?  If the answer is no then ask yourself why the fuck not if it was such a risk. 

 

What??!!

 

The Share Price was a direct response to this

 

 

Premiership clubs don't lose there worth over night, in fact its pretty hard to lose worth at all

 

which I quoted at the time.  So that is where you are wrong put simply.  Its a load of rubbish.

 

I've not once tried to relate ten year old share prices to Ashley's selling price.  I could have used any club's share price to illustrate football clubs losing value.  Newcastles was simply the easiest to find.

 

 

Carry on with the Straw man argument though

 

'Clubs dont lose their value overnight' is quite stunning in its stupidity. A championship club is less valuable than a premiership club and that really can happen overnight.

 

A club imploding in turmoil can also happen overnight and then you end up with no one interested in the place, i.e. not valuable to anyone.

 

That can happen over the course of a season if you buy a club in relegation trouble to begin with or completely fuck up a club like Newcastle.  Relegation was never a realistic risk when Ashley bought the club, just think before you post FFS

[ChezGiven]

 

Again tell me where I'm wrong?  What you're doing at the moment just screams "I don't want to agree but I've got no idea how I can argue with you".  Take a page out of Mick's book.

 

Bringing up share prices from nearly 10 years ago is such a weak argument.  Again just look at what he's paid for the club, the state the clubs in, and then ask yourself do you really believe he's going to take a loss when selling?  If the answer is no then ask yourself why the fuck not if it was such a risk. 

 

What??!!

 

The Share Price was a direct response to this

 

 

Premiership clubs don't lose there worth over night, in fact its pretty hard to lose worth at all

 

which I quoted at the time.  So that is where you are wrong put simply.  Its a load of rubbish.

 

I've not once tried to relate ten year old share prices to Ashley's selling price.  I could have used any club's share price to illustrate football clubs losing value.  Newcastles was simply the easiest to find.

 

 

Carry on with the Straw man argument though

 

'Clubs dont lose their value overnight' is quite stunning in its stupidity. A championship club is less valuable than a premiership club and that really can happen overnight.

 

A club imploding in turmoil can also happen overnight and then you end up with no one interested in the place, i.e. not valuable to anyone.

 

That can happen over the course of a season if you buy a club in relegation trouble to begin with or completely fuck up a club like Newcastle.  Relegation was never a realistic risk when Ashley bought the club, just think before you post FFS

 

Those are just words Teasy and they could have been assembled the way you wrote them or randomly by a monkey and the statement in bold above would still be nonsense.

[madras]

 

 

Do you think you're actually telling me something by posting that?, or that it even effects my point?  It would seem so considering your attempted smug condesending attitude   Instead of copying and pasting something tell me how that effects my point?  Of course you need to assess the risk vs the return in something before investing.  Its not something special that you needed to cut and past something for, its basic logic.

 

Don't know why you think I said he's taking the same risk when betting on the markets as he is when investing in NUFC, I didn't say that, take the time to read my posts properly in future please.

 

Chez and Liam O do know what they are talking about, it's what they are paid to do.

in the midst of the biggest banking crisis for how long ? based on what. financial people knowing what they were doing.

 

 

nowt to do with the debate,just couldn't resist.

[NE5]

 

I don't think that, I don't know nor care.  Its irrelivant to me how good Mike Ashley is at picking winners at the bookies.  My only problem with it is that he's got no problem with gambling (real gambling not making a solid investment like NUFC) hundred of millions of pounds yet he's not willing to take the same kind of risk with even a quarter of the money at NUFC.

 

He said he'd put £20 million a year in, that's more than anybody else has done before.

 

its also more than anybody has "said" they would. Shame it stopped at "said" though - so what is your point exactly ?

 

Its not like you to ignore cold hard facts ie he hasn't put in this money, any more than the clubs league positions before the board you slate weren't massively superior to their predecessors

 

Its quite amusing the way this thread has changed. From people still making out that he put his own money in out of the goodness of his heart  he's looking for a return alright - nowt wrong with that - but stop making it out to be an act of charity.

 

As Teasy says, if he walks away with a big profit overall what will you say then ? Surely you and the others can't be that blind ?

 

On the other hand 

 

Simple fact, is that the club is in its biggest crisis since 1991, and unless Joe Kinnear does a damn good job, the most dissafected bunch of players since 1977.

 

I take it 1991 doesn't ring any bells ? Think owners.

