Finances web-site

[Howaythelads]

Says the 50 year old who posts bluesleep.gif as a response to something he disagrees with.

 

I cringed at your post to melanchronic, which is why I posted all those links.

 

Thanks for the advice though.

 

Did NE5 text you, btw?

 

48.

 

Couldn't care less if you cringe at my posts or not, tbh. The point is, you'll cringe at your own in years to come.

 

It's obvious you aren't able to accept others have a different opinion, you aren't able to properly debate the points, instead taking the easy way out by generally highlighting small portions of a post in order to make a personal point, rather than addressing the debate. I post an opinion and I generally try to back it up with why I have that opinion. I know I could be wrong, you on other hand believe you can't be wrong while rarely supplying any reasons for an opinion you hold. When you do state a reason for an opinion which is then questioned in debate, you turn the post into a personal one rather than continue the debate. You aren't the only one and you aren't the worst.

 

I used to think your opinions were worthwhile reading but you appear to have such a chip on your shoulder these days I really can't be arsed with what you post. You're a joke to me, Dave. Never used to be.

 

 

Poor Dave, I don't think he'll be able to get over this, it's terrible news, I know it is as I've been through it myself but luckily you still reply from time to time which makes life that little bit easier to take.

 

Chin up Dave, all is not lost.

 

Aye, mainly to highlight the tripe you spout, which you can't really do anything about not having any real knowledge of the football club. You could always ask someone who was there before 1992. I suppose it's difficult for you Mick, the expectations from your posts are higher since you claimed to have been a supporter for decades until being caught out in the lie. No doubt you could tell me all about the time Keegan joined, and about the two cup finals in the 70's though, so don't worry, all isn't lost because you do have experience of some of those decades.

 

[Mick]

Says the 50 year old who posts bluesleep.gif as a response to something he disagrees with.

 

I cringed at your post to melanchronic, which is why I posted all those links.

 

Thanks for the advice though.

 

Did NE5 text you, btw?

 

48.

 

Couldn't care less if you cringe at my posts or not, tbh. The point is, you'll cringe at your own in years to come.

 

It's obvious you aren't able to accept others have a different opinion, you aren't able to properly debate the points, instead taking the easy way out by generally highlighting small portions of a post in order to make a personal point, rather than addressing the debate. I post an opinion and I generally try to back it up with why I have that opinion. I know I could be wrong, you on other hand believe you can't be wrong while rarely supplying any reasons for an opinion you hold. When you do state a reason for an opinion which is then questioned in debate, you turn the post into a personal one rather than continue the debate. You aren't the only one and you aren't the worst.

 

I used to think your opinions were worthwhile reading but you appear to have such a chip on your shoulder these days I really can't be arsed with what you post. You're a joke to me, Dave. Never used to be.

 

 

Poor Dave, I don't think he'll be able to get over this, it's terrible news, I know it is as I've been through it myself but luckily you still reply from time to time which makes life that little bit easier to take.

 

Chin up Dave, all is not lost.

 

Aye, mainly to highlight the tripe you spout, which you can't really do anything about not having any real knowledge of the football club. You could always ask someone who was there before 1992. I suppose it's difficult for you Mick, the expectations from your posts are higher since you claimed to have been a supporter for decades until being caught out in the lie. No doubt you could tell me all about the time Keegan joined, and about the two cup finals in the 70's though, so don't worry, all isn't lost because you do have experience of some of those decades.

 

 

snigger.gif

 

A 48 year old baby, that just about sums you up.  What are you doing up at this time?  Have you got wind?

[Syrette]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

[OzzieMandias]

 

Good points, Macbeth, as ever.

 

But I think you need to consider reducing the size of those graphics.

 

For one or two people, the pictures are obviously too big to see.

 

I think you need to consider extracting yourself from his back end.

 

Going to try making some points of your own?? You know, points that have some SUBSTANCE behind them.

 

What is it about these facts and figures concerning our steadily declining income and dangerously spiralling ratio of wages to turnover that strikes you as insubstantial, exactly?

 

And what is it that you don't understand about this decline coming about due to the dropping off of performances on the field of play, rather than consistent mismanagment of the clubs finances by the Board? This isn't difficult stuff.

 

If you can't even see that the two things are intricately related – mismanagement of the club doesn't stop at finances, while finances affect our performances on the field of play as much as performances on the field of play affect finances – then it's not surprising that you can't recognise the vicious circle we've been in since Partizan, which marked the end of the good work Bobby Robson had managed to do, pretty much against the run of play.

[Guest Toon Barmy]

 

 

 

Be careful what you wish for, as ever.

