Guest fading star Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 So at the end of the day you dont acknowledge the debt repayment made from Ashley to the financiers as legitimate? Its perfectly legitimate but the club owes him the money nontheless - the club is not debt free. Well, then Im stumped, i dont see what you're critical point is then? By the same logic Roman deserve slander not credit. It's not even as "bad" as the loans Abramovich has made to Chelsea due to what the money has been used for. Abramovich's loans have funded the purchase of players, many of whom have been signed for fees that were greatly over the odds and will never be recouped (see: Shaun Wright-Philips, Andriy Shevchenko, Hernán Crespo, etc). Those players are also on hugely inflated wages, which makes it even more difficult for Chelsea to move them on to other clubs if they become surplus to requirements. Essentially, the money has been spent on intangible assets and the majority of it is unrecoverable under any circumstances. If Abramovich called in those loans Chelsea would be totally f***ed. Ashley's loan has been to pay off debt owed to external agencies, who were charging interest regardless of whether the club was making a profit and could have recalled the loan at a point in time damaging to the club. If Ashley called in the loan, we'd be pretty f***ed, but no worse than we already were, in fact we'd have benefited from not having to pay interest on the loans for however long it was between Ashley paying off the original loans and demanding repayment on the loan to him. Precisely, i perosnally cant look past the notion that this "debt" is still a burden to the club if its owed the the person who owns the club in the first place. Its about as secure as it can get. If you're worried about the "debt" you're kind of implying that theres a danger that Ashley could call it in at any time and screw us over, even if he charged interest on the loan, hes not gonna do it if we cant afford it. Its just a ridiculous notion. Nonsense, he's an evil genius who'll arse-f*** his own company just to spite the fans. When do you see us being in aposition where we can spend money on players again. Will it be before or after Ashley gets his £100m back? I don't think he anticipates getting it back until such time as the club is sold. So when do you see us stopping the cost cutting and getting back to team building? Next season? The season after that? Never? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 I'll wait and see what 2008-09 accounts are like. The timing of this is fantastic too. A ready made excuse for not spending any money in the transfer window. Just give us some honesty man and be up front from the off. If the club is financially in the s***, say so, instead of saying the club is debt free, money is available for this and that player, talking about the top 6 etc. They are there own worst enemies and all this anger, frustration and poison stems directly from their dishonesty more than anything else. How do you get the impression that they've not been honest about this!?! Everything they've said about the financial side of the club has been proved to be honest. They said that the club was in danger of going out of business when they took over. True. They said that the debts had been paid off. True. All that can be true and there can still be money available to the manager for transfers. Ashley can be prepared to provide the money himself if the manager identifies a player that fits with the club's strategy (Young, value for money both in terms of wages and transfer fee, future potential, etc), that player is available (ie his club is willing to sell), and they want to come here and the club can still be financially in the s*** at the moment. Unfortunately, that strategy is going to restrict the number of players available to us, especially within the confines of the ridiculous January transfer window - which surely needs to go, if FIFA/UEFA are serious about encouraging an element of financial realism in football - but that doesn't mean it's wrong. If we're needing to get in a few fire-fighters to see us through until the end of the season, then fine, but we should try and make them loan signings if they don't fit with the sensible, neigh essential, transfer strategy. The anger comes from people's desire for there to be a hero and a villain in all of this and their subsequent inability to see both sides of the story. People have simply refused to accept that Ashley has had legitimate reasons behind doing what he's done - whether you think he's made mistakes or not - preferring to see him as some kind of evil super-villain whose taken us over simply to destroy the club. That's simply f***ing ridiculous and it's about time reality bit for many people, hopefully this is the start of that. The debts haven’t been paid off they’ve been restructured. In fact NUFC owe more money now than they did when Ashley took over. Do you suggest he shouldn't have put the money in to save that being the case then? Idiot. I’m not suggesting anything. NUFC does owe more money now than it did when the new owner took over. I’m sorry if the facts intrude on your childishly naïve Ashley fantasy but it’s important to establish the facts. How do you suggest he paid them off without the company owing him money for doing it? Bump He could have invested £100m in his business, instead of lending it the money with an option to charge interest. If he’s as committed to club as he says why go for the loan option? Have you been on the :toke: ? What do you think Ashley has done if he hasn't invested £100 million into the club? Considering he is the sole owner of the club putting £100 million into the club, out of his pocket is an investment. If the club doesn't make money then Ashley is not going to be able to take anything out, unlike when Freddy and the lads were getting a nice divi now and then to keep their pockets lined. It wouldn't make any business sense for Ashley to take money out of the club when its making a loss, because that is just going to hit him in the pocket even more. Do you honestly think Steve Gibson backs boro for nowt? These fellas haven't made it big in business because they are stupid you know. I think this club would be in serious shite had Ashley not come in and put his money in, and I think Sir John Hall knew that. I am not an Ashley apologist at all, either, I think the way he has behaved is crap, and the lack of communication is a big mistake, but you cannot say he has not invested in the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 So when do you see us stopping the cost cutting and getting back to team building? Next season? The season after that? Never? We either cost cut or borrow more from him, as it stands we spend more than we bring in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Ashley's loan has been to pay off