Llambias Q&A with Chronicle: OP updated with Thursday's articles

[NE5]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

 

Link?

 

a bit touchy are we ?

 

 

[Guest optimistic nit]

Still a lie, and a very odd one at that.   

 

So is Ashleys plan to reduce the wage bill by £30m* a season, or does he have another strategy for balancing the books?

 

*£50m if you factor in recouping his £100m loan over the duration of the 5 year plan.

 

The wage bill is 70.4% of our operating expenses so that's got to be the most obvious area to go looking to make savings.  Targeting anything else as a starting point wouldn't make sense as the savings would me minimal in comparison.

 

In business you always go for savings in whatever area offers the greatest gains, 10% of a 100 is better than 50% of 5.

 

 

what a load of shite

 

mackems.gif

 

How is that a load of shite? Mick is spot on there, both in his analagy at the bottom with regards to the %'s and he's also right about the wage bill. If it is indeed 70.4% of expenditure (and I have no reason to doubt it) then that has to be the first place he looks at trimming. Obviously if someone was on £100,000 a week but got 35 goals a season or whatever then that would justify the wages, but when you look at the likes of Geremi, Owen, Smith, Viduka, Duff, Cacapa etc, these players offer nothing to the squad because they are either shite, made of glass, or both. In some cases (Smith, Cacapa, Viduka) we're basically paying them for nothing, as well as covering the cost of their rehab and physio.

 

I'd like to see you explain how that post is shite. My guess is just because it was Mick who posted it, maybe you should actually read it? It makes sense.

 

perhaps you should read some of my posts which are factually based, you may reach better judgements if you do. I don't suppose the irony that you for instance also disagree with anything I say because it's me.

 

My reference to "load of shite" is two fold. One in that it is nothing to do with the topic title !! and two, anything to defend Ashley.

 

Making a profit is no good if you are playing in the 2nd division and a half full stadium, if that is where we end up, although with a half full stadium it might be even more difficult to make a profit, it certainly won't improve any chance of getting back into europe.

 

 

 

 

and being in europe is no good if you bancrupt yourself in the procees © Leeds 2003.

[NE5]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

 

Link?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias

[NE5]

Still a lie, and a very odd one at that.   

 

So is Ashley’s plan to reduce the wage bill by £30m* a season, or does he have another strategy for balancing the books?

 

*£50m if you factor in recouping his £100m loan over the duration of the 5 year plan.

 

The wage bill is 70.4% of our operating expenses so that's got to be the most obvious area to go looking to make savings.  Targeting anything else as a starting point wouldn't make sense as the savings would me minimal in comparison.

 

In business you always go for savings in whatever area offers the greatest gains, 10% of a 100 is better than 50% of 5.

 

 

what a load of shite

 

mackems.gif

 

How is that a load of shite? Mick is spot on there, both in his analagy at the bottom with regards to the %'s and he's also right about the wage bill. If it is indeed 70.4% of expenditure (and I have no reason to doubt it) then that has to be the first place he looks at trimming. Obviously if someone was on £100,000 a week but got 35 goals a season or whatever then that would justify the wages, but when you look at the likes of Geremi, Owen, Smith, Viduka, Duff, Cacapa etc, these players offer nothing to the squad because they are either shite, made of glass, or both. In some cases (Smith, Cacapa, Viduka) we're basically paying them for nothing, as well as covering the cost of their rehab and physio.

 

I'd like to see you explain how that post is shite. My guess is just because it was Mick who posted it, maybe you should actually read it? It makes sense.

 

perhaps you should read some of my posts which are factually based, you may reach better judgements if you do. I don't suppose the irony that you for instance also disagree with anything I say because it's me.

 

My reference to "load of shite" is two fold. One in that it is nothing to do with the topic title !! and two, anything to defend Ashley.

 

Making a profit is no good if you are playing in the 2nd division and a half full stadium, if that is where we end up, although with a half full stadium it might be even more difficult to make a profit, it certainly won't improve any chance of getting back into europe.

 

 

 

 

and being in europe is no good if you bancrupt yourself in the procees © Leeds 2003.

 

you should tell Real Madrid that they have been getting it all wrong then

 

 

[Mick]

 

 

perhaps you should read some of my posts which are factually based, you may reach better judgements if you do. I don't suppose the irony that you for instance also disagree with anything I say because it's me.

