UV Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 (Insert emoticon for someone talking out their arse here --> http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=729;type=avatar ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 A lot of the statements on here seem to be based on the premise that because he's the owner, everything that's happened must be his fault. There was a lot that he got right. But a Chairman once said that all the decisions that he made paled into significance beside the one concerning the choice of manager. And Ashley got that wrong, at least for the plan that he had in mind. Where he can't be blamed is for the manner and timing of Keegan's departure, which has caused so much damage. Keegan has a lot to answer for there. what a load of rot. Ref your first paragraph - plenty of people have said in the past, when it suited them, everything stops with the owner [personally I don't necessarily agree] but why move the goalposts ? 2nd paragraph - I really don't think he did too much right at all 3rd para - of course he's to blame. He even had a chance to reverse the situation but didn't. The manager is his most important employee, so how the hell can you absove him of any blame < sigh > please tell us what you disagree with and why No mate, it's not that I disagree necessarily. I just found it funny that you made sure to cover all your bases from criticism with a good all-round use of the English language. Everything here is Ashley's fault, yet not everything was Shepherd's fault. edit: I thought bobyule's post was very reasoned, and told it like it is welll........I think its amusing that people who blamed Shepherd for everything are now making excuses for Ashley.........which is why I said so At the end of the day, we are in the biggest shit for about 20 years, and a million miles away from equalling those european and Champs league qualifications never mind doing better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 No-one blamed Shepherd for everything, and no-one is suggesting Ashley is innocent of wrong-doing. You seem obsessed with the positives of Shepherd's (much longer) reign, to the point where you appear to believe they absolve him of any blame for the negative occurrences. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest elbee909 Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 NE5's arguments do seem to be aimed at a shifting mass of perceived opinion, rather than actual individuals. Where he does argue with individuals it tends to be petty one-upmanship/insult driven. Should have been an MP! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 A lot of the statements on here seem to be based on the premise that because he's the owner, everything that's happened must be his fault. There was a lot that he got right. But a Chairman once said that all the decisions that he made paled into significance beside the one concerning the choice of manager. And Ashley got that wrong, at least for the plan that he had in mind. Where he can't be blamed is for the manner and timing of Keegan's departure, which has caused so much damage. Keegan has a lot to answer for there. what a load of rot. Ref your first paragraph - plenty of people have said in the past, when it suited them, everything stops with the owner [personally I don't necessarily agree] but why move the goalposts ? 2nd paragraph - I really don't think he did too much right at all 3rd para - of course he's to blame. He even had a chance to reverse the situation but didn't. The manager is his most important employee, so how the hell can you absove him of any blame < sigh > please tell us what you disagree with and why No mate, it's not that I disagree necessarily. I just found it funny that you made sure to cover all your bases from criticism with a good all-round use of the English language. Everything here is Ashley's fault, yet not everything was Shepherd's fault. edit: I thought bobyule's post was very reasoned, and told it like it is welll........I think its amusing that people who blamed Shepherd for everything are now making excuses for Ashley.........which is why I said so At the end of the day, we are in the biggest s*** for about 20 years, and a million miles away from equalling those european and Champs league qualifications never mind doing better. but we are not a million miles away from where we were for most roeders 2nd season or where we were when souness got the boot.. why do you only quote champs lge etc as examples of fred's work and not the drop from those heights or the appointment of 3 poor managers off the spin ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 (Insert emoticon for someone talking out their arse here --> http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=729;type=avatar ) Oh, what a brilliantly original response. "Same to you." I'll have to try and remember that one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 So what's going on in here then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 So what's going on in here then? we've all agreed to just let bygones be bygones and live happily ever after. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 In light of the global financial crash, the situation overspending West Ham now find themselves in, unsustainable Premier league wage bills and football's general level of debt, Mike Ashley's structured plan for the club and it's finances looks quite visionary. A shame that Keegan's walkout and the sub primes demonstration blew such a hole in what now looks like it was a very astute longer term plan for NUFC's prosperity and success. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 In light of the global financial crash, the situation overspending West Ham now find themselves in, unsustainable Premier league wage bills and football's general level of debt, Mike Ashley's structured plan for the club and it's finances looks quite visionary. A shame that Keegan's walkout and the sub primes demonstration blew such a hole in what now looks like it was a very astute longer term plan for NUFC's prosperity and success. What would relegation do for the plan? Year on year with insignificant squad improvement while others spend would leave us more threatened. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gggg Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 In light of the global financial crash, the situation overspending West Ham now find themselves in, unsustainable Premier league wage bills and football's general level of debt, Mike Ashley's structured plan for the club and it's finances looks quite visionary. Aston Villa and Spurs had a similar "vision" at the start of the Premiership and it set them back 15 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mucky01 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 ^ yep, the Doug Ellis vision. WIKI: Ellis was a controversial chairman and major shareholder of Aston Villa for two separate spells; the first being from 1968 to 1975. Ellis was replaced as chairman and finally ousted from the board in 1979. During his absence Aston Villa enjoyed its greatest period of success in modern times, winning the Football League title in 1981 and the European Cup in 1982. Ellis returned as chairman in 1982 and remained there until selling to Randy Lerner in 2006. Most fans blame him for the decline of the club after the European Cup victory in 1981/2. Within five years the club was relegated from the top flight, with many of the European Cup-winning team being sold to other teams. Supporters and former club managers criticised Ellis's alleged lack of ambition[5] [6], noting that the club often struggled to bring in top players. Ellis responded that his approach had always been one of financial prudence, helping to avoid the fate of big-borrowing clubs such as Leeds United. no debts or vision there either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 (Insert emoticon for someone talking out their arse here --> http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=729;type=avatar ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 In light of the global financial crash, the situation overspending West Ham now find themselves in, unsustainable Premier league wage bills and football's general level of debt, Mike Ashley's structured plan for the club and it's finances looks quite visionary. Aston Villa and Spurs had a similar "vision" at the start of the Premiership and it set them back 15 years. Unless you've been on Mars for the last 6 months you may realise we live in very different financial times to those of the last 15 years. Ashley's intention was not to stop spending, just to stop spending stupidly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 In light of the global financial crash, the situation overspending West Ham now find themselves in, unsustainable Premier league wage bills and football's general level of debt, Mike Ashley's structured plan for the club and it's finances looks quite visionary. Aston Villa and Spurs had a similar "vision" at the start of the Premiership and it set them back 15 years. Unless you've been on Mars for the last 6 months you may realise we live in very different financial times to those of the last 15 years. Ashley's intention was not to stop spending, just to stop spending stupidly. Net spend under his tenure would suggest differently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mucky01 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 so it’s all the fault of the credit crunch/recession! class. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 so its all the fault of the credit crunch/recession! class. Muck you need to learn to read properly. Whoever's FAULT it was, the present global financial situation will impact on every industry and especially those financed in the way Premiership football is. Ashley's proposed structure looks increasingly sensible with what is going on, whether that was by foresight or accident. Even Manu, Chelsea etc will be looking very carefully at their books and spending in the near future. Clubs in debt and operating with disproportionate salary bills could be in big trouble before long. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 In light of the global financial crash, the situation overspending West Ham now find themselves in, unsustainable Premier league wage bills and football's general level of debt, Mike Ashley's structured plan for the club and it's finances looks quite visionary. Aston Villa and Spurs had a similar "vision" at the start of the Premiership and it set them back 15 years. Unless you've been on Mars for the last 6 months you may realise we live in very different financial times to those of the last 15 years. Ashley's intention was not to stop spending, just to stop spending stupidly. Net spend under his tenure would suggest differently. I think his assumed tenure was a lot longer than one year. Therefore to judge him (or anyone) else on the one year since taking over a sinking ship would be unfair in the extreme. But there again what do the angry mob care about fairness ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chris P Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 A lot of the statements on here seem to be based on the premise that because he's the owner, everything that's happened must be his fault. There was a lot that he got right. But a Chairman once said that all the decisions that he made paled into significance beside the one concerning the choice of manager. And Ashley got that wrong, at least for the plan that he had in mind. Where he can't be blamed is for the manner and timing of Keegan's departure, which has caused so much damage. Keegan has a lot to answer for there. Once again Bob you've got it spot on. I loved KK and hoped it would work out, but his appointment was Ashley's big mistake. I will now never forgive Keegan for the way he walked out, sure things didn't suit him but he could have been man enough to stay with the team and fans he allegedly loved while a sensible resolution was worked on. It appears that in the days following his walkout Ashley tried everything possible to find a compromise but Keegans only concern was attempting to preserve his pay off. Hence King Kev has said nothing to enlighten those he supposedly loved. Exactly. Where is Keegan in all of this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mucky01 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 so it’s all the fault of the credit crunch/recession! class. Muck you need to learn to read properly. Whoever's FAULT it was, the present global financial situation will impact on every industry and especially those financed in the way Premiership football is. Ashley's proposed structure looks increasingly sensible with what is going on, whether that was by foresight or accident. Even Manu, Chelsea etc will be looking very carefully at their books and spending in the near future. Clubs in debt and operating with disproportionate salary bills could be in big trouble before long. yep, every business should look at their spending in a recession, a lot of them that will go under as they stop investing and give their competitors an advantage. Speculate to accumulate, NUFC clearly haven’t recently, but his has to be done – albeit sensibly. But the Hall/Shepherd way was to the other extreme. “Ashley's proposed structure looks increasingly sensible with what is going on, whether that was by foresight or accident.” sorry, to me and many others he’s out of his depth running a football club and is going back to what he knows best. He should keep away from gambling on shares in banks as well – stick to nylon sportswear and trainers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 so it’s all the fault of the credit crunch/recession! class. Muck you need to learn to read properly. Whoever's FAULT it was, the present global financial situation will