So who's going to buy the club?

[Mick]

Please don't reply to him Mick.

 

I'm not going to, it's all been done before, millions of times.

[Teasy]

If he has only loaned the money and expects that loan to stand after the club is sold then no wonder nobody's prepared to pay £280, the clubs barely worth half that with the debt still remaining.  Especially since there's no way he'll allow it to stay interest free once he's gone.  He surely has to include the money he loaned in the sale price, nobody will buy otherwise.

[NJS]

If he has only loaned the money and expects that loan to stand after the club is sold then no wonder nobody's prepared to pay £280, the clubs barely worth half that with the debt still remaining.  Especially since there's no way he'll allow it to stay interest free once he's gone.  He surely has to include the money he loaned in the sale price, nobody will buy otherwise.

 

I've been assuming, as I posted yesterday, that the debt has been converted into equity in the club as explained by Chez which explains the £250m starting point.

 

If he wants £300m and wants to continue to hold the debt and expect the new owners to repay it then he should be shot and I don't see how even his most rabid supporter could continue to defend him.

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

If, if, if...

[Guest Edd]

If he has only loaned the money and expects that loan to stand after the club is sold then no wonder nobody's prepared to pay £280, the clubs barely worth half that with the debt still remaining.  Especially since there's no way he'll allow it to stay interest free once he's gone.  He surely has to include the money he loaned in the sale price, nobody will buy otherwise.

 

I've been assuming, as I posted yesterday, that the debt has been converted into equity in the club as explained by Chez which explains the £250m starting point.

 

If he wants £300m and wants to continue to hold the debt and expect the new owners to repay it then he should be shot and I don't see how even his most rabid supporter could continue to defend him.

 

 

Keith Harris, who is handling the sale, has confirmed that the debt had been paid off and converted into equity so the price for the club includes that.  Teasy need not worry

 

 

[NJS]

I'd add Harris to the people I have no reason to believe. One day we're told there are interested parties either via SP or via Kinnear via Ashley, the next day nobody is interested. This is the problem which has plagued this whole affair - the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth.

 

I don't expect "We're talking to x who will pay £287m and 23p and it will be done by Wednesday" but I do expect information.

 

Harris did issue a statement you refer to which just added to the confusion - I would say by his use of "the debt has been paid off" is a classic.

 

 

[Guest Pie]

Can you make those who bounce down the same road with the same shit pay a quid to charity per post? Its getting beyond a joke. Really is dull.

[madras]

 

shame you're not half so understanding towards people that provided you with regular european football.....and, eeerrr, saved the club from folding.

 

Fact is that myself and a few others have been trying to tell you that paying off that stadium debt is what anybody else would have done had they had the brass to do it. He's whacking it onto the asking price, and you KNOW that numerous people insinuated he did it out of the goodness of his heart. He's screwed up because he knew not much about football, the area, the supporters, the football club, all qualities the board you slated had in fact.

 

Lets hope he does get his money back quickly, and walks away with a huge slice of money that the ex board were slated for doing from every direction, and bring an end to this whole sad and sorry episode.....and we get someone else in who will attempt to match the relative success we had in the last 15 years, at least.

 

Unlike you with Ashley I gave Shepherd years to get things right, I didn't make my mind up the day he took over.  The stadium debt was nowhere near £100 million but you seem to gloss over that in attempt to whitewash the issue, laughable.  Nobody claims that Ashley paid off debt out of the goodness of his heart, he paid off some of the debt because he had to and the rest was paid off to reduce the effect it was having on the club.  Instead of the banks taking £millions it remained within the club. 

 

You also think you were right about Ashley all along just because Keegan has walked, not for the first time.    What did you say when he first walked out and didn't come back under Hall & Shepherd? 

 

The ex board were rightly slated for the direction they were taking the club, something Sir John recognised when selling his shares, he said they had run out of ideas.  It's just a pity he didn't understand that before appointing Souness, if he had we might not be having this argument now as the new owner wouldn't have been starting out from such a low position in a very competitive league.

 

 

I'm not whitewashing anything. The majority of people on here, including you, have made out that Ashley paid off these debts as if it was an act goodwill, ambition, or whatever. Look at your quote in my sig for your response to how you viewed his actions would be in this area.

 

You gave Shepherd time. Aye, you went to 2 FA Cup Finals and regular european football while you gave him time. If Ashley provided a club that was even aiming for half of that, then he would still have the goodwill of the supporters and wouldn't have lost his manager.