 

Glad to see you've learnt your lesson

[Dave]

I wouldn't slaughter myself in front of you two.

 

Needless to say, I have none of your lengthy experience or knowledge of the club, only what i've seen in my time supporting it - a fraction of the time you have. Does that mean that my opinion doesn't count?

 

Hmm, it hasn't escaped me that you ask certain people this question, Dave. I've seen others putting people down for beinig overseas posters recently, making out their opinion doesn't count, yet you ignore it. Why's that, Dave? Got a chip about something have you?

 

IIRC people were annoyed at overseas fans saying that the supporters who go to games weren't doing enough, that's fair play. I don't think they were saying that they weren't entitled to an opinion.

 

As I don't get to as many games as I wish I could, I wouldn't dream of specifically critisising the support who turn up either.

[NE5]

 

Good points, Macbeth, as ever.

 

But I think you need to consider reducing the size of those graphics.

 

For one or two people, the pictures are obviously too big to see.

 

I think you need to consider extracting yourself from his back end.

 

Going to try making some points of your own?? You know, points that have some SUBSTANCE behind them.

 

What is it about these facts and figures concerning our steadily declining income and dangerously spiralling ratio of wages to turnover that strikes you as insubstantial, exactly?

 

And what is it that you don't understand about this decline coming about due to the dropping off of performances on the field of play, rather than consistent mismanagment of the clubs finances by the Board? This isn't difficult stuff.

 

If you can't even see that the two things are intricately related – mismanagement of the club doesn't stop at finances, while finances affect our performances on the field of play as much as performances on the field of play affect finances – then it's not surprising that you can't recognise the vicious circle we've been in since Partizan, which marked the end of the good work Bobby Robson had managed to do, pretty much against the run of play.

 

and you backed the spending spree of his successor and the sale for peanuts of the "cancer", insisting we would be better off when he had built "his own team". What a shame you don't see how finance and quality of player on the pitch is really linked.

 

 

[Dave]

Says the 50 year old who posts bluesleep.gif as a response to something he disagrees with.

 

I cringed at your post to melanchronic, which is why I posted all those links.

 

Thanks for the advice though.

 

Did NE5 text you, btw?

 

48.

 

Couldn't care less if you cringe at my posts or not, tbh. The point is, you'll cringe at your own in years to come.

 

It's obvious you aren't able to accept others have a different opinion, you aren't able to properly debate the points, instead taking the easy way out by generally highlighting small portions of a post in order to make a personal point, rather than addressing the debate. I post an opinion and I generally try to back it up with why I have that opinion. I know I could be wrong, you on other hand believe you can't be wrong while rarely supplying any reasons for an opinion you hold. When you do state a reason for an opinion which is then questioned in debate, you turn the post into a personal one rather than continue the debate. You aren't the only one and you aren't the worst.

 

I used to think your opinions were worthwhile reading but you appear to have such a chip on your shoulder these days I really can't be arsed with what you post. You're a joke to me, Dave. Never used to be.

 

 

That is very ironic, considering my 'OMG saddo!' post yesterday was clearly pointing out the numerous times that you have refused to debate and purely posted a yawning smilie.

 

And if I entertain you i'm glad.

 

You can't be arsed with what I post, but you bite every time. Sort it out!

[NE5]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant, or both. You should also note that these sort of discussions aren't normally started by either myself of HTL, most of my posts are a response.

 

My comments towards Mick are based on the impression that I have, which is that he is a KK bandwagon jumper. That is not the same as younger lads like yourself and others who can't support the club for geographical, financial or other reasons. I didn't used to think he was but I do now due to his opinion that the has club not made massive progress under this board, which is complete rubbish, nobody who supported the club earlier says this. This is absolutely correct, and has been backed up with solid fact, whether it has gone pear shaped over the last few years is a different point, the attitude and setup of the club whatever its faults is light years superior to what it was, and we can advocate replacing the board if we like but there is no guarantee a new board will be better, have ambition, have the interests of the club at heart, and won't be after a quick killing and sell it on again quickly, any scenario is possible.

 

 

[Syrette]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant

 

 

They're not constant at all. And whether it's right or wrong I do listen and take it in.

[NE5]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant

 

 

They're not constant at all. And whether it's right or wrong I do listen and take it in.

 

if you think so, alright, all I can say is that I am pointing out a possibility of it going wrong, which is very real. Replacing the board with one that guarantees trophies is a bit of a tall order, and that is the next step up rom regular qualification for europe and buying top England players. Can you see this ? Our own board pre-1992 and many other big clubs just like us are sitting, just existing, staying solvent, not showing this ambition and will never go anywhere as a result. If that is the type of club you want, then THAT is crap, believe me, so think about the type of board we could have waiting out there and balance out the odds on getting one who has a desire - and a guarantee - to go higher or one like all the others. This club could easily exist on 30,000 crowds, sitting in the bottom half of the table, paying a dividend, making a small operating profit and selling a player when things go slightly wrong, and that is what you might get.

