Newcastle United Supporters Club

[Tooj]

Here is a general question for everyone, which is a reflection on the potential buyers and the interest in the club. I understand that the answer to this question will only be known properly when the new owners takeover. However, going on what we know about the level of interest and the types of buyers out there;

 

Would we be better off today if we had accepted Keegan walking out and allowed Ashley to find a suitable replacement as manager than where we find ourselves today?

 

 

 

 

Not unless we get an owner who wants a toy, and there arent that many about. With West Ham alledegly going for £100m how attractive are we as an acquisition for an owner who wants a fashoin accessory.

 

What if the new owners dont re-appoint Keegan?

 

Then that's their decision at the end of the day. As long as they back whomever they appoint that's the main thing.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Here is a general question for everyone, which is a reflection on the potential buyers and the interest in the club. I understand that the answer to this question will only be known properly when the new owners takeover. However, going on what we know about the level of interest and the types of buyers out there;

 

Would we be better off today if we had accepted Keegan walking out and allowed Ashley to find a suitable replacement as manager than where we find ourselves today?

 

 

Of course, a milliom miles better off.

 

This goes to the core of why the fans have to take their share of the blame for our current situation. If we had not reacted in the way we did the transition would have been (relatively) painless and we would be back to talking about football again now.

 

We would still be struggling a bit due to injuries but everything would be a lot better than it is.

[fredbob]

Here is a general question for everyone, which is a reflection on the potential buyers and the interest in the club. I understand that the answer to this question will only be known properly when the new owners takeover. However, going on what we know about the level of interest and the types of buyers out there;

 

Would we be better off today if we had accepted Keegan walking out and allowed Ashley to find a suitable replacement as manager than where we find ourselves today?

 

 

 

 

Not unless we get an owner who wants a toy, and there arent that many about. With West Ham alledegly going for £100m how attractive are we as an acquisition for an owner who wants a fashoin accessory.

 

What if the new owners dont re-appoint Keegan?

 

Then that's their decision at the end of the day. As long as they back whomever they appoint that's the main thing.

 

And supposing we have an equally 'unproductive' window come Jan or the summer for reasons unknown are they to be forced out as well?

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Why don't you just have a go at answering the question? What attitude should the NUSC take if Ashley can't find a buyer for the club?

 

If they have the interests of the club at heart then they do everything ih their power to arrange a meeting with Ashley and try to map out a way forward that involves Ashley investing into the club again.

 

I know its difficult to take anything coming out of the club at face value, but if he is truthful in only selling the club as he can no longer enjoy going to the matches then with compromise on everyones part this can be resolved.

 

Of course that doesn't fit with ensuring he leaves at all costs, but if a buyer isn't found (i'd even go as far as to say if one is not found by next Friday) then this is the only way forward imo

[Baggio]

Here is a general question for everyone, which is a reflection on the potential buyers and the interest in the club. I understand that the answer to this question will only be known properly when the new owners takeover. However, going on what we know about the level of interest and the types of buyers out there;

 

Would we be better off today if we had accepted Keegan walking out and allowed Ashley to find a suitable replacement as manager than where we find ourselves today?

 

 

If Ashley can't find a buyer, then definitely yes.

 

Otherwise it does kind of depend on who the buyer is. But the chances of us being bought by some wedged-up billionaire eager to splash hundreds of millions on star players are looking, in my opinion, decidedly slim. So probably yes again.

 

And looking slimmer by the day given the utter mayhem on the financial markets and the imminent global recession.

 

From reading the last statement from NUSC it reads like they don't care if the next owner has millions to pump into the club or not, all they're interested in is Ashley leaving as soon as possible.

[Tooj]

Here is a general question for everyone, which is a reflection on the potential buyers and the interest in the club. I understand that the answer to this question will only be known properly when the new owners takeover. However, going on what we know about the level of interest and the types of buyers out there;

 

Would we be better off today if we had accepted Keegan walking out and allowed Ashley to find a suitable replacement as manager than where we find ourselves today?

 

 

 

 

Not unless we get an owner who wants a toy, and there arent that many about. With West Ham alledegly going for £100m how attractive are we as an acquisition for an owner who wants a fashoin accessory.

 

What if the new owners dont re-appoint Keegan?

 

Then that's their decision at the end of the day. As long as they back whomever they appoint that's the main thing.

 

And supposing we have an equally 'unproductive' window come Jan or the summer are they to be forced out as well?

 

Define unproductive.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Here is a general question for everyone, which is a reflection on the potential buyers and the interest in the club. I understand that the answer to this question will only be known properly when the new owners takeover. However, going on what we know about the level of interest and the types of buyers out there;

 

Would we be better off today if we had accepted Keegan walking out and allowed Ashley to find a suitable replacement as manager than where we find ourselves today?

 

 

 

 

Not unless we get an owner who wants a toy, and there arent that many about. With West Ham alledegly going for £100m how attractive are we as an acquisition for an owner who wants a fashoin accessory.

 

What if the new owners dont re-appoint Keegan?

 

Then that's their decision at the end of the day. As long as they back whomever they appoint that's the main thing.

 

And supposing we have an equally 'unproductive' window come Jan or the summer are they to be forced out as well?

 

Define unproductive.

 

Smith & Shola still being here

[Tooj]

Unproductive it shall be then.

[OzzieMandias]

Here is a general question for everyone, which is a reflection on the potential buyers and the interest in the club. I understand that the answer to this question will only be known properly when the new owners takeover. However, going on what we know about the level of interest and the types of buyers out there;

 

Would we be better off today if we had accepted Keegan walking out and allowed Ashley to find a suitable replacement as manager than where we find ourselves today?

 

 

If Ashley can't find a buyer, then definitely yes.

 

Otherwise it does kind of depend on who the buyer is. But the chances of us being bought by some wedged-up billionaire eager to splash hundreds of millions on star players are looking, in my opinion, decidedly slim. So probably yes again.

 

And looking slimmer by the day given the utter mayhem on the financial markets and the imminent global recession.

 

Which is what prompted my question upthread. What does the NUSC do now? An Ashley who's stuck with a club he no longer wants plus continued agitation and protest looks like a sure recipe for further disaster -- a club that can not move forward but is also becoming increasingly unattractive to such buyers as are still out there when the recessionary dust begins to settle.

[ChezGiven]

So here's another question that i've been reflecting on;

 

If the new owners don't appoint Keegan then what difference does it make who the owner is?

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Unproductive it shall be then.

 

Particularly with our chief negotiator gone

[OzzieMandias]

Why don't you just have a go at answering the question? What attitude should the NUSC take if Ashley can't find a buyer for the club?

 

If they have the interests of the club at heart then they do everything ih their power to arrange a meeting with Ashley and try to map out a way forward that involves Ashley investing into the club again.

 

I know its difficult to take anything coming out of the club at face value, but if he is truthful in only selling the club as he can no longer enjoy going to the matches then with compromise on everyones part this can be resolved.

 

Of course that doesn't fit with ensuring he leaves at all costs, but if a buyer isn't found (i'd even go as far as to say if one is not found by next Friday) then this is the only way forward imo

 

I agree completely.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

So here's another question that i've been reflecting on;

 

If the new owners don't appoint Keegan then what difference does it make who the owner is?

 

They might not be cockneys.  That's all that matters.

[OzzieMandias]

So here's another question that i've been reflecting on;

 

If the new owners don't appoint Keegan then what difference does it make who the owner is?

 

Likely level of investment is then the only variable.

[TRon]

So here's another question that i've been reflecting on;

 

If the new owners don't appoint Keegan then what difference does it make who the owner is?

 

They won't be Cockney Mafia. I think that's as far ahead as the Ashley Out brigade have probably figured it so far.

[OzzieMandias]

So here's another question that i've been reflecting on;

 

If the new owners don't appoint Keegan then what difference does it make who the owner is?

 

Likely level of investment is then the only variable.

 

Actually that's not true. Experience in running a similar business will also count.

[OzzieMandias]

It's unlikely to be an international pie manufacturer, anyway.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

So here's another question that i've been reflecting on;

 

If the new owners don't appoint Keegan then what difference does it make who the owner is?

 

Likely level of investment is then the only variable.

 

Actually that's not true. Experience in running a similar business will also count.

 

So if Freddy is heading a consortium/ being brought in as chairman?

[TRon]

So here's another question that i've been reflecting on;

 

If the new owners don't appoint Keegan then what difference does it make who the owner is?

 

Likely level of investment is then the only variable.

 

Actually that's not true. Experience in running a similar business will also count.

 

So if Freddy is heading a consortium/ being brought in as chairman?

 

Why would anyone want Freddie as chairman? Would he be bringing his son with him to rubber stamp Luque/Boumsong type deals?

[ChezGiven]

So here's another question that i've been reflecting on;

 

If the new owners don't appoint Keegan then what difference does it make who the owner is?

 

Likely level of investment is then the only variable.

 

Would you (generally) support them if they adopted a similar strategy of finding young talent and a focus on the academy?

[fredbob]

Massively off topic but its jst something ive been wondering - can anyone tell me the difference between DOF (Wise/Vetere/Jiminez) and an old school chairman like FS?

 

What have this lot done that is so bad that Shepherd himself hasnt done in the past?

 

 

[Colos Short and Curlies]

So here's another question that i've been reflecting on;

 

If the new owners don't appoint Keegan then what difference does it make who the owner is?

 

Likely level of investment is then the only variable.

 

Actually that's not true. Experience in running a similar business will also count.

 

So if Freddy is heading a consortium/ being brought in as chairman?

 

Why would anyone want Freddie as chairman? Would he be bringing his son with him to rubber stamp Luque/Boumsong type deals?

 

Because he has experience running a similar business. (It wasn't a recommendation btw, merely a question type statement)

[Mick]

Here is a general question for everyone, which is a reflection on the potential buyers and the interest in the club. I understand that the answer to this question will only be known properly when the new owners takeover. However, going on what we know about the level of interest and the types of buyers out there;

 

Would we be better off today if we had accepted Keegan walking out and allowed Ashley to find a suitable replacement as manager than where we find ourselves today?

 

 

 

 

I think the answer has to be "of course."  If Ashley can't find a buyer then he's got to do what is best for the club, I'd like to see Llambias go before we bring in a new manager and keep Ashley.

[Mick]

Why don't you just have a go at answering the question? What attitude should the NUSC take if Ashley can't find a buyer for the club?

 

If they have the interests of the club at heart then they do everything ih their power to arrange a meeting with Ashley and try to map out a way forward that involves Ashley investing into the club again.

 

I know its difficult to take anything coming out of the club at face value, but if he is truthful in only selling the club as he can no longer enjoy going to the matches then with compromise on everyones part this can be resolved.

 

Of course that doesn't fit with ensuring he leaves at all costs, but if a buyer isn't found (i'd even go as far as to say if one is not found by next Friday) then this is the only way forward imo

 

I doubt that Ashley would have any interest in meeting NUSC after what's gone on, that's just a guess.

[Mick]

So here's another question that i've been reflecting on;

 

If the new owners don't appoint Keegan then what difference does it make who the owner is?

 

That's not easy to answer as the new owner could bring in better or worse, he could also invest or take from the club.