 

Speaking of who, you aren't taking the piss out of Keegan now are you, in your desperation to defend the man who hasn't "embarrassed" you ? For info, he "walked out" after 5 years [shame he didn't last even 1 year under Ashley] and when he walked out the first time, the chairman was in fact Sir John Hall, the man who was forced into appointing Keegan in the first place by his fellow directors, yet you still give him the credit.

 

Speaking of debts, it has been said often that all the major clubs have debts, and well documented by certain people that it is not such a big deal with the income coming into the club and revenue streams. Do you think that manu are in deep s*** because they have a debt of something in excess of over half a billion ? Do you think they are worried about it or thier supporters are worried about it ? You and people like you only focussed on this for one reason. You wanted something to beat Shepherd with. Well, now Ashley has took it on, and as you all harped on about running the club "like a business", well now you have it. We didn't waste any money in the summer, or last January.

 

It didn't take much to see that this was what was going to happen, having seen and heard the utter bollocks that started coming out of the club this time a year ago. Anyone who had been there before would have done.

 

 

i thought he had paid off the debt. if he has underwritten it it's till better than the debt that wasn't underwritten previously. obviously not happy that he said he'd paid it off when he may not have.

 

re other clubs having debt...those that make a profit can usually handle the debt. i wouldnt be too worried about NUFC having a billion pounds worth of debt if we made operating profit enough to finance it. if you have debt and are making continual losses then you have to turn it round or you are f***ed. yet again with the previous regime i saw no sign that things were going to turn round.

 

[Guest Edd]

I'd add Harris to the people I have no reason to believe. One day we're told there are interested parties either via SP or via Kinnear via Ashley, the next day nobody is interested. This is the problem which has plagued this whole affair - the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth.

 

I don't expect "We're talking to x who will pay £287m and 23p and it will be done by Wednesday" but I do expect information.

 

Harris did issue a statement you refer to which just added to the confusion - I would say by his use of "the debt has been paid off" is a classic.

 

 

Christ some people really do try hard to complicate things.

 

Harris said the debt was paid off and turned into equity.  What's remotely confusing about that?  (I'll dig put the exact quote if you still don't understand/believe it)

 

And why do you think he would lie about that when he's not associated with the club and his own companies reputation would be in tatters if he was found to be lying on national radio?

 

You complain about "the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth" and then when someone gives one you essentially call him a liar.

[quayside]

Unless everyone is lying my perception of the situation is that Ashley has loaned money to the club at 0%  interest to pay off debt that was due to external lenders. It says in the audited accounts that he had no option but to pay some of it off because of a change of ownership clause in the loan agreement. As I understand it the money he has stuck in as loan is not equity but is being treated as such when it comes to valuing the club. So if a deal is done for £250m - that is all Ashley gets.

 

[NJS]

I'd add Harris to the people I have no reason to believe. One day we're told there are interested parties either via SP or via Kinnear via Ashley, the next day nobody is interested. This is the problem which has plagued this whole affair - the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth.

 

I don't expect "We're talking to x who will pay £287m and 23p and it will be done by Wednesday" but I do expect information.

 

Harris did issue a statement you refer to which just added to the confusion - I would say by his use of "the debt has been paid off" is a classic.

 

 

Christ some people really do try hard to complicate things.

 

Harris said the debt was paid off and turned into equity.  What's remotely confusing about that?  (I'll dig put the exact quote if you still don't understand/believe it)

 

And why do you think he would lie about that when he's not associated with the club and his own companies reputation would be in tatters if he was found to be lying on national radio?

 

You complain about "the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth" and then when someone gives one you essentially call him a liar.

 

The quote was:

 

“I know him well and I’m representing him now, he has actually cleared up Newcastle’s debt. On the balance sheet it shows they don’t owe money, they owe it to him. That’s not debt, that’s equity, a more efficient way for an owner who owns the whole business."

 

How many people do you think understand that in comparison to the number of people who think what he has done is the equivalent of a normal person paying off a loan early?

 

The article also mentions no viable bids (see P62 of this thread) so Ashley via Kinnear is lying.

 

 

[Baggio]

Harris is the only one who's comments I do believe over the sale of the club tbh.

