OzzieMandias Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 The scousers banner isn't retarded in the same way that ours is. It concerns owners who don't want to sell, invoking a particular potential buyer, one that for a while seemed serious about its intention to purchase the club, rather than moronically demanding that an owner who has tried and failed to sell the club, should sell the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 The scousers banner isn't retarded in the same way that ours is. It concerns owners who don't want to sell, invoking a particular potential buyer, one that for a while seemed serious about its intention to purchase the club, rather than moronically demanding that an owner who has tried and failed to sell the club, should sell the club. That's if you believe Ashley ever intended to sell. "putting it up for sale" is different to accepting what were probably reasonable offers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 The scousers banner isn't retarded in the same way that ours is. It concerns owners who don't want to sell, invoking a particular potential buyer, one that for a while seemed serious about its intention to purchase the club, rather than moronically demanding that an owner who has tried and failed to sell the club, should sell the club. That's if you believe Ashley ever intended to sell. "putting it up for sale" is different to accepting what were probably reasonable offers. Link? Or are you just bullshitting? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edd Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 The scousers banner isn't retarded in the same way that ours is. It concerns owners who don't want to sell, invoking a particular potential buyer, one that for a while seemed serious about its intention to purchase the club, rather than moronically demanding that an owner who has tried and failed to sell the club, should sell the club. That's if you believe Ashley ever intended to sell. "putting it up for sale" is different to accepting what were probably reasonable offers. I wish people would make their mind up. One minute Ashley only ever bought the club to sell it for a quick profit, the next he never intended selling the club in the first place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 The scousers banner isn't retarded in the same way that ours is. It concerns owners who don't want to sell, invoking a particular potential buyer, one that for a while seemed serious about its intention to purchase the club, rather than moronically demanding that an owner who has tried and failed to sell the club, should sell the club. That's if you believe Ashley ever intended to sell. "putting it up for sale" is different to accepting what were probably reasonable offers. Well I believe he's been trying to sell for a year now, since way before the evil banner. However this claim that he couldn't sell the club is ridiculous. Unless Harris was lying, there were at least 7 parties interested enough to provide documentation of their ability to buy the club before they were shown the accounts. These didn't include the Nigerians or South Africans who were all mouth and no trousers. Any of those parties could have bought the club if they thought the price was fair for a club at risk of relegation. Despite worries that the banner is putting off buyers, I doubt "must have 100% gullible supporters" is high on the list of priorities for prospective purchasers, especially considering these people were interested in the first place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 The scousers banner isn't retarded in the same way that ours is. It concerns owners who don't want to sell, invoking a particular potential buyer, one that for a while seemed serious about its intention to purchase the club, rather than moronically demanding that an owner who has tried and failed to sell the club, should sell the club. That's if you believe Ashley ever intended to sell. "putting it up for sale" is different to accepting what were probably reasonable offers. Well I believe he's been trying to sell for a year now, since way before the evil banner. However this claim that he couldn't sell the club is ridiculous. Unless Harris was lying, there were at least 7 parties interested enough to provide documentation of their ability to buy the club before they were shown the accounts. These didn't include the Nigerians or South Africans who were all mouth and no trousers. Any of those parties could have bought the club if they thought the price was fair for a club at risk of relegation. Despite worries that the banner is putting off buyers, I doubt "must have 100% gullible supporters" is high on the list of priorities for prospective purchasers, especially considering these people were interested in the first place. Perhaps Harris is lying here, then: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/jan/13/digger-newcastle-united-sale-hedge-fund-fraud-madhoff-arsenal-shares-kevin-pietersen-ipl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Whether he 'couldn't' sell the club, or decided that the offers weren't good enough, the outcome is the same. Who are we to say he should sell one of his most significant assets for a price that he doesn't think is good enough? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Whether he 'couldn't' sell the club, or decided that the offers weren't good enough, the outcome is the same. Who are we to say he should sell one of his most significant assets for a price that he doesn't think is good enough? I think that's the point - the campaign/banner has the aim of "pressuring" him into lowering what he considers a good price on the basis that he doesn't get any "joy" out of staying. Obviously if he considers money the be all and and all of the deal then its a waste of time but I don't see anything wrong in trying. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 How would you of run the club if you took over in the same way that Ashley did? What problems did you see we had when Ashley took over that needed addressing? How would you go about addressing them? How would you go about investing in the club? Personal cash or club money? Knowing the club was in massive debt, and beling failry new to this business having seen the problems casue in the past by this very approach, would you trust a single person with your money? Would you not share responsiblty about to shorten the odds of failure? I would have left the debt which wasn't compulsory to be serviced by sky/ST income then I would have used persobnal money to fund a an intial splurge - maybe £50m I may have got an "expert" into help me run the club but the people Ashley got in had/have no expertise or experience in doing so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 The scousers banner isn't retarded in the same way that ours is. It concerns owners who don't want to sell, invoking a particular potential buyer, one that for a while seemed serious about