 

My reference to "load of s****" is two fold. One in that it is nothing to do with the topic title !! and two, anything to defend Ashley.

 

Making a profit is no good if you are playing in the 2nd division and a half full stadium, if that is where we end up, although with a half full stadium it might be even more difficult to make a profit, it certainly won't improve any chance of getting back into europe.

 

 

 

If your reference was two fold then it's a load of shite two fold.  The post had nothing to do with the thread title because it was in response to a direct question from fading star, which was quoted.  As for defending Ashley, I posted facts not opinion, if that is defending him then that's life.

[Tooj]

Still a lie, and a very odd one at that.   

 

So is Ashleys plan to reduce the wage bill by £30m* a season, or does he have another strategy for balancing the books?

 

*£50m if you factor in recouping his £100m loan over the duration of the 5 year plan.

 

The wage bill is 70.4% of our operating expenses so that's got to be the most obvious area to go looking to make savings.  Targeting anything else as a starting point wouldn't make sense as the savings would me minimal in comparison.

 

In business you always go for savings in whatever area offers the greatest gains, 10% of a 100 is better than 50% of 5.

 

 

what a load of shite

 

mackems.gif

 

How is that a load of shite? Mick is spot on there, both in his analagy at the bottom with regards to the %'s and he's also right about the wage bill. If it is indeed 70.4% of expenditure (and I have no reason to doubt it) then that has to be the first place he looks at trimming. Obviously if someone was on £100,000 a week but got 35 goals a season or whatever then that would justify the wages, but when you look at the likes of Geremi, Owen, Smith, Viduka, Duff, Cacapa etc, these players offer nothing to the squad because they are either shite, made of glass, or both. In some cases (Smith, Cacapa, Viduka) we're basically paying them for nothing, as well as covering the cost of their rehab and physio.

 

I'd like to see you explain how that post is shite. My guess is just because it was Mick who posted it, maybe you should actually read it? It makes sense.

 

Yet the point is most of those were signed under Ashley, yet they don't seem to want to take responsibility for this. They are far too quick to lay the blame under the previous regime (who were far from perfect btw) without acknowledging their own mistakes for the extraordinary high wage bill that we have.

[madras]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

i tell you that non newcastle supporting friends of mine laughed at NUFC for appointing souness and roeder and it is dismissed. someone else tells you that some non nufc fans think along your lines and it is taken on board and is supposed to mean something.

 

 

i can see a pattern forming.

[OzzieMandias]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

 

Link?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

[NE5]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

i tell you that non newcastle supporting friends of mine laughed at NUFC for appointing souness and roeder and it is dismissed. someone else tells you that some non nufc fans think along your lines and it is taken on board and is supposed to mean something.

 

 

i can see a pattern forming.

 

so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did.

 

mackems.gif

 

The difference is, I know that nobody laughed at us/me when we were qualifying for europe more than everybone but 4 teams. I also don't take the presumption that they are, to heart.

 

I'm so pleased you think all the 87 clubs that haven't qualified for europe as often as us, found something to laugh at.

 

I think you and some others should get out more and stop taking these WUM's on phone ins to heart.

 

Whats your take on Chelsea sacking Phil Scolari ? How can that be, a world cup winner, and I thought it was only us who appointed managers who failed and didn't give them time  Have you read the reports that Zola may take over in the summer ? Amazing, someone who has only been a manager for a few months, surely its only us who do things like that too ? 

 

 

 

 

[NE5]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

 

Link?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

 

So whats your criteria for appointing managers ? What do you think of Chelsea sacking Scolari ? Do you think they are a laughing stock now too 

[NE5]

 

 

perhaps you should read some of my posts which are factually based, you may reach better judgements if you do. I don't suppose the irony that you for instance also disagree with anything I say because it's me.

 

My reference to "load of s****" is two fold. One in that it is nothing to do with the topic title !! and two, anything to defend Ashley.

 

Making a profit is no good if you are playing in the 2nd division and a half full stadium, if that is where we end up, although with a half full stadium it might be even more difficult to make a profit, it certainly won't improve any chance of getting back into europe.

 

 

 

If your reference was two fold then it's a load of shite two fold.  The post had nothing to do with the thread title because it was in response to a direct question from fading star, which was quoted.  As for defending Ashley, I posted facts not opinion, if that is defending him then that's life.

 

you don't say. So sometimes threads drift away from the title? Fancy that. Surprised nobody scolded you for it .

 

Whats your take on the FACT that the Halls and Shepherd have been the best owners of the club for the last 50 miles by miles based on FACTUAL LEAGUE POSITIONS. Thats FACT not OPINION by the way.

 

 

[Pilko]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

 

Link?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

 

So whats your criteria for appointing managers ? What do you think of Chelsea sacking Scolari ? Do you think they are a laughing stock now too 

 

Everything you need is right here.

[NE5]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

 

Link?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

 

So whats your criteria for appointing managers ? What do you think of Chelsea sacking Scolari ? Do you think they are a laughing stock now too 

 

Everything you need is right here.

 

What ? Do you think the whole of the football world is laughing at Chelsea  Or do you mean us ? If so, you truly are one deluded person, and a true product of the Halls and Shepherds raised standards and expectations at NUFC that they created, which you don't understand in the slightest.

 

 

[madras]

 

 

perhaps you should read some of my posts which are factually based, you may reach better judgements if you do. I don't suppose the irony that you for instance also disagree with anything I say because it's me.

 

My reference to "load of s****" is two fold. One in that it is nothing to do with the topic title !! and two, anything to defend Ashley.

 

Making a profit is no good if you are playing in the 2nd division and a half full stadium, if that is where we end up, although with a half full stadium it might be even more difficult to make a profit, it certainly won't improve any chance of getting back into europe.

 

 

 

If your reference was two fold then it's a load of s**** two fold.  The post had nothing to do with the thread title because it was in response to a direct question from fading star, which was quoted.  As for defending Ashley, I posted facts not opinion, if that is defending him then that's life.

 

you don't say. So sometimes threads drift away from the title? Fancy that. Surprised nobody scolded you for it .

 

Whats your take on the FACT that the Halls and Shepherd have been the best owners of the club for the last 50 miles by miles based on FACTUAL LEAGUE POSITIONS. Thats FACT not OPINION by the way.

 

 

you know what ne5. that is completely 100% true....................doesn't mean by the end they weren't going backwards on the pitch and losing money hand over fist off it and not looking as if they could turn it round.

[indi]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

He's doing a particularly s**** job of it then, isn't he!?!

 

Simple logic suggests that you and your friends are wrong, try and answer this question and you'll hopefully figure it out:

 

Why would Ashley invest a huge amount of his personal fortune in what everyone knows is a highly risky business with spend a few years of his life putting in all the work and effort and getting all the grief associated with running a football club, simply to get his money back.

 

Some things to consider:

 

- He could have left his money in the bank and earned interest with zero risk and zero effort/grief involved.

- He could have invested in other industries which would have given him a much higher rate of return for a much lower risk.

- He could have invested in a different team, which would have given him potential to make a bigger profit. eg buy a Championship side get them promoted, keep them up a couple of seasons, sell them on.

- He could have tried to buy a Premiership club that gave him a better chance of making money.

 

You make a good point.  I'm personally unsure of the bloke.

 

Football teams, especially in England have been seeing so many billionaire takeovers that could be an argument he wants to get us into a better position and then sell us off.  He tried to sell us off for alot more then we were worth after KK.  Everyone including the tea lady told him needs to lower his price.  On that point, he didn't try too hard to state his case, gave into supporters pressure almost immediately.

 

Secondly, he may not have known what he was getting himself into.  He see's us sell out our stadium week in, week out with on paper top players, underperforming - maybe even thinking he was grabbing a bargain.  Too good to refuse so grabs at it, then being stung with true state of our finances and having to begrudgingly support us to protect his investment.

 

Thirdly, how many people in the world had ever heard of Mike Ashley before he took us over? for a reclusive man he was enjoying all the popularity he was receiving at the start.

 

As Mick says the people behind Man City tried for us before them and Ashley told them where to go, these are some of the very richest people on Earth, who have since demonstrated the kind of money they're happy to spend, do you really think he was simply holding out for someone richer? I'm not sure that I've ever seen anything other than speculation over what his price was, but even if he did start out with a high price, I'm sure that would have been open to negotiation as everything is in business. Also, everything he's done has been about planning for the long-term; buying loads of kids, getting the wages and finances under control, bringing in the much derided system and so-on. These are hardly things that are going to secure him a short-term profit, particularly through selling to some mega-rich money-is-no-object type, I mean how many youth team players are in Chelsea's side each week and how many do you reckon will be in Citeh's side after a couple of seasons? The only things those kind of people are interested in are success on the pitch and the kudos of owning a big-name club, that's why City's owners tried for us first and why DIC are only interested in Liverpool. Therefore a much better way of trying to attract those kind of people would have been to make a few big-name signings get a world-renowned manager, play good football, win games and fuck the debt, fuck the youth team, fuck the expense, fuck the club's future, as he wouldn't have intended being around to see it anyway.

 

Also, as you say there's the lack of proper due-diligence thing, that's not the actions of someone looking for a profit, is it? If all you're interested in is making money then surely you go over the finances with a fine-tooth comb beforehand don't you? Especially if you know that others have already done due-diligence and subsequently not proceeded with the purchase.

 

Whilst it's obvious he's not prepared to walk away having got totally burnt financially, there's simply no logic in the argument that he only ever intended to make a quick buck.

 

You're second point is more valid and you're right that he did seem to give in quite easily after KK walked out, but I think that was more to do with just how shocked he was at the reaction and the way everyone seemed to just decide that the club was entirely in the wrong and that Keegan entirely in the right, despite not knowing any of the facts. That's continued since despite Keegan not actually having said anything about it directly, whilst everything the club has said has been dismissed out-of-hand as lies by the vast majority. I think it makes much more logical sense that he had gotten into this for a bit of fun and thought: "fuck that!" when it all kicked off. You're third point could therefore well be true, but I don't really see what the problem is with that, if it is? Again, whist I think that there is truth in what you say about him not having realised the true state of the club's finances I don't think that would be the reason that he would now simply be begrudgingly protecting his investment - if indeed that is what he's doing, rather than genuinely trying to give it another go. Like I've said above, if he was only interested in the money he'd have done the financial checks more thoroughly before he bought the club. I think it's much more likely that he would be begrudgingly trying to protect his investment due to becoming disillusioned with owning the club due to the fans reaction after KK's departure turning something enjoyable into something that was anything but enjoyable. If that's what's happened then I think it's much more likely that he fell out of love with the club - so to speak - rather than for purely financial reasons.

 

This is why I was so against the protests and is one of the reasons that I'm so opposed to NUSC. People say that they only have the club's best interests at heart and I'm sure that's what they think they're doing, but personally I think that they are totally mistaken and their actions are absolutely diametrically opposed to what's best for the club in reality. I think that the biggest single danger facing the club is the threat of it's owner seeing it as something that's not worth the bother and deciding to simply keep it ticking over until the recession is over and he can get rid of it without totally screwing himself financially. Perhaps that's already happened and it's too late, but we as fans better hope and pray that him deciding to take the club off the market and get more involved is due to a genuine desire to give it another go, I think that there are signs there that it could be, I hope so. Some people need to face up to a couple of facts, namely; Mike Ashley is our owner and he will remain our owner for the foreseeable future, as there simply isn't anyone else out there. Given that, the best thing the fans can do, for the good of the club, is to try and get him to enjoy owning it, so that he wants it to be successful and is willing to spend his money on it. Whatever your views on the Keegan thing - and let's face it; that's what's caused everyone to kick-off, as most were happy previously - it's in the past, it's time to get over it - if not, forget it - and look at what's best for the club, our club, the thing we're supposed to support. However much people love him, Keegan is one man, and one man can never be allowed to be bigger than the club.

 

I'm not saying that people need to love Mike Ashley, or even like him, but that they need to put their feelings towards him for what he did or didn't do to Kevin Keegan aside and realise that we need him more than he needs us at present and it is in our (the club's) best interests to encourage him, rather than force him away. Otherwise we will run the risk of cutting our nose off to spite our face and the only thing that will suffer is us and NUFC. People need to understand and accept that before it's too late, I hope they do, as being able to say I told you so will not provide me with any pleasure whatsoever. If things change and a shining knight comes along and NUSC can finally answer the question "what happens next?" then great, but until then NUSC and those who think like they do need to think about the consequences of their words and actions or in other words they need to shut the fuck up.

[madras]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

i tell you that non newcastle supporting friends of mine laughed at NUFC for appointing souness and roeder and it is dismissed. someone else tells you that some non nufc fans think along your lines and it is taken on board and is supposed to mean something.