[Baggio]

I'd add Harris to the people I have no reason to believe. One day we're told there are interested parties either via SP or via Kinnear via Ashley, the next day nobody is interested. This is the problem which has plagued this whole affair - the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth.

 

I don't expect "We're talking to x who will pay £287m and 23p and it will be done by Wednesday" but I do expect information.

 

Harris did issue a statement you refer to which just added to the confusion - I would say by his use of "the debt has been paid off" is a classic.

 

 

Christ some people really do try hard to complicate things.

 

Harris said the debt was paid off and turned into equity.  What's remotely confusing about that?  (I'll dig put the exact quote if you still don't understand/believe it)

 

And why do you think he would lie about that when he's not associated with the club and his own companies reputation would be in tatters if he was found to be lying on national radio?

 

You complain about "the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth" and then when someone gives one you essentially call him a liar.

 

The quote was:

 

“I know him well and I’m representing him now, he has actually cleared up Newcastle’s debt. On the balance sheet it shows they don’t owe money, they owe it to him. That’s not debt, that’s equity, a more efficient way for an owner who owns the whole business."

 

How many people do you think understand that in comparison to the number of people who think what he has done is the equivalent of a normal person paying off a loan early?

 

The article also mentions no viable bids (see P62 of this thread) so Ashley via Kinnear is lying.

 

 

 

When did Kinnear say bids have been made?

 

I can't remember reading that.

[Guest Edd]

I'd add Harris to the people I have no reason to believe. One day we're told there are interested parties either via SP or via Kinnear via Ashley, the next day nobody is interested. This is the problem which has plagued this whole affair - the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth.

 

I don't expect "We're talking to x who will pay £287m and 23p and it will be done by Wednesday" but I do expect information.

 

Harris did issue a statement you refer to which just added to the confusion - I would say by his use of "the debt has been paid off" is a classic.

 

 

Christ some people really do try hard to complicate things.

 

Harris said the debt was paid off and turned into equity.  What's remotely confusing about that?  (I'll dig put the exact quote if you still don't understand/believe it)

 

And why do you think he would lie about that when he's not associated with the club and his own companies reputation would be in tatters if he was found to be lying on national radio?

 

You complain about "the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth" and then when someone gives one you essentially call him a liar.

 

The quote was:

 

“I know him well and I’m representing him now, he has actually cleared up Newcastle’s debt. On the balance sheet it shows they don’t owe money, they owe it to him. That’s not debt, that’s equity, a more efficient way for an owner who owns the whole business."

 

How many people do you think understand that in comparison to the number of people who think what he has done is the equivalent of a normal person paying off a loan early?

 

The article also mentions no viable bids (see P62 of this thread) so Ashley via Kinnear is lying.

 

 

Whether people know what the financial realities are of turning the debt into equity doesn't change the fact that Harris says it has happened.

 

And that's irrelevant to this discussion anyway as while people might not understand it, that does not mean that he is a liar which is what you originally implied and I was taking issue with.  The "no viable bids" is also irrelevant unless you have some quotes from Harris about that too?

[NG32]

I'd add Harris to the people I have no reason to believe. One day we're told there are interested parties either via SP or via Kinnear via Ashley, the next day nobody is interested. This is the problem which has plagued this whole affair - the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth.

 

I don't expect "We're talking to x who will pay £287m and 23p and it will be done by Wednesday" but I do expect information.

 

Harris did issue a statement you refer to which just added to the confusion - I would say by his use of "the debt has been paid off" is a classic.

 

 

Christ some people really do try hard to complicate things.

 

Harris said the debt was paid off and turned into equity.  What's remotely confusing about that?  (I'll dig put the exact quote if you still don't understand/believe it)

 

And why do you think he would lie about that when he's not associated with the club and his own companies reputation would be in tatters if he was found to be lying on national radio?

 

You complain about "the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth" and then when someone gives one you essentially call him a liar.

 

The quote was:

 

“I know him well and I’m representing him now, he has actually cleared up Newcastle’s debt. On the balance sheet it shows they don’t owe money, they owe it to him. That’s not debt, that’s equity, a more efficient way for an owner who owns the whole business."

 

How many people do you think understand that in comparison to the number of people who think what he has done is the equivalent of a normal person paying off a loan early?

 

The article also mentions no viable bids (see P62 of this thread) so Ashley via Kinnear is lying.

 

 

 

When did Kinnear say bids have been made?

 

I can't remember reading that.

 

Said he would be here until the end of October, dont think he specificly said "bids" but may have read to people that way.

[Baggio]

I'd add Harris to the people I have no reason to believe. One day we're told there are interested parties either via SP or via Kinnear via Ashley, the next day nobody is interested. This is the problem which has plagued this whole affair - the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth.

 

I don't expect "We're talking to x who will pay £287m and 23p and it will be done by Wednesday" but I do expect information.

 

Harris did issue a statement you refer to which just added to the confusion - I would say by his use of "the debt has been paid off" is a classic.

 

 

Christ some people really do try hard to complicate things.

 

Harris said the debt was paid off and turned into equity.  What's remotely confusing about that?  (I'll dig put the exact quote if you still don't understand/believe it)

 

And why do you think he would lie about that when he's not associated with the club and his own companies reputation would be in tatters if he was found to be lying on national radio?

 

You complain about "the lack of clear, unambiguous statements of truth" and then when someone gives one you essentially call him a liar.

 

The quote was:

 

“I know him well and I’m representing him now, he has actually cleared up Newcastle’s debt. On the balance sheet it shows they don’t owe money, they owe it to him. That’s not debt, that’s equity, a more efficient way for an owner who owns the whole business."

 

How many people do you think understand that in comparison to the number of people who think what he has done is the equivalent of a normal person paying off a loan early?

 

The article also mentions no viable bids (see P62 of this thread) so Ashley via Kinnear is lying.

 

 

 

When did Kinnear say bids have been made?

 

I can't remember reading that.

 

Said he would be here until the end of October, dont think he specificly said "bids" but may have read to people that way.

 

That sounds more like wishful thinking on Ashley's part that a buyer can be found quickly rather than him claiming to have a deal set up.

[madras]

a few of todays rags reporting that any deal wouldn't get done till the end of the season as the imposed deadline set by ashley has passed.

 

 

aye righto,that'd be the reason.

[TRon]

I think there was genuine interest but the economic uncertainty at the moment has meant no one is willing to pay premium price for Newcastle, and it looks like Ashley doesn't want to drop his price enough to get the deal done.

[NJS]

Whether people know what the financial realities are of turning the debt into equity doesn't change the fact that Harris says it has happened.

 

And that's irrelevant to this discussion anyway as while people might not understand it, that does not mean that he is a liar which is what you originally implied and I was taking issue with.  The "no viable bids" is also irrelevant unless you have some quotes from Harris about that too?

 

What I meant was that theres been so much BS surrounding all of this, theres no good reason why I should implicitly believe or trust Harris because of some notion of him being a reputable man.

 

He works for an investment company - I wouldn't automatically trust such a person if they told me 2+2 =4.

 

He may be telling the truth but even last week Kinnear said that he'd been told Ashley was talking to people.

 

 

 

 

[TRon]

Whether people know what the financial realities are of turning the debt into equity doesn't change the fact that Harris says it has happened.

 

And that's irrelevant to this discussion anyway as while people might not understand it, that does not mean that he is a liar which is what you originally implied and I was taking issue with.  The "no viable bids" is also irrelevant unless you have some quotes from Harris about that too?

 

What I meant was that theres been so much BS surrounding all of this, theres no good reason why I should implicitly believe or trust Harris because of some notion of him being a reputable man.

 

He works for an investment company - I wouldn't automatically trust such a person if they told me 2+2 =4.

 

He may be telling the truth but even last week Kinnear said that he'd been told Ashley was talking to people.

 

 

 

 

 

You seem to know a lot about investment and finance. Why not get the NUSC to contact some well-placed people who can put their services forward instead of Seymour Pierce? Or even some trusted analysts who can confirm your suspicions?

[thomas]

Whether people know what the financial realities are of turning the debt into equity doesn't change the fact that Harris says it has happened.

 

And that's irrelevant to this discussion anyway as while people might not understand it, that does not mean that he is a liar which is what you originally implied and I was taking issue with.  The "no viable bids" is also irrelevant unless you have some quotes from Harris about that too?

 

What I meant was that theres been so much BS surrounding all of this, theres no good reason why I should implicitly believe or trust Harris because of some notion of him being a reputable man.

 

He works for an investment company - I wouldn't automatically trust such a person if they told me 2+2 =4.

 

He may be telling the truth but even last week Kinnear said that he'd been told Ashley was talking to people.

