Better the devil we know?

[Guest smoggeordie]

Better the devil you know?

 

Anyone with time, money and hope invested in the emotional black hole that is Newcastle United has a right to scream blue murder right now.

 

And in any business, the buck stops with the man at the top.

 

So it's hardly startling that the blood being bayed for belongs to Freddy Shepherd.

 

What wouldn't be too much more surprising is if the chairman now decided enough was enough.

 

Never mind he's as Geordie as a bottle o' dog, has overseen the expansion of St James's Park and allowed his managers to spend a gross £200 million-plus on players . . .

 

His hometown team are 10 places and several notches in class below where they were when he took over, the ground is a temple of gloom and much of that money has been wasted by his managers.

 

Mostly the fans' money. His managers.

 

And there's the rub.

 

The less successful the manager, the more discredited the chairman who saw fit to appoint him. One cannot hang the other out to dry.

 

Managers, in the case of Shepherd, who himself has been well paid by the club for his services.

 

The chairman would have people judge him in purely business terms.

 

Well, he has simply got business decisions of too much importance wrong in recent years - most obviously the timing of Sir Bobby Robson's sacking and the appointment of He Who Must Not Be Named - to be spared a backlash.

 

But all that said, I make two points.

 

First, it is strange that the Halls should be spared the wrath of the Magpie mob.

 

Here is a family that has banked multi-millions from the club during Shepherd's tenure for what appears to be a lot, lot less work.

 

A family that - Shepherd in or Shepherd out - holds the club's major shareholding, and all the power and culpability that comes with it.

 

Second, next to the strangers of the Belgravia Group, Shepherd may be the better devil to know.

 

I keep hearing that the intentions of United's would-be buyers are even less well known than the buyers themselves.

 

But, as an investment group, I don't see how their intentions could be much clearer: they are to make money . . . and make it fast.

 

The cash for Belgravia to buy the club would, apparently, come from a hedge fund.

 

And the investors in said hedge fund will have as much emotional commitment to Newcastle United as the average Chelsea fan.

 

That's none at all.

 

In layman's language, a hedge fund lends money for investment in companies - at a very high rate of interest - in search of a big gain in a short time. Two or three years being the norm.

 

They rarely involve themselves in companies like football clubs for the long term.

 

Unlike Roman Abramovich, it's cash rather than glory they are after. Cash, say, by getting Newcastle back into the Champions League.

 

Granted, that might seem a short-term aim to savour for supporters.

 

But it seems to me just as likely that the prospect of opening a casino at St James's is the business boost that Belgravia are interested in.

 

And what would become of the club once the profiteers had made their fast buck?

 

Fans should be even more wary of the implications of Newcastle NOT delivering its new owners instant success.

 

Hedge funds tend to impose very harsh conditions on companies in the event of the best case scenario not working out.

 

The fund which helped finance Malcolm Glazer's takeover of Manchester United made such alarming demands that the American switched to alternative funding a year down the line - and had to hand the hedge fund a hefty pay off for providing the initial cash.

 

And what of the man leading the Belgravia Group? The man who, perhaps, might replace Shepherd.

 

I understand Duncan Hickman attended Millfield public school in Somerset and is a fund manager. That's a stockbroker made good (very good) to you and me.

 

As far as I can tell, his football background extends no further than once being involved with the fad of issuing club credit cards.

 

Otherwise, he used to be a director of a management company which represented Jenson Button.

 

He lives in Jersey and, to be frank, doesn't seem to stick at any one thing for very long.

 

In fact, I believe Mr Hickman has been a director of at least 17 companies - not including any arm of the Belgravia Group - in recent years.

 

Does he strike you as the ideal man to run Newcastle United?

 

If you support Sunderland (who know all about people overseeing failure from Jersey), perhaps he does.

 

And if you bleed black and white? Rail against Shepherd all you will.

 

But just be careful what you wish for.

 

Link

[Crumpy Gunt]

Makes you wonder if Farrington is being played like a fiddle by Shepherd. Lets face it Oliver safely tucked into one of Shepherds back pockets and now to get Farrington and the Sunday Sun in the other.