 

 

[Syrette]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant

 

 

They're not constant at all. And whether it's right or wrong I do listen and take it in.

 

if you think so, alright, all I can say is that I am pointing out a possibility of it going wrong, which is very real. Replacing the board with one that guarantees trophies is a bit of a tall order, and that is the next step up rom regular qualification for europe and buying top England players. Can you see this ? Our own board pre-1992 and many other big clubs just like us are sitting, just existing, staying solvent, not showing this ambition and will never go anywhere as a result. If that is the type of club you want, then THAT is crap, believe me, so think about the type of board we could have waiting out there and balance out the odds on getting one who has a desire - and a guarantee - to go higher or one like all the others. This club could easily exist on 30,000 crowds, sitting in the bottom half of the table, paying a dividend, making a small operating profit and selling a player when things go slightly wrong, and that is what you might get.

 

 

 

Er I actually agree with just about all of what you're saying here but the quotings rather strange...

 

[macbeth]

 

What a shame you don't see how finance and quality of player on the pitch is really linked.

 

 

 

So you put the near oubling of wages in 4 years down to the quality of players on the pitch ? The team today is twice as good as the team from 2002 ?

[OzzieMandias]

 

Good points, Macbeth, as ever.

 

But I think you need to consider reducing the size of those graphics.

 

For one or two people, the pictures are obviously too big to see.

 

I think you need to consider extracting yourself from his back end.

 

Going to try making some points of your own?? You know, points that have some SUBSTANCE behind them.

 

What is it about these facts and figures concerning our steadily declining income and dangerously spiralling ratio of wages to turnover that strikes you as insubstantial, exactly?

 

And what is it that you don't understand about this decline coming about due to the dropping off of performances on the field of play, rather than consistent mismanagment of the clubs finances by the Board? This isn't difficult stuff.

 

If you can't even see that the two things are intricately related – mismanagement of the club doesn't stop at finances, while finances affect our performances on the field of play as much as performances on the field of play affect finances – then it's not surprising that you can't recognise the vicious circle we've been in since Partizan, which marked the end of the good work Bobby Robson had managed to do, pretty much against the run of play.

 

and you backed the spending spree of his successor and the sale for peanuts of the "cancer", insisting we would be better off when he had built "his own team". What a shame you don't see how finance and quality of player on the pitch is really linked.

 

 

 

When you've stopped spouting the same old shite, perhaps you'll give us the benefit of your "knowledge" on our steadily declining income and spiralling wages/turnover ratio.

 

But then, you'll never stop spouting the same old shite, will you, because you know that your pro-Shepherd position is basically stupid.

[NE5]

 

Good points, Macbeth, as ever.

 

But I think you need to consider reducing the size of those graphics.

 

For one or two people, the pictures are obviously too big to see.

 

I think you need to consider extracting yourself from his back end.

 

Going to try making some points of your own?? You know, points that have some SUBSTANCE behind them.

 

What is it about these facts and figures concerning our steadily declining income and dangerously spiralling ratio of wages to turnover that strikes you as insubstantial, exactly?

 

And what is it that you don't understand about this decline coming about due to the dropping off of performances on the field of play, rather than consistent mismanagment of the clubs finances by the Board? This isn't difficult stuff.

 

If you can't even see that the two things are intricately related – mismanagement of the club doesn't stop at finances, while finances affect our performances on the field of play as much as performances on the field of play affect finances – then it's not surprising that you can't recognise the vicious circle we've been in since Partizan, which marked the end of the good work Bobby Robson had managed to do, pretty much against the run of play.

 

and you backed the spending spree of his successor and the sale for peanuts of the "cancer", insisting we would be better off when he had built "his own team". What a shame you don't see how finance and quality of player on the pitch is really linked.

 

 

 

When you've stopped spouting the same old shite, perhaps you'll give us the benefit of your "knowledge" on our steadily declining income and spiralling wages/turnover ratio.

 

But then, you'll never stop spouting the same old shite, will you, because you know that your pro-Shepherd position is basically stupid.

 

you are quite wrong, there is only one person here who took a pro-Shepherd stance when backing Souness to spend a fortune and replace the "cancer". Do you still think we are better off for it like you said we would be.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,5456.msg108632.html#msg108632

 

what about this BTW, ref your first paragraph above

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,11032.msg204215.html#msg204215

[Parky]

Tbf to Ne5 a hedge fund or other investment vehicle's first responsability is to ITSELF, ie its investors. It is motivated purely by profit and will have goals and a very concrete 3-5yr plan on returning profits.

[OzzieMandias]

Tbf to Ne5 a hedge fund or other investment vehicle's first responsability is to ITSELF, ie its investors. It is motivated purely by profit and will have goals and a very concrete 3-5yr plan on returning profits.

 

And it will do that how exactly?

 

By making sure we spend a few more seasons fighting relegation? Selling the stadium to some other football club in the area? Building a luxury resort complex in Longbenton?

 

Or by intelligent investment and reorganisation of the way the club is run with the aim of maximising our potential in the game as opposed to slowly pissing it away like Shepherd?

 

turning the tide and

[NE5]

Tbf to Ne5 a hedge fund or other investment vehicle's first responsability is to ITSELF, ie its investors. It is motivated purely by profit and will have goals and a very concrete 3-5yr plan on returning profits.

 

The article last Sunday in the Sunday Sun by Neil Farrington is worth reading again for those who either missed it or think it won't happen because it certainly and easily could.

 

 

[Mick]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant, or both. You should also note that these sort of discussions aren't normally started by either myself of HTL, most of my posts are a response.

 

My comments towards Mick are based on the impression that I have, which is that he is a KK bandwagon jumper. That is not the same as younger lads like yourself and others who can't support the club for geographical, financial or other reasons. I didn't used to think he was but I do now due to his opinion that the has club not made massive progress under this board, which is complete rubbish, nobody who supported the club earlier says this. This is absolutely correct, and has been backed up with solid fact, whether it has gone pear shaped over the last few years is a different point, the attitude and setup of the club whatever its faults is light years superior to what it was, and we can advocate replacing the board if we like but there is no guarantee a new board will be better, have ambition, have the interests of the club at heart, and won't be after a quick killing and sell it on again quickly, any scenario is possible.

 

 

 

The club has not made progress under this chairman and that will not change, no matter how much you try to spin it out to look as if it has, 2nd to 17th is not progress, cash rich to debt is not progress.  You're pathetic, you're trying to give Shepherd credit for what Sir John did while chairman, the record under Shepherd is of failure except for 3 seasons while Robson was manager, the rest is shite.

 

Is Ellis a shit chairman?

[NE5]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant, or both. You should also note that these sort of discussions aren't normally started by either myself of HTL, most of my posts are a response.

 

My comments towards Mick are based on the impression that I have, which is that he is a KK bandwagon jumper. That is not the same as younger lads like yourself and others who can't support the club for geographical, financial or other reasons. I didn't used to think he was but I do now due to his opinion that the has club not made massive progress under this board, which is complete rubbish, nobody who supported the club earlier says this. This is absolutely correct, and has been backed up with solid fact, whether it has gone pear shaped over the last few years is a different point, the attitude and setup of the club whatever its faults is light years superior to what it was, and we can advocate replacing the board if we like but there is no guarantee a new board will be better, have ambition, have the interests of the club at heart, and won't be after a quick killing and sell it on again quickly, any scenario is possible.

 

 

 

The club has not made progress under this chairman and that will not change,

 

so you still think 30 years of selling your best players and being happy with just being in the top league is the same as buying England players and qualifying regularly for europe  :lol: only a true KK bandwagon jumper would say such a thing.

 

 

[Mick]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant

 

 

They're not constant at all. And whether it's right or wrong I do listen and take it in.

 

if you think so, alright, all I can say is that I am pointing out a possibility of it going wrong, which is very real. Replacing the board with one that guarantees trophies is a bit of a tall order, and that is the next step up rom regular qualification for europe and buying top England players. Can you see this ? Our own board pre-1992 and many other big clubs just like us are sitting, just existing, staying solvent, not showing this ambition and will never go anywhere as a result. If that is the type of club you want, then THAT is crap, believe me, so think about the type of board we could have waiting out there and balance out the odds on getting one who has a desire - and a guarantee - to go higher or one like all the others. This club could easily exist on 30,000 crowds, sitting in the bottom half of the table, paying a dividend, making a small operating profit and selling a player when things go slightly wrong, and that is what you might get.

 

 

 

How many past chairman dropped us 16 league places?

 

How many past chairman presided over a 12 million loss?

 

How many past chairman squandered something like £50 million on a manager who was clearly, for all to see, a shit manager?

 

How many past chairman called the fans mugs and dogs?

 

How many of the past chairman bragged that we were one of the top 8 jobs in football only to appoint a manager who has finished in the bottom 3 with all of his revious 3 clubs?

 

How many of the past chairman have had more than £80 million income to squander?

[Mick]

Tbf to Ne5 a hedge fund or other investment vehicle's first responsability is to ITSELF, ie its investors. It is motivated purely by profit and will have goals and a very concrete 3-5yr plan on returning profits.

 

The article last Sunday in the Sunday Sun by Neil Farrington is worth reading again for those who either missed it or think it won't happen because it certainly and easily could.

 

 

 

The Farringdon article is nothing but spin, Belgravia are not a hedge fund, they haven't been for years and they said that they would be using money that they have built up to fund buying the club, Farringdon is either ignorant, or a puppet to the club, just like the other local journalists.

[thedudeabides]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant, or both. You should also note that these sort of discussions aren't normally started by either myself of HTL, most of my posts are a response.

 

My comments towards Mick are based on the impression that I have, which is that he is a KK bandwagon jumper. That is not the same as younger lads like yourself and others who can't support the club for geographical, financial or other reasons. I didn't used to think he was but I do now due to his opinion that the has club not made massive progress under this board, which is complete rubbish, nobody who supported the club earlier says this. This is absolutely correct, and has been backed up with solid fact, whether it has gone pear shaped over the last few years is a different point, the attitude and setup of the club whatever its faults is light years superior to what it was, and we can advocate replacing the board if we like but there is no guarantee a new board will be better, have ambition, have the interests of the club at heart, and won't be after a quick killing and sell it on again quickly, any scenario is possible.

 

 

 

The club has not made progress under this chairman and that will not change, no matter how much you try to spin it out to look as if it has, 2nd to 17th is not progress, cash rich to debt is not progress.  You're pathetic, you're trying to give Shepherd credit for what Sir John did while chairman, the record under Shepherd is of failure except for 3 seasons while Robson was manager, the rest is shite.

 

 

Well said mate.

 

What happened in the past under Westwood, McKeag et al is completely irrelevant to how Shepherd has managed the club in all honesty. Like you say, he took over a financially healthy and vibrant football club from Sir John Hall and has slowly reduced us to an average club with apathetic support, that is up to it's eyes in debt...........whilst rewarding himself huge sums of money in the process.

 

I really can't see how people can honestly continue to support Shepherd.

[Mick]

 

 

so you still think 30 years of selling your best players and being happy with just being in the top league is the same as buying England players and qualifying regularly for europe  :lol: only a true KK bandwagon jumper would say such a thing.

 

 

 

I wonder if your comfort blanket is going to have a go at you for only picking what you chose to respond to?  He's bound to as he doesn't apply double standards, does he?

 

The club has not made progress under Shepherd, -16 league places and £millions down the drain.

[NE5]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant

 

 

They're not constant at all. And whether it's right or wrong I do listen and take it in.

 

if you think so, alright, all I can say is that I am pointing out a possibility of it going wrong, which is very real. Replacing the board with one that guarantees trophies is a bit of a tall order, and that is the next step up rom regular qualification for europe and buying top England players. Can you see this ? Our own board pre-1992 and many other big clubs just like us are sitting, just existing, staying solvent, not showing this ambition and will never go anywhere as a result. If that is the type of club you want, then THAT is crap, believe me, so think about the type of board we could have waiting out there and balance out the odds on getting one who has a desire - and a guarantee - to go higher or one like all the others. This club could easily exist on 30,000 crowds, sitting in the bottom half of the table, paying a dividend, making a small operating profit and selling a player when things go slightly wrong, and that is what you might get.

 

 

 

How many past chairman dropped us 16 league places?

 

How many past chairman presided over a 12 million loss?

 

How many past chairman squandered something like £50 million on a manager who was clearly, for all to see, a shit manager?

 

How many past chairman called the fans mugs and dogs?

 

How many of the past chairman bragged that we were one of the top 8 jobs in football only to appoint a manager who has finished in the bottom 3 with all of his revious 3 clubs?

 

How many of the past chairman have had more than £80 million income to squander?

 

How many chairman/boards put the club on the brink of the 3rd division after 30 years of mismanagement and selling our best players ?

 

How many chairman/boards got us into a position where there was 16 places [to temporarily] drop to ? [this is the same rubbish as those who ridicule keegans "12 point lead" ]

 

How many chairman/boards tapped the fanbase and made big money to buy top players rather than sell their best players to raise it  instead ?

 

How many chairman/board took the piss out of you by selling our best players, running the ground down, and were happy with us building stands "to match the one at Watford"

 

How many chairman/board couldn't attract decent managers like Bobby Robson, Howard Kendall and had to make their 8th desperate choice in the end ?

 

Again - spoken like a true KK bandwagon jumper.