So you choose not to believe Harris and state that it's because there's "so much BS surrounding all of this" but then go on to use a quote by Joe Kinnear, implying you trust Joe Kinnear, to beat Harris up, when it's in fact JFK who's created 80% of this BS with his statements changing like the wind? 

 

Right.

 

 

[Cronky]

Whether people know what the financial realities are of turning the debt into equity doesn't change the fact that Harris says it has happened.

 

And that's irrelevant to this discussion anyway as while people might not understand it, that does not mean that he is a liar which is what you originally implied and I was taking issue with.  The "no viable bids" is also irrelevant unless you have some quotes from Harris about that too?

 

What I meant was that theres been so much BS surrounding all of this, theres no good reason why I should implicitly believe or trust Harris because of some notion of him being a reputable man.

 

He works for an investment company - I wouldn't automatically trust such a person if they told me 2+2 =4.

 

He may be telling the truth but even last week Kinnear said that he'd been told Ashley was talking to people.

 

 

 

 

 

Before a bid comes in, a certain amount of talking will go on. What's the problem?

 

I do think Kinnear would be better off saying nothing on this subject and just referring any queries on those who are handling matters. He makes these throwaway comments and then people start poring over the details to check whether it ties in with the exact wording of other quotes - a lot of which aren't first hand.

[ChezGiven]

Sunday Sun - Anil Ambani ready to revive interest

 

Meanwhile, sources suggest that Indian billionaire Anil Ambani may be ready to revive his interest in a Newcastle takeover.

 

The Sunday Sun can confirm that Ambani did make serious inquiries about a bid for United in the summer, and has not ruled out an official approach.

 

But the revelation that owner Mike Ashley has underwritten Newcastle’s debts rather than settled them out of his own pocket is understood to be a new concern for would-be buyers.

 

One of the potential investors approached by Ashley during his recent trip to Dubai — Zabeel Investments — are poised to buy Charlton Athletic, as the likelihood increases of Ashley having to significantly lower his asking price for the Magpies.

 

 

 

'Help me Anil Ambani, you're my only hope'

 

 

A little nugget of gold in an ocean of shit.

[Guest Edd]

Whether people know what the financial realities are of turning the debt into equity doesn't change the fact that Harris says it has happened.

 

And that's irrelevant to this discussion anyway as while people might not understand it, that does not mean that he is a liar which is what you originally implied and I was taking issue with.  The "no viable bids" is also irrelevant unless you have some quotes from Harris about that too?

 

What I meant was that theres been so much BS surrounding all of this, theres no good reason why I should implicitly believe or trust Harris because of some notion of him being a reputable man.

 

He works for an investment company - I wouldn't automatically trust such a person if they told me 2+2 =4.

 

He may be telling the truth but even last week Kinnear said that he'd been told Ashley was talking to people.

So you choose not to believe Harris and state that it's because there's "so much BS surrounding all of this" but then go on to use a quote by Joe Kinnear, implying you trust Joe Kinnear, to beat Harris up, when it's in fact JFK who's created 80% of this BS with his statements changing like the wind? 

 

Right.

 

 

It is staggering the lengths some people will go to to try and magic up more controversy around the club.  Clearly driven by some other agenda.

[dustynrg]

Whether people know what the financial realities are of turning the debt into equity doesn't change the fact that Harris says it has happened.

 

And that's irrelevant to this discussion anyway as while people might not understand it, that does not mean that he is a liar which is what you originally implied and I was taking issue with.  The "no viable bids" is also irrelevant unless you have some quotes from Harris about that too?

 

What I meant was that theres been so much BS surrounding all of this, theres no good reason why I should implicitly believe or trust Harris because of some notion of him being a reputable man.

 

He works for an investment company - I wouldn't automatically trust such a person if they told me 2+2 =4.

 

He may be telling the truth but even last week Kinnear said that he'd been told Ashley was talking to people.

So you choose not to believe Harris and state that it's because there's "so much BS surrounding all of this" but then go on to use a quote by Joe Kinnear, implying you trust Joe Kinnear, to beat Harris up, when it's in fact JFK who's created 80% of this BS with his statements changing like the wind? 

 

Right.

 

 

It is staggering the lengths some people will go to to try and magic up more controversy around the club.  Clearly driven by some other agenda.

 

It's called going into the far end of a fart.