debt owed to external agencies, who were charging interest regardless of whether the club was making a profit and could have recalled the loan at a point in time damaging to the club. If Ashley called in the loan, we'd be pretty f***ed, but no worse than we already were, in fact we'd have benefited from not having to pay interest on the loans for however long it was between Ashley paying off the original loans and demanding repayment on the loan to him. That's raising the possibility of something that would never happen though, even if the ground loan hadn't been subject to the clearance clause, why would NR, Barclays or any of the other owed parties have suddenly called them in? Hall raised this same possibility when he took over about the Barclays overdraft and I didn't believe him then either. Of course I accept the point about saved interest. Yet, you seem to think that Ashley would do it to himself. Banks call in loans all the time, they often do it to healthy companies and it can be nothing to do with the recipient of the loan and everything to do with the bank's own situation. NUFC is not a healthy company and would not be looked upon as a good risk by any financial institution at present without Ashley's personal backing. A bank would screw NUFC without a second thought if it felt that was the best thing to do for its own benefit. Ashley on the other hand, would essentially be screwing himself should he call the loan in, he owns NUFC and therefore he would be damaging his own business. That's got to make it less likely than a bank doing it, hasn't it!?! NUFC isn’t Jamie’s Tile Warehouse, and no bank is going to risk the avalanche of negative publicity it would get for killing off a club of Newcastle stature. However, if we get relegated this season we will go bust unless Ashley lends the club some more money… about £50m by my estimate. Even if we stay up cost cutting isn’t going to keep pace with falling revenues. Ashley has pushed the club into a vicious cycle that can only be broken by an investment in the product. Less income = less money for team building = less income = less money for team building etc etc So, you're saying that the banks would never risk doing something that might be unpopular and mean they got bad press? Erm, where have you been for the last few months!?! Do you really need me to go into more detail about the reasons your point is totally incorrect, or can you now figure it out for yourself? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Good luck with that one Indi. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fading star Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Ashley's loan has been to pay off debt owed to external agencies, who were charging interest regardless of whether the club was making a profit and could have recalled the loan at a point in time damaging to the club. If Ashley called in the loan, we'd be pretty f***ed, but no worse than we already were, in fact we'd have benefited from not having to pay interest on the loans for however long it was between Ashley paying off the original loans and demanding repayment on the loan to him. That's raising the possibility of something that would never happen though, even if the ground loan hadn't been subject to the clearance clause, why would NR, Barclays or any of the other owed parties have suddenly called them in? Hall raised this same possibility when he took over about the Barclays overdraft and I didn't believe him then either. Of course I accept the point about saved interest. Yet, you seem to think that Ashley would do it to himself. Banks call in loans all the time, they often do it to healthy companies and it can be nothing to do with the recipient of the loan and everything to do with the bank's own situation. NUFC is not a healthy company and would not be looked upon as a good risk by any financial institution at present without Ashley's personal backing. A bank would screw NUFC without a second thought if it felt that was the best thing to do for its own benefit. Ashley on the other hand, would essentially be screwing himself should he call the loan in, he owns NUFC and therefore he would be damaging his own business. That's got to make it less likely than a bank doing it, hasn't it!?! NUFC isn’t Jamie’s Tile Warehouse, and no bank is going to risk the avalanche of negative publicity it would get for killing off a club of Newcastle stature. However, if we get relegated this season we will go bust unless Ashley lends the club some more money… about £50m by my estimate. Even if we stay up cost cutting isn’t going to keep pace with falling revenues. Ashley has pushed the club into a vicious cycle that can only be broken by an investment in the product. Less income = less money for team building = less income = less money for team building etc etc So, you're saying that the banks would never risk doing something that might be unpopular and mean they got bad press? Erm, where have you been for the last few months!?! Do you really need me to go into more detail about the reasons your point is totally incorrect, or can you now figure it out for yourself? No. I’m saying they wouldn’t foreclose a loan to a football club of Newcastle’s importance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fading star Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 So when do you see us stopping the cost cutting and getting back to team building? Next season? The season after that? Never? We either cost cut or borrow more from him, as it stands we spend more than we bring in. Yes, but when do you see us stopping the cost cutting and getting back to team building? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 So when do you see us stopping the cost cutting and getting back to team building? Next season? The season after that? Never? We either cost cut or borrow more from him, as it stands we spend more than we bring in. Yes, but when do you see us stopping the cost cutting and getting back to team building? When the wage bill gets brought down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 No. I’m saying they wouldn’t foreclose a loan to a football club of Newcastle’s importance. Liverpool is under threat of that exact scenario. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fading star Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 No. I’m saying they wouldn’t foreclose a loan to a football club of Newcastle’s importance. Liverpool is under thread of that exact scenario. They are, to the tune of £500m I believe. Do you expect LFC to go out of business? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 They are, to the tune of £500m I believe. Do you expect LFC to go out of business? The Liverpool debt is £350 million. I would be surprised if they do go out of business but I can see them being screwed even further financially, they currently pay £30 million to service the debt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fading star Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 They are, to the tune of £500m I believe. Do you expect LFC to go out of business? The Liverpool debt is £350 million. I would be surprised if they do go out of business but I can see them being screwed even further financially, they currently pay £30 million to service the debt. There you go. If the banks were going to treat football clubs like normal businesses Leeds would have gone under years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 No. I’m saying they wouldn’t foreclose a loan to a football club of Newcastle’s importance. Liverpool is under thread of that exact scenario. They are, to the tune of £500m I believe. Do you expect LFC to go out of business? Of course no-one expects Liverpool to go out of business (even if many find the prospect quite delicious, but that's besides the point)...but then again, it remains entirely possible. What makes you think it's so completely inconceivable? Do the words...Lehman Brothers...Barings...mean anything to you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 There you go. If the banks were going to treat football clubs like normal businesses Leeds would have gone under years ago. I said I would be surprised, I was also surprised to see people standing ouside NR for hours to take money out in a panic. I was surprised when Woolworths and Land of Leather closed down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 No. I’m saying they wouldn’t foreclose a loan to a football club of Newcastle’s importance. Liverpool is under thread of that exact scenario. They are, to the tune of £500m I believe. Do you expect LFC to go out of business? Of course no-one expects Liverpool to go out of business (even if many find the prospect quite delicious, but that's besides the point)...but then again, it remains entirely possible. What makes you think it's so completely inconceivable? Do the words...Lehman Brothers...Barings...mean anything to you? Not as a collective but i imagine he's familiar with them as individual words. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Sweet Jesus: http://banterpit.channelbee.com/viewtopic.php?t=12021 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fading star Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 No. I’m saying they wouldn’t foreclose a loan to a football club of Newcastle’s importance. Liverpool is under thread of that exact scenario. They are, to the tune of £500m I believe. Do you expect LFC to go out of business? Of course no-one expects Liverpool to go out of business (even if many find the prospect quite delicious, but that's besides the point)...but then again, it remains entirely possible. What makes you think it's so completely inconceivable? Do the words...Lehman Brothers...Barings...mean anything to you? Football clubs are an integral part of their local communities history and culture, political expediency protects them from the crass disregard people like Ashley have for such things. Real Madrid for example are basically kept afloat by the local government, Sunderland City council subbed SAFC’s stadium redevelopment to the tune of £20m. All through this thread NUFC has been talked about as if it was a normal business, when it is anything but. However if the club slips down the leagues its kudos will fall and it will become far more vulnerable than it is now. Ashley has gambled the clubs future on staying up without investing in the most important part of his business. It’s lunacy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Sweet Jesus: http://banterpit.channelbee.com/viewtopic.php?t=12021 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Sweet Jesus: http://banterpit.channelbee.com/viewtopic.php?t=12021 Doubt it. If it was true then why haven't we sold anyone in this window, surely there'd be a fire-sale going on as we speak, there isn't and I don't believe we'd go from business to bringing the administrators in, overnight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Sweet Jesus: http://banterpit.channelbee.com/viewtopic.php?t=12021 Jesus Christ! Where do these people come from? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Sweet Jesus: http://banterpit.channelbee.com/viewtopic.php?t=12021 Doubt it. If it was true then why haven't we sold anyone in this window, surely there'd be a fire-sale going on as we speak, there isn't and I don't believe we'd go from business to bringing the administrators in, overnight. It's not true at all Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Sweet Jesus: http://banterpit.channelbee.com/viewtopic.php?t=12021 Which one of the banter pit are you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 No. I’m saying they wouldn’t foreclose a loan to a football club of Newcastle’s importance. Liverpool is under thread of that exact scenario. They are, to the tune of £500m I believe. Do you expect LFC to go out of business? Of course no-one expects Liverpool to go out of business (even if many find the prospect quite delicious, but that's besides the point)...but then again, it remains entirely possible. What makes you think it's so completely inconceivable? Do the words...Lehman Brothers...Barings...mean anything to you? Football clubs are an integral part of their local communities history and culture, political expediency protects them from the crass disregard people like Ashley have for such things. Real Madrid for example are basically kept afloat by the local government, Sunderland City council subbed SAFC’s stadium redevelopment to the tune of £20m. All through this thread NUFC has been talked about as if it was a normal business, when it is anything but. However if the club slips down the leagues its kudos will fall and it will become far more vulnerable than it is now. Ashley has gambled the clubs future on staying up without investing in the most important part of his business. It’s lunacy. You're right, football clubs aren't normal businesses and there will nearly always be someone come along who's prepared to pour their own - or someone else's - money into them, this leads the banks to delay foreclosure, but it's only a delay; if they don't believe there's anyone out there who'll take them on, then they will do it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Sweet Jesus: http://banterpit.channelbee.com/viewtopic.php?t=12021 Which one of the banter pit are you? None of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Sweet Jesus: http://banterpit.channelbee.com/viewtopic.php?t=12021 Doubt it. If it was true then why haven't we sold anyone in this window, surely there'd be a fire-sale going on as we speak, there isn't and I don't believe we'd go from business to bringing the administrators in, overnight. It's not true at all That was the implication. 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