Save Newcastle United

[indi]

If ashley, was looking for an investor, to own part of the club, why couldnt this be the fans, why dosent he sell part of the club back to the fans, in return for them having a say on issues such as manager, dof, chairman etc.

the raised capital could buy some players, everyone wins.

 

Did he not already propose that, but everyone ignored it?

 

It was probably the closest anyone's ever going to get to what people are proposing here and it's gone right down the shitter due to the actions of exact same people who are now wanting it to happen. Ironic, eh?

 

Ashley's gone, people got what they wanted, they now need to understand the consequences of their actions.

[cp40]

If ashley, was looking for an investor, to own part of the club, why couldnt this be the fans, why dosent he sell part of the club back to the fans, in return for them having a say on issues such as manager, dof, chairman etc.

the raised capital could buy some players, everyone wins.

 

Did he not already propose that, but everyone ignored it?

 

It was probably the closest anyone's ever going to get to what people are proposing here and it's gone right down the shitter due to the actions of exact same people who are now wanting it to happen. Ironic, eh?

 

Ashley's gone, people got what they wanted, they now need to understand the consequences of their actions.

 

 

ashley hasnt gone, he still owns the club, if he did already propose it, it totally passed me by.

I agree it probably is the nearest it could realistically be achieved, i think he may be in a forgiving mood, if people start to pledge money to the club.

[Joey]

This is all well and good but it's an absurd idea, it's not just finding the money to buy the club, but then theres things like the debts the club still owe, weekly outgoings, player wages etc.

 

We could never have enough money as just ordinary fans to keep us up.

If we did go down under this time of management then it's less mess per season each league we'd drop down.

[TRon]

This is all well and good but it's an absurd idea, it's not just finding the money to buy the club, but then theres things like the debts the club still owe, weekly outgoings, player wages etc.

 

We could never have enough money as just ordinary fans to keep us up.

If we did go down under this time of management then it's less mess per season each league we'd drop down.

 

if it went wrong we could always hold some protests and write fanzine articles then hopefully everything would magically be ok

[abcdefg]

It's a non-starter, perhaps at some point in the future there could be a roll out of shares, but that's all it could ever be.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

And if we get another McKeag, Shepherd or Ashley in again, then what?

 

Just keep protesting, creating banners, booing etc. etc.?

 

At some point fans of many clubs not just our own are going to have to seriously look into taking over their clubs or run the risk of losing them completely and the game itself must surely make it easier for fans to own their clubs and harder for individuals flush with a few quid to just sell and buy clubs willy nilly because this is getting ridiculous now.

 

Fans don't know their own power, yet this week alone the owner/s of Liverpool are begging protesters to meet up and discuss things while some "mongs" outside of St. James' Park and a daft banner has forced our new owner into looking to sell up.

 

Newcastle United is too big, too important socially and to the community to be owned by any one individual or a group of people to be ran as a business investment or a portfolio asset, something Ashley is finding out.

 

It breaks my heart to see our club at the mercy of money vultures with no interest in the club outside of what benefits in terms of money the club can bring to someone or a group of people.

 

Mock the website author's ideas all you like but I personally applaud anyone who takes the time and effort to look at and put out alternatives that may appear absurd, unrealistic and even laughable but the idea of fans owning their club is by no means impossible nor stupid.

 

It also breaks my heart that fans nowadays have been conned blind by the powers that be into believing that money is the saviour of all and the only way in which to succeed.

 

Do we need a mega billionaire? On paper it appears we do but the likes of Abramovic won't be around forever, the bubble will burst some day and football will find a more balanced and even level playing field across the full spectrum of the sport, if not soon then within the next 10-20 years.

 

If our only choice is to sell to an Abramovic type or filthy rich Arabs who will bankroll mega spending sprees, crazy wages and try and buy success, I for one don't want it not for the game and most of all not for my club.

 

That to me isn't football nor Newcastle United.

 

A fan takeover could happen and could work.

 

What it requires is the motivation of fans to do something about their club other than buying tickets and wearing replica shirts. Fans have shown this week alone when prodded with a stick, there is life in us, we have a soul. We are not mere customers or pockets or should that be puppets to the almighty rich, to the playboys, fantasists and corrupted owners or corporations hell bent on screwing the game for every penny it can squeeze out of it or the games they want to play.

 

Haven't we been walked over enough?

 

We can't stand at games, we can't drink at games, swearing, chanting and singing and enjoying yourself is frowned upon. Unless you enjoy a decent wage its becoming increasingly difficult to afford to support your club. There aren't many heroes to worship anymore and when a player does try to identify and have a relationship with fans he gets booked for over celebrating. The list goes on and on yet we just put up with it and in many cases will put ourselves into debt to do so.