impact on every industry and especially those financed in the way Premiership football is. Ashley's proposed structure looks increasingly sensible with what is going on, whether that was by foresight or accident. Even Manu, Chelsea etc will be looking very carefully at their books and spending in the near future. Clubs in debt and operating with disproportionate salary bills could be in big trouble before long. yep, every business should look at their spending in a recession, a lot of them that will go under as they stop investing and give their competitors an advantage. Speculate to accumulate, NUFC clearly haven’t recently, but his has to be done – albeit sensibly. But the Hall/Shepherd way was to the other extreme. “Ashley's proposed structure looks increasingly sensible with what is going on, whether that was by foresight or accident.” sorry, to me and many others he’s out of his depth running a football club and is going back to what he knows best. He should keep away from gambling on shares in banks as well – stick to nylon sportswear and trainers. on the back of the papers reporting his losses. do you think this was his one forray into that area or had he done it before and profited (but not reported as "billionaire makes more money" isn't really a catchy headline) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mucky01 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 so it’s all the fault of the credit crunch/recession! class. Muck you need to learn to read properly. Whoever's FAULT it was, the present global financial situation will impact on every industry and especially those financed in the way Premiership football is. Ashley's proposed structure looks increasingly sensible with what is going on, whether that was by foresight or accident. Even Manu, Chelsea etc will be looking very carefully at their books and spending in the near future. Clubs in debt and operating with disproportionate salary bills could be in big trouble before long. yep, every business should look at their spending in a recession, a lot of them that will go under as they stop investing and give their competitors an advantage. Speculate to accumulate, NUFC clearly haven’t recently, but his has to be done – albeit sensibly. But the Hall/Shepherd way was to the other extreme. “Ashley's proposed structure looks increasingly sensible with what is going on, whether that was by foresight or accident.” sorry, to me and many others he’s out of his depth running a football club and is going back to what he knows best. He should keep away from gambling on shares in banks as well – stick to nylon sportswear and trainers. on the back of the papers reporting his losses. do you think this was his one forray into that area or had he done it before and profited (but not reported as "billionaire makes more money" isn't really a catchy headline) There have been many headlines about Ashley making wads of money, only related to his sportswear empire, as well as with the roulette wheel – along with the banking investment not exactly “sensible”. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 so it’s all the fault of the credit crunch/recession! class. Muck you need to learn to read properly. Whoever's FAULT it was, the present global financial situation will impact on every industry and especially those financed in the way Premiership football is. Ashley's proposed structure looks increasingly sensible with what is going on, whether that was by foresight or accident. Even Manu, Chelsea etc will be looking very carefully at their books and spending in the near future. Clubs in debt and operating with disproportionate salary bills could be in big trouble before long. yep, every business should look at their spending in a recession, a lot of them that will go under as they stop investing and give their competitors an advantage. Speculate to accumulate, NUFC clearly haven’t recently, but his has to be done – albeit sensibly. But the Hall/Shepherd way was to the other extreme. “Ashley's proposed structure looks increasingly sensible with what is going on, whether that was by foresight or accident.” sorry, to me and many others he’s out of his depth running a football club and is going back to what he knows best. He should keep away from gambling on shares in banks as well – stick to nylon sportswear and trainers. on the back of the papers reporting his losses. do you think this was his one forray into that area or had he done it before and profited (but not reported as "billionaire makes more money" isn't really a catchy headline) There have been many headlines about Ashley making wads of money, only related to his sportswear empire, as well as with the roulette wheel – along with the banking investment not exactly “sensible”. do you think he's won before on market spreading ? or do you think he's lost all the time ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 In light of the global financial crash, the situation overspending West Ham now find themselves in, unsustainable Premier league wage bills and football's general level of debt, Mike Ashley's structured plan for the club and it's finances looks quite visionary. Ashley's 'structured' plan as you put it was designed to raise the sell-on value of the club, nothing more. Clubs with debt are less attractive options, even more so in a credit crunch. Clubs without debt are very attractive options, even more so in a credit crunch. He will find this out very soon despite the on-field mess as he gets himself a healthy profit for his initial investment. That has been his intention all along. I'm not surprised you see it another way though, given your absurd claims in the opening post. A shame that Keegan's walkout and the sub primes demonstration blew such a hole in what now looks like it was a very astute longer term plan for NUFC's prosperity and success. More like KK blew a hole in your hopes that Ashley was the real deal, that's what this is all about. You don't want to admit he isn't and never was the real deal. Instead you'd rather denigrate a man who has done far more for this club than the man you laughingly claim as the best ever chairman or owner we've ever had. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 on the back of the papers reporting his losses. do you think this was his one forray into that area or had he done it before and profited (but not reported as "billionaire makes more money" isn't really a catchy headline) How about "Newcastle owner Ashley wins £1.3m on one spin of roulette wheel"? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-563853/Newcastle-owner-Ashley-wins-1-3m-spin-roulette-wheel.html I think "billionaire makes more money" would have been more catchy actually. Note: I'm not vouching for the veracity of this article, and I know it's a different gamble to the one you were talking about, just addressing your "well they wouldn't report it if he'd won" argument. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts