NE5 Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 So basically the man makes a statement about taking the club forward and then proceeds to piss off and sell the only half-decent players we have remaining and we're supposed to keep quiet, bend over and take it because we're afraid of what the alternatives are. How has Ashley pissed off the only half decent players we have left at the club? Does anyone think Owen is leaving because of something Mike Ashley has said or done, or is it because he feels his career has gone backwards after signing for NUFC (including the two years under Shepherd)? Given may leave, but again that is a result of the 10 years of being generally shite. Its not as if Owen and Given (or N'Zogbia) were happy with life before Ashley turned up, and then all of a sudden they wanted out. eerrr.........2 FA Cup Finals, more qualifications for europe than any club bar 4, sell out crowds in the 2nd biggest ground in the country, and qualifying for the 2nd phase of the champs league is "generally shite". I don't think so, and suggest if you think it is, what you are about to witness under Ashley will change your mind if you really don't understand by now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I don't think Ashley wanting to sit with the fans and drink etc was "bullshit", but I do think it was a mistake. He got caught up with his desire to enjoy his ownership of the club and didn't think about the position he would be left in if things went wrong. Naive, but not devious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Why is it always assumed that anyone unhappy with Ashley is demanding a Man City-style billionaire willing to lavish untold millions of their personal worth on the club? thats true, and I don't expect it despite my criticism, and Chez's post above. I know indi has raised a good debateable point. I don't expect Ashley to spend his fortune on players and never did, but I DO expect him to spend money on top footballers in a way befitting a club with one of the biggest support, the advantage of having a one club city, instead of behaving like a selling 2nd rate club again. In some ways, while I would love to see the team win a good trophy, having waited 40 years since the last one, taking the Chelsea route to success is not really the preferred way, I would rather do it by having a good manager, good board, showing good judgement and working hard to scout, attract and attract the players [including the best players from other smaller premiership clubs where applicable] ie and doing it like Liverpool have done. It would give more pride and be far more satisfying. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edd Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 If we are paying the price for any decisions in the past, they are all under Ashley's ownership. I don't want to turn this into yet another Shepherd vs Ashley argument, so in the interests of a debate ignore Ashley ever existed and answer the following: Assuming Shepherd was still in charge, could we have continued to invest at the level fans seem to demand while still keeping our huge debts in control? Genuine question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Why is it always assumed that anyone unhappy with Ashley is demanding a Man City-style billionaire willing to lavish untold millions of their personal worth on the club? Firstly, unless it is someone who is willing to invest large chunks of a personal fortune, the probability of the next owner being better is about 0.5 i.e. its possible (like the last time) that they could be worse. Thats the most basic analysis though. Secondly, if Ashley is doing such a bad job, then the imaginary investor who is willing to spend and invest more heavily than Ashley would have already materialised. They would have looked at the finances and realised that as Ashley is spending nothing and has all these huge revenues then he must be making an enormous profit. Everyone who thinks there is loads of money being made by the club obviously hasnt clicked their brain into gear. No one is buying. Thirdly, if this imaginary investor is not prepared to pay the value of the asset (which can be determined by a model, not simply just by what someone is prepared to pay for it) then this is significant information to me which would suggest less investment and ambition than currently shown and possibly a debt financed growth strategy. Like the one thats just royally fucked up West Ham. Never forget that this whole debate is centred around the financial crisis. If that settles down, then lets re-visit this. You mean Ashley might get lucky due to the current, and unexected, economic climate ? I can see your point that someone crafty enough to wait until prices - maybe - drop will get the club for less, but I don't necessarily follow that it is a sign that he wouldn't have ambition for the club. Anyone in football can see that aside of that, we are a club in serious danger of getting relegated, and a quick promotion back to the top flight and the platform is there to gain ground very quickly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 So basically what you're after is someone who's less reckless with their money than Mike Ashley is? How does that square with wanting to compete with the big boys? Someone who undertook due diligence would be a good start, and personally I’d quite like them to wear a suit and sit in the directors box as well. All that “Look at me down this pint, I’m one of the lads me like” stuff made was a sure sign Ashley would be trouble. spot on. It was clearly bullshit from the start, and quite amazingly lots of people lapped it up. And a lot of people didn't lap it up NE5 and wondered what the agenda of a man from Buckinghamshire