 

Oh well, bring in the billionaires. I just hope for the club's sake they don't fuck our club over like everyone else has managed to do before and since Sir John Hall, ironically the one man who offered the club on a plate to fans who then told him to fuck off.

 

I wonder whether history will one day look back on that day and rue it.

[Guest Alan Shearer 9]

And if we get another McKeag, Shepherd or Ashley in again, then what?

 

All of them put together only amount to being half the tit that you are. Imagine if someone like you had control of NUFC we'd be absolutely fucked. You'd probably try and relocate the stadium underwater so you can have a wank over a shark at the game.

[James]

 

Fact is that a fans consortium couldn't afford the club, let alone afford to subsidise the operating costs that fans take for granted, let alone transfers and wages.

[cp40]

 

Fact is that a fans consortium couldn't afford the club, let alone afford to subsidise the operating costs that fans take for granted, let alone transfers and wages.

 

i thought they did subsidise operating costs anyway, through season ticket sales, merchandise, tv revenues?

[Jimburst]

Thats quite embarassing.

[Andy]

I could easily imagine that a consortium led by HTT would pay for the club, pay for the biggest name players and coaching staff, and then forget to pay the gas and electricity bill, resulting in the club being deducted points on health and safety grounds and ultimately relegated.

[Teasy]

 

Fact is that a fans consortium couldn't afford the club, let alone afford to subsidise the operating costs that fans take for granted, let alone transfers and wages.

 

What are you on about?, tell me which owner in the past has ever subsidised operating costs, wages or transfers at Newcastle United?  Nobody has, its all paid for from club revenue (match tickets, TV money, merchandise) and bank loans ect..  How would any of that change should the club be owned by the fans?  They aren't going to give away a season ticket for life to share owners you know...

[indi]

 

Fact is that a fans consortium couldn't afford the club, let alone afford to subsidise the operating costs that fans take for granted, let alone transfers and wages.

 

What are you on about?, tell me which owner in the past has ever subsidised operating costs, wages or transfers at Newcastle United?  Nobody has, its all paid for from club revenue (match tickets, TV money, merchandise) and bank loans ect..  How would any of that change should the club be owned by the fans?  They aren't going to give away a season ticket for life to share owners you know...

 

Mike Ashley.

[Teasy]

When did he subsidise operating costs wages or transfer fee's?, never is the answer.  He invested £100 million to pay off stadium debt, completely different thing.  The fact is it doesn't require subsidising as revenue covers it, the only thing that could use subsidising is transfer fee's and if a fans consortium did that it would be the first time in Newcastle history..

 

Not saying I think fan ownership will actually happen by the way, at least this time around..

[indi]

When did he subsidise operating costs wages or transfer fee's?  He invested £100 million to pay off stadium debt, completely different thing.

 

Read your own post and you should see that if debt was used to subsidise the club's running costs and he them paid off that debt then he's subsidising the running costs.

 

Where has it been said that the only debt he paid off was the stadium debt.

 

In fact what difference does it make? It all goes on the same balance sheet at the end of the day.

[Guest gggg]

Aye that's not a problem, the revenue easily covers the wages and a decent sized transfer budget. Then you could add more memberships and money making schemes on top.

 

There's no reason why an election system like they have in Spain couldn't work either with a president voted in every few years.

 

The problem is there's no way on earth you're going to find enough people with enough money to buy the club in the first place.

[BottledDog]

When did he subsidise operating costs wages or transfer fee's?, never is the answer.  He invested £100 million to pay off stadium debt, completely different thing.  The fact is it doesn't require subsidising as revenue covers it, the only thing that could use subsidising is transfer fee's and if a fans consortium did that it would be the first time in Newcastle history..

 

He said he was willing to subsidise up to £20 million a year. Not that now we'll ever get to find out if he would have or not.

[Teasy]

When did he subsidise operating costs wages or transfer fee's?  He invested £100 million to pay off stadium debt, completely different thing.

 

Read your own post and you should see that if debt was used to subsidise the club's running costs and he them paid off that debt then he's subsidising the running costs.

 

Where has it been said that the only debt he paid off was the stadium debt.

 

In fact what difference does it make? It all goes on the same balance sheet at the end of the day.

 

I knew what you meant, but its pedantic and not relevant to what I was talking about.  James claims a fans consortium couldn't afford to subsidise operating costs, wages and transfers, I'm saying that those things are not subsidised by owners.  They come from club revenue and in the case of transfers sometimes bank loans in the past.  The fact that Ashley found he had to pay off the mortgage on the stadium when he took over due to the contract the bank had with the Hall's doesn't change that fact.

[Teasy]

When did he subsidise operating costs wages or transfer fee's?, never is the answer.  He invested £100 million to pay off stadium debt, completely different thing.  The fact is it doesn't require subsidising as revenue covers it, the only thing that could use subsidising is transfer fee's and if a fans consortium did that it would be the first time in Newcastle history..

 

He said he was willing to subsidise up to £20 million a year. Not that now we'll ever get to find out if he would have or not.

 

How much would you bet against that "subsidy" being from club revenue, yeah technically its his money since he owns the club, but its money generated by the club itself.

[Guest optimistic nit]

When did he subsidise operating costs wages or transfer fee's?, never is the answer.  He invested £100 million to pay off stadium debt, completely different thing.  The fact is it doesn't require subsidising as revenue covers it, the only thing that could use subsidising is transfer fee's and if a fans consortium did that it would be the first time in Newcastle history..

 

He said he was willing to subsidise up to £20 million a year. Not that now we'll ever get to find out if he would have or not.

 

How much would you bet against that "subsidy" being from club revenue, yeah technically its his money since he owns the club, but its money generated by the club itself.

 

but he said £20million of his OWN money. that word is quite important. he may have lied, but i dont think so and we'll never find out now.

[Teasy]

More like misleading really.  Who knows, you might be right he might have meant money from his own personal bank account, so there should have been spare revenue from the last two seasons plus £40 million from Ashley available for transfers this summer, anyone believe that?

[Guest gggg]

.

[indi]

When did he subsidise operating costs wages or transfer fee's?  He invested £100 million to pay off stadium debt, completely different thing.

 

Read your own post and you should see that if debt was used to subsidise the club's running costs and he them paid off that debt then he's subsidising the running costs.

 

Where has it been said that the only debt he paid off was the stadium debt.

 

In fact what difference does it make? It all goes on the same balance sheet at the end of the day.

 

The difference it makes is that's not relivant to my point..   James claims a fans consortium couldn't afford to subsidise operating costs, wages and transfers, I'm saying that those things are not subsidised by owners.  They come from club revenue and in the case of transfers bank loans in the past.  The fact that Ashley found he had to pay off the mortgage on the stadium when he took over due to the contract the bank had with the Hall's doesn't change that fact.

 

So banks are now in the habit of giving out loans which they never want back and don't expect interest to be paid upon?

 

If the previous regimes were subsidising the running costs of the club with loans, they were still subsidising the running costs. Those loans would need to have been paid off at some point, so if Ashley has paid off those loans he is in effect subsidising the running costs of the club, even if those running costs were incurred during the previous regime.

 

The fact of the matter is that the club was (and apparently still is) massively in debt. These debts had come about due to the clubs own actions (ie the running costs). It is not the same as ManU where the club was debt free and profitable prior to the Glaiziers taking over, but is now in debt after effectively buying itself, due to the Glaizers transferring the loans they used to buy the club to the club after purchase. Our debt has come about due to the simple fact that the club has been spending more than it has been earning for many years and it has been financing that by taking out loans secured against future revenue.

 

These debts are a fact of life, they exist and would still exist even if the fans had control of the club, in fact it would be much more likely that the banks would insist on speedier repayment of the loans and/or higher interest rates if the fans were controlling the club because they would see that as a much greater risk than someone like Ashley.

 

You can't just ignore the debt and pretend it didn't happen. The club has needed to be subsidised for a while now and whilst the previous regime tried to run away from that and put it all on the never never, Ashley has gone some way towards tackling it, or in other words, has subsidised the club out of his own money.

 

If the fans want to do this then they're going to have to raise the money to buy the club, and then also have the money to subsidise the running costs of the club to the extent that they can not only make up the short-fall between what the club brings in and what it spends, but also pay off the debt as well.

 

Oh and don't forget this whole situation has arisen because the fans weren't happy because Ashley wasn't spending enough in the transfer market, so they'd have to find whatever additional money to bring that up to an "acceptable" amount too!!

 

Good luck raising all that cash, you'll fucking need it!!

[Teasy]

So then you're saying that Freddy Shepherd subsidised Newcastle United, because he took out loans?..

 

Of course loans have to be paid off, when did I say they didn't?  But the likes of Shepherd and Ashley don't pay them!  They are paid off by payments that come from revenue.  Just like they were under Shepherd, just like they still are under Ashley.  The same revenue that a fans consortium would have available to it.

 

What is your actual point here anyway?  My point is that any fans consortium would have the same money available to it as any Newcastle owner in the past.  None of them have actually put in personal money to pay players wages, or for club running costs or transfers, so why should it be a concern for a fans consortium?

 

BTW yet again Ashley paid off the mortgage on the stadium, not past transfer fee's ect

[Guest optimistic nit]

More like misleading really.  Who knows, you might be right he might have meant money from his own personal bank account, so there should have been spare revenue from the last two seasons plus £40 million from Ashley available for transfers this summer, anyone believe that?

 

 

the club was making a loss, and how do you know money wasn't available? but just not spent? also there is no reason to think it was going to be spent on transfers, and last season i think he invested a bit more than £20million.