Stu Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 There investment wont be philanthropic, and they wont be investing agaisnt a heavy wage or large scale debtl meaning there money will go primarily on the transfer fees and adding to a smaller wage bill. All you've said you;d do so far, is ignore part of the debt which is eating at the clubs revenue, invest £50m of your own money into the club relyin on one persons decisions and hoping we'll succeed, all whilst adding to the already inflated wage bill. It's basically one big gamble - wheres the next bit of money coming from? I didn't say ignore the debt - I said service it through ST/Sky money but yes essentially I am talking about gambling. I get the impression that Ashley may have been going to go down this route if the club had been debt free when he bought it. He seemed to "easily" find the £110m to pay off the debt which I could argue is similar to injecting capital as I advocate. The pisser for us is as I said that all of what could have been his "gamble" money was spent for no tangible football (as opposed to business) benefit - that's why I'm suggesting a mixture of the two in retrospect. but could it not be said that the club gambled to keep up with the "big boys" and that when the gambled failed, it was time for someone to consolidate and start building up the bank again? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 but could it not be said that the club gambled to keep up with the "big boys" and that when the gambled failed, it was time for someone to consolidate and start building up the bank again? Possibly - a fair point. If we had been taken over by say an NE consortium of businessmen then that approach would be more obvious - I think I like everyone else is disappointed that we were taken over by someone who nominally had a lot more money but has chose a frugal football approach. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 but could it not be said that the club gambled to keep up with the "big boys" and that when the gambled failed, it was time for someone to consolidate and start building up the bank again? Possibly - a fair point. If we had been taken over by say an NE consortium of businessmen then that approach would be more obvious - I think I like everyone else is disappointed that we were taken over by someone who nominally had a lot more money but has chose a frugal football approach. Hence the over reaction to the Keegan saga? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 but could it not be said that the club gambled to keep up with the "big boys" and that when the gambled failed, it was time for someone to consolidate and start building up the bank again? Possibly - a fair point. If we had been taken over by say an NE consortium of businessmen then that approach would be more obvious - I think I like everyone else is disappointed that we were taken over by someone who nominally had a lot more money but has chose a frugal football approach. You say frugal, but I say sensible. With perhaps the exception of the stadium debt (specifically money used for stadium expansion and not loans Shepherd secured against the stadium for player investment/wages) - I would have taken the option to pay off the debt immediately rather than have it hanging over the club. As it turns out, Ashely made the right judgement call (unlike some of his other personal/business gambles in the past 18months) as the oncoming credit crunch and subsequent demise of club-friendly Northern Rock would have cost us in either higher interest charges or paying the same debt off (at a higher cost) eventually. I'm of the opinion that the club finances were in a delicate state before Ashley came along to shore things up, I'm not saying that we were going to fold, but the global economic events would have torn a massive hole in Shepherd's financial planning, possibly leading to asset stripping or a fire-sale - ironically, one that people are accusing Ashley of now. I don't fault Shepherd for this, I believe he had the right ambition and the correct intentions - shame his methods can't be spoken for in the same way - I firmly believe he would have ran out of credit at some point and the (already declining) fairytale would have all come crashing down. As I said, he took the gamble (which most of us enjoyed), but it ultimately came just short. Obviously this gamble came a cost (otherwise it wouldn't be a gamble, simply spending what we have) which needs to be addressed in the short term so that the club can get back on sustainable ground and begin to start paying for itself again. Whether Ashley ever gets the chance to achieve this, I'm not so sure, but I certainly don't have a problem giving him the time to do it. Even if it does come at the cost of losing our top-flight status... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 but could it not be said that the club gambled to keep up with the "big boys" and that when the gambled failed, it was time for someone to consolidate and start building up the bank again? Possibly - a fair point. If we had been taken over by say an NE consortium of businessmen then that approach would be more obvious - I think I like everyone else is disappointed that we were taken over by someone who nominally had a lot more money but has chose a frugal football approach. Hence the over reaction to the Keegan saga? No - imo that was about control and responsibility - it wouldn't have mattered if the budget was £1 or £100m Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SpinTheBlackCircle Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 We all love Fat Mike and his dwarfes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 You say frugal, but I say sensible. Whether Ashley ever gets the chance to achieve this, I'm not so sure, but I certainly don't have a problem giving him the time to do it. Even if it does come at the cost of losing our top-flight status... As I've said before, asking fans to go back to being mediocre or even relegated when they've seen good times is asking too much imo - it certainly is for someone like me who has seen poor times before and I also think it will be for "Sky" fans as they are generally described. I think with the remaining good will/willingness to keep going its still just about possible for Ashley to give it another go - a year of two of no ambition at all will do serious damage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 but could it not be said that the club gambled to keep up with the "big boys" and that when the gambled failed, it was time for someone to consolidate and start building up the bank again? Possibly - a fair point. If we had been taken over by say an NE consortium of businessmen then that approach would be more obvious - I think I like everyone else is disappointed that we were taken over by someone who nominally had a lot more money but has chose a frugal football approach. Hence the over reaction to the Keegan saga? No - imo that was about control and responsibility - it wouldn't have mattered if the budget was £1 or £100m So why are people complaining about the money spent if its not an issue at all? Control and repsonsiblity were key changes for the new regime, they wanted the share the repsoinsibitly o that the money was spent more effectively. In my opinion it worked to an extent, but system failed fundamentally becaseu of egos. Simple as that, the reaction was understandable but completely over done in my opinion. If people dont think they lead to the situation we're in now with Kinnear at the helm and Ashley looking to sell then why bother sustaining the protests? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 You say frugal, but I say sensible. Whether Ashley ever gets the chance to achieve this, I'm not so sure, but I certainly don't have a problem giving him the time to do it. Even if it does come at the cost of losing our top-flight status... As I've said before, asking fans to go back to being mediocre or even relegated when they've seen good times is asking too much imo - it certainly is for someone like me who has seen poor times before and I also think it will be for "Sky" fans as they are generally described. I think with the remaining good will/willingness to keep going its still just about possible for Ashley to give it another go - a year of two of no ambition at all will do serious damage. As it's been mentioned in this thread and several others - what are the realistic alternatives? We can't keep pretending that we're going to win the lottery and somehow get the funds to rival Man City, Chelsea, etc., even then (as Chelsea are discovering), we'd simply be the plaything and the hopes of the fans would rest upon the whim of some (probably) foreign owner. Lets get the club back to basics, lets get the wage structure in line with the revenue streams...if the club can pay for itself season after season (lets call Ashley's paying off the debt as Year Zero) then any bonuses we receive (whether it be from Ashley's pocket or selling a promising youngster/cheap player) can be put towards a kitty (lets call it the "ambition" pot). As a fan, what I want (even more than winning something) is to go to SJP on a Saturday and come away feeling like all 11 players have given their all - win, lose or draw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 You say frugal, but I say sensible. Whether Ashley ever gets the chance to achieve this, I'm not so sure, but I certainly don't have a problem giving him the time to do it. Even if it does come at the cost of losing our top-flight status... As I've said before, asking fans to go back to being mediocre or even relegated when they've seen good times is asking too much imo - it certainly is for someone like me who has seen poor times before and I also think it will be for "Sky" fans as they are generally described. I think with the remaining good will/willingness to keep going its still just about possible for Ashley to give it another go - a year of two of no ambition at all will do serious damage. As it's been mentioned in this thread and several others - what are the realistic alternatives? We can't keep pretending that we're going to win the lottery and somehow get the funds to rival Man City, Chelsea, etc., even then (as Chelsea are discovering), we'd simply be the plaything and the hopes of the fans would rest upon the whim of some (probably) foreign owner. Lets get the club back to basics, lets get the wage structure in line with the revenue streams...if the club can pay for itself season after season (lets call Ashley's paying off the debt as Year Zero) then any bonuses we receive (whether it be from Ashley's pocket or selling a promising youngster/cheap player) can be put towards a kitty (lets call it the "ambition" pot). As a fan, what I want (even more than winning something) is to go to SJP on a Saturday and come away feeling like all 11 players have given their all - win, lose or draw. Precisley my feelings too. This is why i think Ashley may have actually got it right, his major mistake, and the biggest mistake yet is that he appointed a man completely unsuitable for the job (not a slieght on Keegan). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 so you're still happy with the implementation of your "plan" then ? Not as happy as you'll be if we don't sign anyone in this window meaning Baggio is out of pocket. I've got 1334 reasons for wanting us to sign players, how many do you have ? Strange of you to say this - supporting the man who is going to relegate us, are you happy with that ? 