suddenly turning up and buying drinks for everyone in Blu Bambu was all about. Just because we don't go running around a web site saying "I told you so" doesn't mean we haven't been sceptical from the start. most did, or most on here did. See how many posted in favour of that pathetic dance around the boardroom the idiot did after we beat the mackems too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fading star Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 If we are paying the price for any decisions in the past, they are all under Ashley's ownership. I don't want to turn this into yet another Shepherd vs Ashley argument, so in the interests of a debate ignore Ashley ever existed and answer the following: Assuming Shepherd was still in charge, could we have continued to invest at the level fans seem to demand while still keeping our huge debts in control? Genuine question. Good, Two wrongs don’t make a right. There seems little doubt we would have had to scale back our spending, but by how much is anyone’s guess. That said we also have no idea where all the extra TV money has gone, or all the money from advanced ST sales. It’s a puzzle, Ashley says he’s paid of all our debts and we’ve spent nowt on the squad since he took over. So if there are no debts to service and no investment in the team where has the money gone? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 If we are paying the price for any decisions in the past, they are all under Ashley's ownership. I don't want to turn this into yet another Shepherd vs Ashley argument, so in the interests of a debate ignore Ashley ever existed and answer the following: Assuming Shepherd was still in charge, could we have continued to invest at the level fans seem to demand while still keeping our huge debts in control? Genuine question. Good, Two wrongs don’t make a right. There seems little doubt we would have had to scale back our spending, but by how much is anyone’s guess. That said we also have no idea where all the extra TV money has gone, or all the money from advanced ST sales. It’s a puzzle, Ashley says he’s paid of all our debts and we’ve spent nowt on the squad since he took over. So if there are no debts to service and no investment in the team where has the money gone? deja vue. Again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fading star Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 At least when we were a PLC supporters had some idea how our money was being spent. Now we have no idea what’s going on. For all we know Ashley could be taking far more out of the club in dividends than Shepherd and the Halls ever did. He's certainly helped himself to some prime advertising space. If the club was knackered when he bought it Ashley shouldn’t have paid £135m. The budget for a workable business plan covers the purchase price and capital investment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I'm just gonna subscribe to the "I'll shut my trap till February 2nd" school of thought, as I think many on here should. Just let the results speak for themselves. If by then we've sold Shay, Oba, and the Zog, while bringing in Loevkrands on a free and Riise on loan, I'll be leading the charge for Ashley's head. Hell, I might even write NE5 a signed apology. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 like myself, NJS is engaging in good debate and asking searching questions Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Really the banner would more accurately convey its core message if it read like this: "We're a bit stupid and we hate you, at least partly for xenophobic reasons, so don't bother trying to do anything to please us because that won't ever change!" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Really the banner would more accurately convey its core message if it read like this: "We're a bit stupid and we hate you, at least partly for xenophobic reasons, so don't bother trying to do anything to please us because that won't ever change!" Be expensive though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Really the banner would more accurately convey its core message if it read like this: "We're a bit stupid and we hate you, at least partly for xenophobic reasons, so don't bother trying to do anything to please us because that won't ever change!" Be expensive though. That's very true. Well, the shorthand does the trick just as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 like myself, NJS is engaging in good debate and asking searching questions which mandiarse doesn't reply to. Nowt new there then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 (I remeber Mort coming out a stating how much we'd added to our wage bill which was a strange move - this to me highlighted their warieness on the wage bill). I don't remember this tbh, I'd be interested to see it if you can find it somehow. (not sarcastic) To be honest, im struggling to find any quotes, all i rememebr is some comments from Mort saying how much we've added to our wage bill. Ill have another look later. There are are 2 ways to lower the wage ratio and that is by incresing revenue (europe and CL qualification) or by lowering the wage bill. The only way to achievie the former (CL qualification) would be to gamble and invest heavily, like the old board did (to their credit -wrong manager though) and it failed, Well it only failed 1 year in 2 on average. Could do better obviously, but not too bad. Certainly better than what we have now with what you are claiming is still too large a wage bill. 1 year on 2 average?? What does that mean exactly? I persoanlly dont count Roders 7th as succes, attributable to the boards investment and decisions, but i guess you do. something i belive we're paying the price for now. Well I repeat, there are only 5 major "liabilities" attributable to the old board, and their wages are covered by new additional revenue available to Ashley. If we are paying the price for any decisions in the past, they are all under Ashley's ownership. You'll have to elaborate on this point, Im not sure how Mort coments about spending money before it came in links in with what you;re saying. As investing heavily is a massive gamble which would possilby put the club under futrther strain should we fail to achieve, the only other sensible option would be to lower the wage bill which is what he appears to be doing, he's also tried to implement a system whereby we can attract manily foriegn talent of good quality but lower wages. We havent compromised on quality (yet) but we are lowering the wages. Are we really lowering the wage bill though? We don't know what any player is on really, but we can guess. Out: Ramage (20) Diatta/Rozehnal (30) Carr (40) Emre (55) Feye (30) Milner (20) Parker Moore Bramble Bernard Sibi Dyer Solano Luque Babyaro Total = 195k/w In: Bassong (20) Gutierrez (50+) Guthrie (20) Coloccini (50+) Xisco (25) Gonzo (25) Total = 190+k/w You may argue about Gutierrez and Coloccini, but Gutierrez was on a free after breaking his contract and so would demand a higher than normal wage, and Coloccini's agent mentioned several times that he didn't want his client to miss out on the wages of a lifetime while threatening that he would leave the following year for free (these are the signs of a "good attitude" demanded by the new transfer policy I believe). I don't think I'll be far wrong. Well, Id look at our wages decrease over the course that Ashleys been in charge. Parker, Babyaro, Moore, Dyer, Luque etc there are some big wages leaving the club. Having said that we no doubt have added somewhat with ht elikes of Geremi and Smith. Having said that, this may ontradict my belief about Morts comments reagrding wage increase.... Villa and Spurs, have both started from financially sound positions been happy to stay mid table for years where there wage bill hasnt strangled them allowed them to keep or purchase quality players so they can until they decided to invest heavily in quality young talent or foreign talent with cheaper wages, therefore they can progress as normal very quickly compete at or near the top. Fixed. Actually it hasn't worked out too well for Spurs yet, but that can mainly be put down to some stupid structure they had where they bought players the manager didn't want, and then blamed him when they couldn't perform together. Very good, but what relevance does the past have now? There mediocrity in the past is ironially serving them well now which is the most important thing, our success in the past, hasnt lead to success now and in fact ironically (in my opinion) has left us behind somewhat. The way money is spent has changed in the few years we've been in the wilderness. Would i be wrong in saying the Spurs structure is what gave it its succes in the first place? You may be close to being right about Spurs possilby having a wage bill similar to our, but id hazard a guess and say that the 2 season they sepnt on the brink incresed there revenue alot to be able to cover it somewhat and also they have a larger squad which matches there wage bill, something we cant boast about. I know it seems like a lifetime ago, but we were in Europe the year before Ashley took over. You may put that down to the level of investment and backing, ill put it down to the good will towards Souness's departure, this views is backed upby the absymal showing the follwing year. Honey moon period. This is a pretty shit retort. Will try better when i can be arsed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fraser Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Really the banner would more accurately convey its core message if it read like this: "We're a bit stupid and we hate you, at least partly for xenophobic reasons, so don't bother trying to do anything to please us because that won't ever change!" Or "The club that I love is being destroyed by a Southern dominated cabal for reasons of self-aggrandisement and I would prefer it if you left, selling the club at a reasonable profit for your trouble. Close the door on your way out. This is a heart-felt emotional response." Even more expensive and not quite so pithy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 If he can't go and he isn't welcome back then what happens now? We take down those nasty banners, create some new ones saying "we love you Mike", welcome him back and watch on as he hands Kinnear a new deal to keep him at the club for a few more years, watch as Owen, Shay, N'Zogbia and Martins all leave, while we stutter about at the bottom of the table in front of gates under 40K with a team of youngsters and Peter Lovenkrands until he recoups enough of his money back where he can then place a realistic market price on the club to actually attract a serious buyer to get him out of here. That's what we do. We do that for as long as it takes and hope to god we stay up, oh and no booing, lets applaud it all in case we do any further damage as fans to player morale. The question shouldn't even be aimed at fans, it should be aimed at Mike Ashley who we now know has no real intention of selling the club unless he receives silly money which is not going to happen or until he at least recoups his money back. There is no way he'll get back his money back by selling the club for that amount as it isn't worth what he's put in and furthermore there is no-one out there willing to give him his money back. So he'll have to lower the value which he will not do as he'll lose out. The only way he can lower the value while getting his money back is by