[Baggio]

Makes you wonder if Farrington is being played like a fiddle by Shepherd. Lets face it Oliver safely tucked into one of Shepherds back pockets and now to get Farrington and the Sunday Sun in the other.

 

Exactly what I thought, its like a someone asked him to write an article shifting any blame from Freddie Shepherd.

[Guest Phil K]

Better the devil you know?

There is also the idea of the stupidity of persevering with someone whose record is one of non-stop horrendously expensive errors and mistakes. Souness's ridiculously long contract - given to someone whose record as a manager is atrocious remember - being one of the most lunatic in even our terrible-director error-ridden history, being one.

THAT is Freddie Shepherd.

Give me the devil I DON'T know in this case.

SHEPHERD OUT.

AND TAKE ROEDER WITH YOU

[tmonkey]

Shephard and Hall are fleecing the club, and so might any new owners - but, being honest, I really wouldnt care about that, as long as there was success to go along with it, ie if they appointed a good manager and let the manager handle the footballing side of the club.

 

Even if Belgravia were looking to make a fast buck out of us, as long as they appoint a good manager, who cares? Weve got the resources to be top 4 whilst also being fleeced, in fact the current board are doing just that but without the footballing success, and since next season will see more funds being available due to the new TV deals (maybe thats why theyre interested in taking us over?), if someone wants to come and make a quick buck out of us, then so be it - just set the club up competently, give us a good manager or DOF, and let him run the footballing side of the club.

 

Thats all we need, yet our current board cannot deliver it because of gross mismanagement and incompetence.

[Guest Phil K]

So Belgravia might fleece us ?

What have Shepherd and the Halls been doing for the past 10 years ?

They've made untold fortunes out of Newcastle and given us an atrocious slump in return.

Far as I'm concerned they can make millions out of Newcastle, as long as the club is healthy and succesful.

That isnt going to happen with Shepherd and Roeder.

Relegation is the nearest we'll get to "success" with those two.

 

I personally wouldn't urinate on Farrington or Oliver if they were on fire (laugh maybe)

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

So Belgravia might fleece us ?

What have Shepherd and the Halls been doing for the past 10 years ?

They've made untold fortunes out of Newcastle and given us an atrocious slump in return.

Far as I'm concerned they can make millions out of Newcastle, as long as the club is healthy and succesful.

That isnt going to happen with Shepherd and Roeder.

Relegation is the nearest we'll get to "success" with those two.

 

I personally wouldn't urinate on Farrington or Oliver if they were on fire (laugh maybe)

 

that's exactly the point, it's pretty stupid to expect success just because the managements changed. As he says, what happens when their investment doesn't pay off?

[Guest DONTOONER]

What the club needs is success...not some mambo JumBO So called Local Loyal fan to head the club

Almost appointing Steve Bruce still give me the shivers!

 

I rather Fat LArk Goes because he doesnt have a bloody brain, that why he could make losses of millions and yet get the team to go further down the table

[magorific]

Makes you wonder if Farrington is being played like a fiddle by Shepherd. Lets face it Oliver safely tucked into one of Shepherds back pockets and now to get Farrington and the Sunday Sun in the other.

 

weird, I read that piece today and thought it made sense. It pointed out that Shepherd has f*cked things up but that we look like taking on just another bunch of winkers with none of their own mney to put into the club but looking to take a fortune out of it.

 

i'll get me coat . ..

[brummie]

"They want to open a casino!!!!!!" = the standard bullshit line used to discredit anyone in the takeover of a club these days - used against Lerner and now in the Newcastle situation.

 

Totally ignores the facts that 1. You can't open a casino where you want, 2. The supercasino bidding process is all but over, and 3. You don't need to spend 100m on a football club to open a casino.

 

When you hear that sort of blanket "throw enough shit, some of it will stick" stuff, you know someone is starting to get worried.

[Scribble]

Shepherd's had several chances - if a manager doesn't bring success he fires them, so the same rationale should apply to him.

 

In all honesty, I think the club has gone stale under his direction, we need a new board, one which will do their damndest to modernise this club in the way things are run.

 

None of this local lad, geordie pre-requisite shite. Just a board that will give whichever maanger appointed the stability, funds, and backing to do their job without interefering and look to improve the structure of the club for success not cronyism.