1334 as it happens, but I wouldn't ever use it as a soopafan card. I'm just supporting my club, hoping they sign players, not hoping they don't just so Baggio ends up out of pocket like you are. don't confuse laughter at someones stupidity [and he's not the only one, by far] for being pleased. Nice to see people encouraging mandiarse to give a debateable answer to a genuine question BTW, instead of glib comments that drag the thread down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 so you're still happy with the implementation of your "plan" then ? Not as happy as you'll be if we don't sign anyone in this window meaning Baggio is out of pocket. I've got 1334 reasons for wanting us to sign players, how many do you have ? Strange of you to say this - supporting the man who is going to relegate us, are you happy with that ? 1334 as it happens, but I wouldn't ever use it as a soopafan card. I'm just supporting my club, hoping they sign players, not hoping they don't just so Baggio ends up out of pocket like you are. don't confuse laughter at someones stupidity [and he's not the only one, by far] for being pleased. Nice to see people encouraging mandiarse to give a debateable answer to a genuine question BTW, instead of glib comments that drag the thread down. A cigar to anyone who can spot which part of Liam's post NE5 was responding to there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 NJS reminds me of a painting I once saw, in a big exhibition of post-communist art, which was satirising the tawdry online ads with which women from Russia and Ukraine tried to lure a western husband. One bint's text about herself simply read: "I am looking for the nice millionaire." Extremely relevant to the thread of course. You obviously haven't been reading the thread. I have thanks. I just thought it didn't really have any relevance at all. Apart from picking faults in anything posted by specific users that don't agree with your viewpoint. I thought taking issue with the specific viewpoints of other posters was the essence of online discussion, but there you go. I was wrong. Going by your post I now understand that it involves whining a lot in a self-righteous fashion after you have completely missed the point. I haven't missed your point at all I'm just sick of it. You're a clever bloke man who knows a lot about the club. But instead of debating a lot of issues you just seem to come down on others and dismiss their opinions in a patronising way, when you can offer a lot more to this board. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 so you're still happy with the implementation of your "plan" then ? Not as happy as you'll be if we don't sign anyone in this window meaning Baggio is out of pocket. I've got 1334 reasons for wanting us to sign players, how many do you have ? Strange of you to say this - supporting the man who is going to relegate us, are you happy with that ? 1334 as it happens, but I wouldn't ever use it as a soopafan card. I'm just supporting my club, hoping they sign players, not hoping they don't just so Baggio ends up out of pocket like you are. don't confuse laughter at someones stupidity [and he's not the only one, by far] for being pleased. Nice to see people encouraging mandiarse to give a debateable answer to a genuine question BTW, instead of glib comments that drag the thread down. A cigar to anyone who can spot which part of Liam's post NE5 was responding to there. and a free lighter for you if you answer this and practice what you preach http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,58833.msg1648574.html#msg1648574 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 You're a clever bloke man who knows a lot about the club. But instead of debating a lot of issues you just seem to come down on others and dismiss their opinions in a patronising way, when you can offer a lot more to this board. Applies to both sides. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 You're a clever bloke man who knows a lot about the club. But instead of debating a lot of issues you just seem to come down on others and dismiss their opinions in a patronising way, when you can offer a lot more to this board. Applies to both sides. Settle down girls. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/7829248.stm Seems like a bit more savvy (and polite) than the way our "supporters groups" go about their business. In reply David Murray said something along the lines of "anyone can make complaints and identify problems, but what we really need are people who can provide solutions". Fair comment I would say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edd Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/7829248.stm Seems like a bit more savvy (and polite) than the way our "supporters groups" go about their business. In reply David Murray said something along the lines of "anyone can make complaints and identify problems, but what we really need are people who can provide solutions". Fair comment I would say. The "solutions" part being particularly relevant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crumpy Gunt Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Any news on Kieth yet? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Any news on Kieth yet? http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?s=&showtopic=22392&view=findpost&p=567742 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyn davies Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 it would appear its on show at todays game Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jrtoonarmy Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 it would appear its on show at todays game Yes as it will be at every game Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 it would appear its on show at todays game Yes as it will be at every game Why? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fading star Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 To annoy people like you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikri Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 To annoy people like you? So the purpose of the banner is now to antagonise fellow supporters? 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