 

 

[Mick]

Thread over.

[NE5]

 

 

Do you think you're actually telling me something by posting that?, or that it even effects my point?  It would seem so considering your attempted smug condesending attitude   Instead of copying and pasting something tell me how that effects my point?  Of course you need to assess the risk vs the return in something before investing.  Its not something special that you needed to cut and past something for, its basic logic.

 

Don't know why you think I said he's taking the same risk when betting on the markets as he is when investing in NUFC, I didn't say that, take the time to read my posts properly in future please.

 

Chez and Liam O do know what they are talking about, it's what they are paid to do.

 

Chez has disagreed with you on other occasions, yet you stuck to your opinion ? Care to explain ?

 

 

[NE5]

Thread over.

 

if you say so. Why not try and prove your poiint ?

 

 

[madras]

 

I don't think that, I don't know nor care.  Its irrelivant to me how good Mike Ashley is at picking winners at the bookies.  My only problem with it is that he's got no problem with gambling (real gambling not making a solid investment like NUFC) hundred of millions of pounds yet he's not willing to take the same kind of risk with even a quarter of the money at NUFC.

 

He said he'd put £20 million a year in, that's more than anybody else has done before.

 

its also more than anybody has "said" they would. Shame it stopped at "said" though - so what is your point exactly ?

 

Its not like you to ignore cold hard facts ie he hasn't put in this money, any more than the clubs league positions before the board you slate weren't massively superior to their predecessors

 

Its quite amusing the way this thread has changed. From people still making out that he put his own money in out of the goodness of his heart  he's looking for a return alright - nowt wrong with that - but stop making it out to be an act of charity.

 

As Teasy says, if he walks away with a big profit overall what will you say then ? Surely you and the others can't be that blind ?

 

On the other hand 

 

Simple fact, is that the club is in its biggest crisis since 1991, and unless Joe Kinnear does a damn good job, the most dissafected bunch of players since 1977.

 

I take it 1991 doesn't ring any bells ? Think owners.

 

 

did fred make a profit out the club ? not just on sale but year in year out.

 

if he hasn't put money in then neither did fred and bearing in mind his one and only league position was level to fred's last one it must mean you haven't grasped the point you were attempting to make. (or was the one season under ashley a better finish than the previous one ?)

[Teasy]

 

 

Do you think you're actually telling me something by posting that?, or that it even effects my point?  It would seem so considering your attempted smug condesending attitude   Instead of copying and pasting something tell me how that effects my point?  Of course you need to assess the risk vs the return in something before investing.  Its not something special that you needed to cut and past something for, its basic logic.

 

Don't know why you think I said he's taking the same risk when betting on the markets as he is when investing in NUFC, I didn't say that, take the time to read my posts properly in future please.

 

Chez and Liam O do know what they are talking about, it's what they are paid to do.

 

I didn't say anything about what they know or don't know about business finance.  Unlike them I'm willing to actually argue my point rather then posting such pearls as "you don't know what you're talking about", wow you've changed my mind then

 

My view is that Ashley seems like quite a risk taker at times, but when it came to NUFC he really wasn't willing to take anything but the minimum of risk.  You know if someone disagrees with that then I'd really appreciate them posting there views on Ashley's time here.  That would be for more constructive and interesting then cheap insults or throw away lines about who does or doesn't know what they're talking about.  You seem to be the only person able to discuss something.

[Mick]

did fred make a profit out the club ? not just on sale but year in year out.

 

if he hasn't put money in then neither did fred and bearing in mind his one and only league position was level to fred's last one it must mean you haven't grasped the point you were attempting to make. (or was the one season under ashley a better finish than the previous one ?)

 

His one season was one place better.

[Mick]

 

I didn't say anything about what they know or don't know about business finance.  Unlike them I'm willing to actually argue my point rather then posting such pearls as "you don't know what you're talking about", wow you've changed my mind then

 

My view is that Ashley seems like quite a risk taker at times, but when it came to NUFC he really wasn't willing to take anything but the minimum of risk.  You know if someone disagrees with that then I'd really appreciate them posting there views on Ashley's time here.  That would be for more constructive and interesting then cheap insults or throw away lines about who does or doesn't know what they're talking about.  You seem to be the only person able to discuss something.

 

I think the two of them have had the same argument with others and have probably just get sick of repeating themselves, I don't think you're the problem, it's probably just the number of times they've said it.