 

Case in point, Roeder having to persuade shepherd tofork out for pro-zone (or whatever its actually called), to monitor player performance! That kind of thing should already be in place, and the club should be looking at other sports to see what areas we can improve on instead of resting on imaginary laurels (or what's known as 'keeping our powder dry'), that is the kind of things Chelsea, Man Utd, and Bolton are doing to improve performance, looking at the techology used in the NFL among other places.

 

 

The one minor bright side to our ridiculous league position is it may panic shepherd (hell, it panics me!) into selling as he'd lose a lot more if we went down.

 

 

[Cronky]

Basic problem is that the only person who's in a position of sufficient strength to influence Shepherd is Douglas Hall, and he doesn't seem to have any interest in the day to day running of the club, or to be a particularly forceful character. The result is that Freddie has been allowed to stumble from one stupid decision to another. His judgement on football matters is equivelent to that of the average pub bore, but his influence on football matters is considerable.

 

We can't progress under that situation. I don't know anything about Belgravia or hedge funds, but I'd take my chances with them rather than carry on under the current cast of idiots.

[heero]

FAtso should have never sacked Bobby, then we would have never been in this position.

 

Once an idiot, always an idiot

 

 

[garth]

I'd take my chances at the moment with Belgravia, if they pay themselves a good dividend then so be it! so long as they bring success to the club run it proffessionally and don't intrude in the managers decisions so long as it doesn't send the club bankrupt. I don't have a problem with that, The Halls and The Shepherds have fleeced this club long enough and have given nothing in return so lets give someone else a crack at it.

[BottledDog]

FAtso should have never sacked Bobby, then we would have never been in this position.

 

Once an idiot, always an idiot

 

 

 

Sacking Robson was inevitable and should have happened at the same time as Houllier. Robson knew his time was short and was willing to help bring in a successor.

 

Sadly the fuckwit in charge said he couldn't shoot Bambi - a fucking insult in anyones book, gives him another year and says he will be sacked after that, leaving a dead duck in charge.

 

Then the twat sacks him a few games in without any clue who to replace him with, leaving him to pay nearly a million to get Shitness on a long term contract.

 

The man is an utter (utter) cunt.

 

 

 

 

An utter (utter) cunt.

[thomas]

Scaremongering of the worst sort tbh.  Why is the myth perpetuated that they're a cut and run outfit? Not just in the article but I see it on here too. 

[BottledDog]

Scaremongering of the worst sort tbh.  Why is the myth perpetuated that they're a cut and run outfit? Not just in the article but I see it on here too. 

 

Thankfully just limited to 3 names these days.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

Scaremongering of the worst sort tbh.  Why is the myth perpetuated that they're a cut and run outfit? Not just in the article but I see it on here too. 

 

just on a common sense level, what business (apart from a football consortium) would take on the risk of running a club for 10 years? Of course they're going to want returns quickly.

[Guest alex]

So Belgravia might fleece us ?

What have Shepherd and the Halls been doing for the past 10 years ?

They've made untold fortunes out of Newcastle and given us an atrocious slump in return.

Far as I'm concerned they can make millions out of Newcastle, as long as the club is healthy and succesful.

That isnt going to happen with Shepherd and Roeder.

Relegation is the nearest we'll get to "success" with those two.

 

I personally wouldn't urinate on Farrington or Oliver if they were on fire (laugh maybe)

 

that's exactly the point, it's pretty stupid to expect success just because the managements changed. As he says, what happens when their investment doesn't pay off?

Expecting whoever takes over to do a better job than Shepherd however, isn't stupid imo. Also, whoever takes over will want the club to be a success as that will benefit them most surely.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

So Belgravia might fleece us ?

What have Shepherd and the Halls been doing for the past 10 years ?

They've made untold fortunes out of Newcastle and given us an atrocious slump in return.

Far as I'm concerned they can make millions out of Newcastle, as long as the club is healthy and succesful.

That isnt going to happen with Shepherd and Roeder.

Relegation is the nearest we'll get to "success" with those two.

 

I personally wouldn't urinate on Farrington or Oliver if they were on fire (laugh maybe)

 

that's exactly the point, it's pretty stupid to expect success just because the managements changed. As he says, what happens when their investment doesn't pay off?

Expecting whoever takes over to do a better job than Shepherd however, isn't stupid imo. Also, whoever takes over will want the club to be a success as that will benefit them most surely.

 

Doug Ellis had a very successful term of office at Villa regarding his investment. You think he was aiming for what most fans considered success?

 

Leeds lost Peter Ridsdale and ended up with Ken fucking Bates

 

You honestly think ANY new owner is 100% guaranteed to improve our situation? (bearing in mind no-one has the first clue where we will finish this year, no matter how much they say they do)

 

 

[Guest alex]

So Belgravia might fleece us ?

What have Shepherd and the Halls been doing for the past 10 years ?

They've made untold fortunes out of Newcastle and given us an atrocious slump in return.

Far as I'm concerned they can make millions out of Newcastle, as long as the club is healthy and succesful.

That isnt going to happen with Shepherd and Roeder.

Relegation is the nearest we'll get to "success" with those two.

 

I personally wouldn't urinate on Farrington or Oliver if they were on fire (laugh maybe)

 

that's exactly the point, it's pretty stupid to expect success just because the managements changed. As he says, what happens when their investment doesn't pay off?

Expecting whoever takes over to do a better job than Shepherd however, isn't stupid imo. Also, whoever takes over will want the club to be a success as that will benefit them most surely.

 

Doug Ellis had a very successful term of office at Villa regarding his investment. You think he was aiming for what most fans considered success?

 

Leeds lost Peter Ridsdale and ended up with Ken ****ing Bates

 

You honestly think ANY new owner is 100% guaranteed to improve our situation? (bearing in mind no-one has the first clue where we will finish this year, no matter how much they say they do)

 

 

No, I reckon we need a fucking change though. By the way, where do you see us finishing in the league this year?

[thomas]

Scaremongering of the worst sort tbh.  Why is the myth perpetuated that they're a cut and run outfit? Not just in the article but I see it on here too. 

 

just on a common sense level, what business (apart from a football consortium) would take on the risk of running a club for 10 years? Of course they're going to want returns quickly.

Why do you say that? On a common sense level, no business (or individual for that matter) with any sense of financial nous would invest in a club expecting returns quickly. 

 

Think about how much they'd spend on the club + players to get us to the top 4 + managers + clubs debts outstanding already.  There's no way, even with CL money coming in, to recoup that investment quickly.  Anyone buying into us would have to buy in with the idea of long term success / income offsetting the short term heavy investing it took to get there.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

Scaremongering of the worst sort tbh.  Why is the myth perpetuated that they're a cut and run outfit? Not just in the article but I see it on here too. 

 

just on a common sense level, what business (apart from a football consortium) would take on the risk of running a club for 10 years? Of course they're going to want returns quickly.

Why do you say that? On a common sense level, no business (or individual for that matter) with any sense of financial nous would invest in a club expecting returns quickly. 

 

Think about how much they'd spend on the club + players to get us to the top 4 + managers + clubs debts outstanding already.  There's no way, even with CL money coming in, to recoup that investment quickly.  Anyone buying into us would have to buy in with the idea of long term success / income offsetting the short term heavy investing it took to get there.

 

Is that using the Jack Walker model? Or the John Hall model?

[Rob W]

aye look at Hearts FFS

[thomas]

Scaremongering of the worst sort tbh.  Why is the myth perpetuated that they're a cut and run outfit? Not just in the article but I see it on here too. 

 

just on a common sense level, what business (apart from a football consortium) would take on the risk of running a club for 10 years? Of course they're going to want returns quickly.

Why do you say that? On a common sense level, no business (or individual for that matter) with any sense of financial nous would invest in a club expecting returns quickly. 

 

Think about how much they'd spend on the club + players to get us to the top 4 + managers + clubs debts outstanding already.  There's no way, even with CL money coming in, to recoup that investment quickly.  Anyone buying into us would have to buy in with the idea of long term success / income offsetting the short term heavy investing it took to get there.

 

Is that using the Jack Walker model? Or the John Hall model?

  Are either club worse off now than when they came in? 

edit: erm ... well is blackburn worse off at least  tongue.gif