making up the deficit from lowering the value, in other ways and that means the money from those 18,000 fans who bought 3 year season tickets, outsourcing stewarding, catering and other areas as its cheaper, slashing the wage bill (Owen's apparent offer?), selling players on for profit (Milner, Shay, N'Zogbia, the whole squad having their price?), bringing in youngsters (Wise's signings for the academy?) and freebies (Bassong, Lovenkrands?) to give us a team to put out, keeping net transfer spend to a minimum and banking any profit after operating costs from TV revenues. A process that has been in place pretty much since he bought the club anywhy, only now its fully activated and being put to work. That's the plan. Excepting him back and calling a truce or whatever won't change Ashley's management of the club as his agenda has always been to sell at a profit eventually, now its a simple and clear cut "get my money back end of" job, by hook or crook. I guarantee will will not spend a net profit on transfers this window, I guarantee high earners will either be peddled or have their contracts downgraded and if Kinnear keeps us up, providing no-one comes in and gives Ashley his money back in the summer by buying the club at the price of what it has since cost him to buy and run, Kinnear will be handed a longer contract as he's cheap labour, just like the Danish player on trial, the catering and stewarding staff the club have outsourced, and the players that will be brought in to replace all those expensive ones that right now, want out from Owen to Shay to Charlie to Oba. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 the catering and stewarding staff the club have outsourced I don't know a lot about this point I'll admit, but wasn't it the Shepherd regime that spent large amounts of the clubs money renting warehouses and storage facilities owned by members of the board and their families? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Bassong wasn't free. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 the catering and stewarding staff the club have outsourced I don't know a lot about this point I'll admit, but wasn't it the Shepherd regime that spent large amounts of the clubs money renting warehouses and storage facilities owned by members of the board and their families? Aye, and he rightly got stick for that, not that this is anything to do with anything. There is nothing actually wrong in what Ashley is doing with the catering and stewarding etc., its good business in terms of cost efficiency but those savings wont go on new players, they will go towards the get my money back fund Ashley opened when he "returned". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 the catering and stewarding staff the club have outsourced I don't know a lot about this point I'll admit, but wasn't it the Shepherd regime that spent large amounts of the clubs money renting warehouses and storage facilities owned by members of the board and their families? Aye, and he rightly got stick for that, not that this is anything to do with anything. There is nothing actually wrong in what Ashley is doing with the catering and stewarding etc., its good business in terms of cost efficiency but those savings wont go on new players, they will go towards the get my money back fund Ashley opened when he "returned". How do you think Ashley will achieve a profit at this club? You see, i believe the only way to make a profit at the club is to sell it at an inflated price. Saving a few million here and a few million there wont make a substantial enough a profit for Ashley, if any. How does Ashley go about increasing the value of the club in your opinion in order to get to the point to sell at a healthy profit? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Really the banner would more accurately convey its core message if it read like this: "We're a bit stupid and we hate you, at least partly for xenophobic reasons, so don't bother trying to do anything to please us because that won't ever change!" Thing is, that banner could easily be paraded by both Newcastle fans and Mike Ashley. Fits them both. [/not being serious] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackyboy Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Like I suggested in a post, he will sell all of our best players and use the money to repay his personal loans to the club. By the time we are relegated he will have recouped at least a 100 mil, reduced the wage bill by a massive amount and will sell the club for an amount which covers the balance of his investement. I was criticised for suggesting that relegation might be an attractive option to MA but I still stand by that. JFK has gone from spending 12mil to bringing in 4/5 players to 2 or 3 players then tonight.....'Finances are tight and we won't be rushed into signing anyone during the January transfer window' The writing is on the wall Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Like I suggested in a post, he will sell all of our best players and use the money to repay his personal loans to the club. By the time we are relegated he will have recouped at least a 100 mil, reduced the wage bill by a massive amount and will sell the club for an amount which covers the balance of his investement. I was criticised for suggesting that relegation might be an attractive option to MA but I still stand by that. JFK has gone from spending 12mil to bringing in 4/5 players to 2 or 3 players then tonight.....'Finances are tight and we won't be rushed into signing anyone during the January transfer window' The writing is on the wall Your powers of precognition are astounding. Mind telling me tomorrow's lottery numbers while you're at it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now