 

 

i can see a pattern forming.

 

so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did.

 

mackems.gif

 

The difference is, I know that nobody laughed at us/me when we were qualifying for europe more than everybone but 4 teams. I also don't take the presumption that they are, to heart.

 

I'm so pleased you think all the 87 clubs that haven't qualified for europe as often as us, found something to laugh at.

 

I think you and some others should get out more and stop taking these WUM's on phone ins to heart.

 

Whats your take on Chelsea sacking Phil Scolari ? How can that be, a world cup winner, and I thought it was only us who appointed managers who failed and didn't give them time  Have you read the reports that Zola may take over in the summer ? Amazing, someone who has only been a manager for a few months, surely its only us who do things like that too ? 

 

 

 

 

erm i'm not actually bothered about what he thought. i'd have disagreed with him about dalglish and also with those who were carrying on about fred the way many are now about ashley ("just want them out and anyone will be better, despite no-one looking like they are willing to step into the breech or carrying the financial clout needed). you shouldn't try to lump everyone who disagrees with you in the same boat and lets face it ,it would need to be a cruise liner.

 

my whole disagreement with you has been about the position the club was in when ashley took over.

 

i'm sure i've answered the scolari one before, but hey ho. it's a one that didn't pay off and was always more of a risk than it seemed due to him never having managed in european league football. even the fact he won a world cup can be lessoned when you think of the players at his disposal. i take it you weren't that miffed when we appointed kinnear in "the lottery" ?

[OzzieMandias]

so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did.

 

 

That's because not everyone shares your tendency to make shite up.

[OzzieMandias]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

He's doing a particularly s**** job of it then, isn't he!?!

 

Simple logic suggests that you and your friends are wrong, try and answer this question and you'll hopefully figure it out:

 

Why would Ashley invest a huge amount of his personal fortune in what everyone knows is a highly risky business with spend a few years of his life putting in all the work and effort and getting all the grief associated with running a football club, simply to get his money back.

 

Some things to consider:

 

- He could have left his money in the bank and earned interest with zero risk and zero effort/grief involved.

- He could have invested in other industries which would have given him a much higher rate of return for a much lower risk.

- He could have invested in a different team, which would have given him potential to make a bigger profit. eg buy a Championship side get them promoted, keep them up a couple of seasons, sell them on.

- He could have tried to buy a Premiership club that gave him a better chance of making money.

 

You make a good point.  I'm personally unsure of the bloke.

 

Football teams, especially in England have been seeing so many billionaire takeovers that could be an argument he wants to get us into a better position and then sell us off.  He tried to sell us off for alot more then we were worth after KK.  Everyone including the tea lady told him needs to lower his price.  On that point, he didn't try too hard to state his case, gave into supporters pressure almost immediately.

 

Secondly, he may not have known what he was getting himself into.  He see's us sell out our stadium week in, week out with on paper top players, underperforming - maybe even thinking he was grabbing a bargain.  Too good to refuse so grabs at it, then being stung with true state of our finances and having to begrudgingly support us to protect his investment.

 

Thirdly, how many people in the world had ever heard of Mike Ashley before he took us over? for a reclusive man he was enjoying all the popularity he was receiving at the start.

 

As Mick says the people behind Man City tried for us before them and Ashley told them where to go, these are some of the very richest people on Earth, who have since demonstrated the kind of money they're happy to spend, do you really think he was simply holding out for someone richer? I'm not sure that I've ever seen anything other than speculation over what his price was, but even if he did start out with a high price, I'm sure that would have been open to negotiation as everything is in business. Also, everything he's done has been about planning for the long-term; buying loads of kids, getting the wages and finances under control, bringing in the much derided system and so-on. These are hardly things that are going to secure him a short-term profit, particularly through selling to some mega-rich money-is-no-object type, I mean how many youth team players are in Chelsea's side each week and how many do you reckon will be in Citeh's side after a couple of seasons? The only things those kind of people are interested in are success on the pitch and the kudos of owning a big-name club, that's why City's owners tried for us first and why DIC are only interested in Liverpool. Therefore a much better way of trying to attract those kind of people would have been to make a few big-name signings get a world-renowned manager, play good football, win games and fuck the debt, fuck the youth team, fuck the expense, fuck the club's future, as he wouldn't have intended being around to see it anyway.

 

Also, as you say there's the lack of proper due-diligence thing, that's not the actions of someone looking for a profit, is it? If all you're interested in is making money then surely you go over the finances with a fine-tooth comb beforehand don't you? Especially if you know that others have already done due-diligence and subsequently not proceeded with the purchase.

 

Whilst it's obvious he's not prepared to walk away having got totally burnt financially, there's simply no logic in the argument that he only ever intended to make a quick buck.

 

You're second point is more valid and you're right that he did seem to give in quite easily after KK walked out, but I think that was more to do with just how shocked he was at the reaction and the way everyone seemed to just decide that the club was entirely in the wrong and that Keegan entirely in the right, despite not knowing any of the facts. That's continued since despite Keegan not actually having said anything about it directly, whilst everything the club has said has been dismissed out-of-hand as lies by the vast majority. I think it makes much more logical sense that he had gotten into this for a bit of fun and thought: "fuck that!" when it all kicked off. You're third point could therefore well be true, but I don't really see what the problem is with that, if it is? Again, whist I think that there is truth in what you say about him not having realised the true state of the club's finances I don't think that would be the reason that he would now simply be begrudgingly protecting his investment - if indeed that is what he's doing, rather than genuinely trying to give it another go. Like I've said above, if he was only interested in the money he'd have done the financial checks more thoroughly before he bought the club. I think it's much more likely that he would be begrudgingly trying to protect his investment due to becoming disillusioned with owning the club due to the fans reaction after KK's departure turning something enjoyable into something that was anything but enjoyable. If that's what's happened then I think it's much more likely that he fell out of love with the club - so to speak - rather than for purely financial reasons.

 

This is why I was so against the protests and is one of the reasons that I'm so opposed to NUSC. People say that they only have the club's best interests at heart and I'm sure that's what they think they're doing, but personally I think that they are totally mistaken and their actions are absolutely diametrically opposed to what's best for the club in reality. I think that the biggest single danger facing the club is the threat of it's owner seeing it as something that's not worth the bother and deciding to simply keep it ticking over until the recession is over and he can get rid of it without totally screwing himself financially. Perhaps that's already happened and it's too late, but we as fans better hope and pray that him deciding to take the club off the market and get more involved is due to a genuine desire to give it another go, I think that there are signs there that it could be, I hope so. Some people need to face up to a couple of facts, namely; Mike Ashley is our owner and he will remain our owner for the foreseeable future, as there simply isn't anyone else out there. Given that, the best thing the fans can do, for the good of the club, is to try and get him to enjoy owning it, so that he wants it to be successful and is willing to spend his money on it. Whatever your views on the Keegan thing - and let's face it; that's what's caused everyone to kick-off, as most were happy previously - it's in the past, it's time to get over it - if not, forget it - and look at what's best for the club, our club, the thing we're supposed to support. However much people love him, Keegan is one man, and one man can never be allowed to be bigger than the club.

 

I'm not saying that people need to love Mike Ashley, or even like him, but that they need to put their feelings towards him for what he did or didn't do to Kevin Keegan aside and realise that we need him more than he needs us at present and it is in our (the club's) best interests to encourage him, rather than force him away. Otherwise we will run the risk of cutting our nose off to spite our face and the only thing that will suffer is us and NUFC. People need to understand and accept that before it's too late, I hope they do, as being able to say I told you so will not provide me with any pleasure whatsoever. If things change and a shining knight comes along and NUSC can finally answer the question "what happens next?" then great, but until then NUSC and those who think like they do need to think about the consequences of their words and actions or in other words they need to shut the fuck up.

 

 

Oodles of good sense there.

[Mick]

 

As Mick says the people behind Man City tried for us before them and Ashley told them where to go, these are some of the very richest people on Earth, who have since demonstrated the kind of money they're happy to spend, do you really think he was simply holding out for someone richer? I'm not sure that I've ever seen anything other than speculation over what his price was, but even if he did start out with a high price, I'm sure that would have been open to negotiation as everything is in business. Also, everything he's done has been about planning for the long-term; buying loads of kids, getting the wages and finances under control, bringing in the much derided system and so-on. These are hardly things that are going to secure him a short-term profit, particularly through selling to some mega-rich money-is-no-object type, I mean how many youth team players are in Chelsea's side each week and how many do you reckon will be in Citeh's side after a couple of seasons? The only things those kind of people are interested in are success on the pitch and the kudos of owning a big-name club, that's why City's owners tried for us first and why DIC are only interested in Liverpool. Therefore a much better way of trying to attract those kind of people would have been to make a few big-name signings get a world-renowned manager, play good football, win games and f*** the debt, f*** the youth team, f*** the expense, f*** the club's future, as he wouldn't have intended being around to see it anyway.

 

Also, as you say there's the lack of proper due-diligence thing, that's not the actions of someone looking for a profit, is it? If all you're interested in is making money then surely you go over the finances with a fine-tooth comb beforehand don't you? Especially if you know that others have already done due-diligence and subsequently not proceeded with the purchase.

 

Whilst it's obvious he's not prepared to walk away having got totally burnt financially, there's simply no logic in the argument that he only ever intended to make a quick buck.

 

You're second point is more valid and you're right that he did seem to give in quite easily after KK walked out, but I think that was more to do with just how shocked he was at the reaction and the way everyone seemed to just decide that the club was entirely in the wrong and that Keegan entirely in the right, despite not knowing any of the facts. That's continued since despite Keegan not actually having said anything about it directly, whilst everything the club has said has been dismissed out-of-hand as lies by the vast majority. I think it makes much more logical sense that he had gotten into this for a bit of fun and thought: "f*** that!" when it all kicked off. You're third point could therefore well be true, but I don't really see what the problem is with that, if it is? Again, whist I think that there is truth in what you say about him not having realised the true state of the club's finances I don't think that would be the reason that he would now simply be begrudgingly protecting his investment - if indeed that is what he's doing, rather than genuinely trying to give it another go. Like I've said above, if he was only interested in the money he'd have done the financial checks more thoroughly before he bought the club. I think it's much more likely that he would be begrudgingly trying to protect his investment due to becoming disillusioned with owning the club due to the fans reaction after KK's departure turning something enjoyable into something that was anything but enjoyable. If that's what's happened then I think it's much more likely that he fell out of love with the club - so to speak - rather than for purely financial reasons.

 

This is why I was so against the protests and is one of the reasons that I'm so opposed to NUSC. People say that they only have the club's best interests at heart and I'm sure that's what they think they're doing, but personally I think that they are totally mistaken and their actions are absolutely diametrically opposed to what's best for the club in reality. I think that the biggest single danger facing the club is the threat of it's owner seeing it as something that's not worth the bother and deciding to simply keep it ticking over until the recession is over and he can get rid of it without totally screwing himself financially. Perhaps that's already happened and it's too late, but we as fans better hope and pray that him deciding to take the club off the market and get more involved is due to a genuine desire to give it another go, I think that there are signs there that it could be, I hope so. Some people need to face up to a couple of facts, namely; Mike Ashley is our owner and he will remain our owner for the foreseeable future, as there simply isn't anyone else out there. Given that, the best thing the fans can do, for the good of the club, is to try and get him to enjoy owning it, so that he wants it to be successful and is willing to spend his money on it. Whatever your views on the Keegan thing - and let's face it; that's what's caused everyone to kick-off, as most were happy previously - it's in the past, it's time to get over it - if not, forget it - and look at what's best for the club, our club, the thing we're supposed to support. However much people love him, Keegan is one man, and one man can never be allowed to be bigger than the club.

 

I'm not saying that people need to love Mike Ashley, or even like him, but that they need to put their feelings towards him for what he did or didn't do to Kevin Keegan aside and realise that we need him more than he needs us at present and it is in our (the club's) best interests to encourage him, rather than force him away. Otherwise we will run the risk of cutting our nose off to spite our face and the only thing that will suffer is us and NUFC. People need to understand and accept that before it's too late, I hope they do, as being able to say I told you so will not provide me with any pleasure whatsoever. If things change and a shining knight comes along and NUSC can finally answer the question "what happens next?" then great, but until then NUSC and those who think like they do need to think about the consequences of their words and actions or in other words they need to shut the f*** up.

 

Another good post.

[NE5]

so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did.

 

 

That's because not everyone shares your tendency to make shite up.

 

such as ?

 

Have you told us your criteria for appointing managers yet BTW ? As you backed at least 4 of the 6 managerial appointments to succeed didn't you ?