its intention to purchase the club, rather than moronically demanding that an owner who has tried and failed to sell the club, should sell the club. That's if you believe Ashley ever intended to sell. "putting it up for sale" is different to accepting what were probably reasonable offers. Well I believe he's been trying to sell for a year now, since way before the evil banner. However this claim that he couldn't sell the club is ridiculous. Unless Harris was lying, there were at least 7 parties interested enough to provide documentation of their ability to buy the club before they were shown the accounts. These didn't include the Nigerians or South Africans who were all mouth and no trousers. Any of those parties could have bought the club if they thought the price was fair for a club at risk of relegation. Despite worries that the banner is putting off buyers, I doubt "must have 100% gullible supporters" is high on the list of priorities for prospective purchasers, especially considering these people were interested in the first place. Perhaps Harris is lying here, then: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/jan/13/digger-newcastle-united-sale-hedge-fund-fraud-madhoff-arsenal-shares-kevin-pietersen-ipl read a shite paper = spout shite Incidentally, weren't you in favour of a hedge fund taking over the club re your comments, re anyone but Shepherd and "nowt to fear from a change at the top" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 How would you of run the club if you took over in the same way that Ashley did? What problems did you see we had when Ashley took over that needed addressing? How would you go about addressing them? How would you go about investing in the club? Personal cash or club money? Knowing the club was in massive debt, and beling failry new to this business having seen the problems casue in the past by this very approach, would you trust a single person with your money? Would you not share responsiblty about to shorten the odds of failure? I would have left the debt which wasn't compulsory to be serviced by sky/ST income then I would have used persobnal money to fund a an intial splurge - maybe £50m I may have got an "expert" into help me run the club but the people Ashley got in had/have no expertise or experience in doing so. Where did you get that from? Even if you'd identified it as a problem which was eating into the clubs finances with interest? So you have £50m extra, to spend in this window and £50m increasing debt from then onwards? Then what? Wheres the next bit of cash coming from? Would you not say he's a bit of a business expert himself? Mort as well? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 How would you of run the club if you took over in the same way that Ashley did? What problems did you see we had when Ashley took over that needed addressing? How would you go about addressing them? How would you go about investing in the club? Personal cash or club money? Knowing the club was in massive debt, and beling failry new to this business having seen the problems casue in the past by this very approach, would you trust a single person with your money? Would you not share responsiblty about to shorten the odds of failure? I would have left the debt which wasn't compulsory to be serviced by sky/ST income then I would have used persobnal money to fund a an intial splurge - maybe £50m I may have got an "expert" into help me run the club but the people Ashley got in had/have no expertise or experience in doing so. Where did you get that from? Even if you'd identified it as a problem which was eating into the clubs finances with interest? So you have £50m extra, to spend in this window and £50m increasing debt from then onwards? Then what? Wheres the next bit of cash coming from? Would you not say he's a bit of a business expert himself? Mort as well? As long as the debt is serviced then its okay - this "paying off the debt is the best thing he could have done" argument makes sense on an instinctive level but not with football clubs - see Man U and Liverpool as examples of serviceable debt models. Money to pay off any extra debt would come from increased revenues from a thing called success (however relative). I meant expert in the football sense - Allardyce did say that some players were missed out on in the early days because of Mort's on the job training. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 I think that's the point - the campaign/banner has the aim of "pressuring" him into lowering what he considers a good price on the basis that he doesn't get any "joy" out of staying. Brilliant plan, Baldrick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 I think that's the point - the campaign/banner has the aim of "pressuring" him into lowering what he considers a good price on the basis that he doesn't get any "joy" out of staying. Brilliant plan, Baldrick. Well since he's supposedly put the club up for sale in the first place for that reason it sounds reasonable to me Nursey. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 How would you of run the club if you took over in the same way that Ashley did? What problems did you see we had when Ashley took over that needed addressing? How would you go about addressing them? How would you go about investing in the club? Personal cash or club money? Knowing the club was in massive debt, and beling failry new to this business having seen the problems casue in the past by this very approach, would you trust a single person with your money? Would you not share responsiblty about to shorten the odds of failure? I would have left the debt which wasn't compulsory to be serviced by sky/ST income then I would have used persobnal money to fund a an intial splurge - maybe £50m I may have got an "expert" into help me run the club but the people Ashley got in had/have no expertise or experience in doing so. Where did you get that from? Even if you'd identified it as a problem which was eating into the clubs finances with interest? So you have £50m extra, to spend in this window and £50m increasing debt from then onwards? Then what? Wheres the next bit of cash coming from? Would you not say he's a bit of a business expert himself? Mort as well? As long as the debt is serviced then its okay - this "paying off the debt is the best thing he could have done" argument makes sense on an instinctive level but not with football clubs - see Man U and Liverpool as examples of serviceable debt models. Money to pay off any extra debt would come from increased revenues from a thing called success (however relative). I meant expert in the football sense - Allardyce did say that some players were missed out on in the early days because of Mort's on the job training. It was the best thing to do in the long term, as well as the short term, it was the best move full stop. Examples of Man U and Liverpool debt levels are moot, not only have they been consistently successful and therefore benefitted from the finances covering wages etc but there debt hasnt been acquired in the conventional way more the owners lumping the debt onto the club, something Ashley didnt do. Effectively speaking, Man U are paying of there own purchases through football. What your basically saying is that you'd gamble and lump £50m in the hope that we'd be successful, you;d also entrust that £50m to one man. You;ve basically not learnt anything from the mistakes of the past. If it goes wrong, your £50m out of pocket with potentially no sell on value of "unfiltered" players who have flopped here. Also, part of the strategic review suggested that they'd benefit from having a footballing person on the board, like you are suggesting. Unfortunalety the merits of Wise's appiontenet is up for debate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 I think that's the point - the campaign/banner has the aim of "pressuring" him into lowering what he considers a good price on the basis that he doesn't get any "joy" out of staying. Brilliant plan, Baldrick. Well since he's supposedly put the club up for sale in the first place for that reason it sounds reasonable to me Nursey. Yeah, right, that obviously proves that he'll be willing to sell off one of his principle assets at a loss just to keep you happy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 How would you of run the club if you took over in the same way that Ashley did? What problems did you see we had when Ashley took over that needed addressing? How would you go about addressing them? How would you go about investing in the club? Personal cash or club money? Knowing the club was in massive debt, and beling failry new to this business having seen the problems casue in the past by this very approach, would you trust a single person with your money? Would you not share responsiblty about to shorten the odds of failure? I would have left the debt which wasn't compulsory to be serviced by sky/ST income then I would have used persobnal money to fund a an intial splurge - maybe £50m I may have got an "expert" into help me run the club but the people Ashley got in had/have no expertise or experience in doing so. Where did you get that from? Even if you'd identified it as a problem which was eating into the clubs finances with interest? So you have £50m extra, to spend in this window and £50m increasing debt from then onwards? Then what? Wheres the next bit of cash coming from? Would you not say he's a bit of a business expert himself? Mort as well? As long as the debt is serviced then its okay - this "paying off the debt is the best thing he could have done" argument makes sense on an instinctive level but not with football clubs - see Man U and Liverpool as examples of serviceable debt models. Money to pay off any extra debt would come from increased revenues from a thing called success (however relative). I meant expert in the football sense - Allardyce did say that some players were missed out on in the early days because of Mort's on the job training. It was the best thing to do in the long term, as well as the short term, it was the best move full stop. Examples of Man U and Liverpool debt levels are moot, not only have they been consistently successful and therefore benefitted from the finances covering wages etc but there debt hasnt been acquired in the conventional way more the owners lumping the debt onto the club, something Ashley didnt do. Effectively speaking, Man U are paying of there own purchases through football. What your basically saying is that you'd gamble and lump £50m in the hope that we'd be successful, you;d also entrust that £50m to one man. You;ve basically not learnt anything from the mistakes of the past. If it goes wrong, your £50m out of pocket with potentially no sell on value of "unfiltered" players who have flopped here. Also, part of the strategic review suggested that they'd benefit from having a footballing person on the board, like you are suggesting. Unfortunalety the merits of Wise's appiontenet is up for debate. First of all I intimated that the £50m would be "my" money and not as a loan. Secondly, what is your alternative? If it is to embrace the Ashley "plan" then you are relying on Wise or whoever to find players who are good enough to keep us up but not good enough to be obvious targets for more ambitious clubs. In other words you'd have to have a production line which is self-sustaining and immediately successfull. Just as doing a "Souness" and wasting money, one year's bad crop and you'd be screwed. I'd also say that appointing a man who would make the £50m work is part of the gamble which other clubs have done - see Chelsea or Villa as well as Aresenal, Man U and Liverpool - for the record Ashley had that man in place. Yeah, right, that obviously proves that he'll be willing to sell off one of his principle assets at a loss just to keep you happy. No - its about making himself happy or more prcisely not unhappy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 So NJS's way of moving the club forward is to find someone rich willing to pump loads of their own money into the club on players. Easy when you put it like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 So NJS's way of moving the club forward is to find someone rich willing to pump loads of their own money into the club on players. Easy when you put it like that. It's a genius idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 So NJS's way of moving the club forward is to find someone rich willing to pump loads of their own money into the club on players. Easy when you put it like that. All he needs is a banner and the will to succeed man, stop being so pessimistic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 So NJS's way of moving the club forward is to find someone rich willing to pump loads of their own money into the club on players. Easy when you put it like that. no, all you need, according to you, is a Director of Football Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 This thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 So NJS's way of moving the club forward is to find someone rich willing to pump loads of their own money into the club on players. Easy when you put it like that. no, all you need, according to you, is a Director of Football I don't remember saying that, I did say setting up a good scouting network and looking to improve our academy would help us progress in the long run though. Perhaps you could tell us what you would have done if you were Ashley when he took over, don't forget to take into account the club lost over £30 million in 2007 and had large debts at the time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 So NJS's way of moving the club forward is to find someone rich willing to pump loads of their own money into the club on players. Easy when you put it like that. All he needs is a banner and the will to succeed man, stop being so pessimistic. Sounds good to me. 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