 

Aren't you saying you don't care if those manu fans etc are laughing at us, or does it depend who the owner is 

 

And have you decided if you are for or against a protest, or is it totally dependent on who the personality involved is 

 

 

[NE5]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

i tell you that non newcastle supporting friends of mine laughed at NUFC for appointing souness and roeder and it is dismissed. someone else tells you that some non nufc fans think along your lines and it is taken on board and is supposed to mean something.

 

 

i can see a pattern forming.

 

so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did.

 

mackems.gif

 

The difference is, I know that nobody laughed at us/me when we were qualifying for europe more than everybone but 4 teams. I also don't take the presumption that they are, to heart.

 

I'm so pleased you think all the 87 clubs that haven't qualified for europe as often as us, found something to laugh at.

 

I think you and some others should get out more and stop taking these WUM's on phone ins to heart.

 

Whats your take on Chelsea sacking Phil Scolari ? How can that be, a world cup winner, and I thought it was only us who appointed managers who failed and didn't give them time  Have you read the reports that Zola may take over in the summer ? Amazing, someone who has only been a manager for a few months, surely its only us who do things like that too ? 

 

 

 

 

erm i'm not actually bothered about what he thought. i'd have disagreed with him about dalglish and also with those who were carrying on about fred the way many are now about ashley ("just want them out and anyone will be better, despite no-one looking like they are willing to step into the breech or carrying the financial clout needed). you shouldn't try to lump everyone who disagrees with you in the same boat and lets face it ,it would need to be a cruise liner.

 

my whole disagreement with you has been about the position the club was in when ashley took over.

 

i'm sure i've answered the scolari one before, but hey ho. it's a one that didn't pay off and was always more of a risk than it seemed due to him never having managed in european league football. even the fact he won a world cup can be lessoned when you think of the players at his disposal. i take it you weren't that miffed when we appointed kinnear in "the lottery" ?

 

I think if we stay up, it will be almost entirely down to Kinnear for getting their heads up and restoring some spirit among the players.

 

Next season will be just the same as this though, until the inevitable happens. And the club will be nearer to where it was when the Halls and Shepherd found it. But I'm sure Ashley continuing his prudency on crowds of 20,000 will be the right policy to get us back into europe again.

 

Why don't you tell us what you would describe the appointments of football managers to be, when such a sure fire certainty as a World Cup Winner is sacked after a few months, and the long term replacement is being touted as someone who has been a manager for only a few months ? Or do you still think we are the only club who ever do this, and all the 87 clubs who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did were getting it right while we were getting it all wrong ??

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did.

 

 

That's because not everyone shares your tendency to make shite up.

 

such as ?

 

 

Such as...

 

so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did.

 

 

Obviously.

 

Did you start drinking earlier than usual today?

 

[NE5]

so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did.

 

 

That's because not everyone shares your tendency to make shite up.

 

such as ?

 

 

Such as...

 

so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did.

 

 

Obviously.

 

Did you start drinking earlier than usual today?

 

 

no, but you too should try it sometime.

 

Ask people what they think of managers who win 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards, if somebody will chat to you that is.

 

So has Ashley not embarrassed you yet then ?

 

 

[Guest toonlass]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

He's doing a particularly s**** job of it then, isn't he!?!

 

Simple logic suggests that you and your friends are wrong, try and answer this question and you'll hopefully figure it out:

 

Why would Ashley invest a huge amount of his personal fortune in what everyone knows is a highly risky business with spend a few years of his life putting in all the work and effort and getting all the grief associated with running a football club, simply to get his money back.

 

Some things to consider:

 

- He could have left his money in the bank and earned interest with zero risk and zero effort/grief involved.

- He could have invested in other industries which would have given him a much higher rate of return for a much lower risk.

- He could have invested in a different team, which would have given him potential to make a bigger profit. eg buy a Championship side get them promoted, keep them up a couple of seasons, sell them on.

- He could have tried to buy a Premiership club that gave him a better chance of making money.

 

You make a good point.  I'm personally unsure of the bloke.

 

Football teams, especially in England have been seeing so many billionaire takeovers that could be an argument he wants to get us into a better position and then sell us off.  He tried to sell us off for alot more then we were worth after KK.  Everyone including the tea lady told him needs to lower his price.  On that point, he didn't try too hard to state his case, gave into supporters pressure almost immediately.

 

Secondly, he may not have known what he was getting himself into.  He see's us sell out our stadium week in, week out with on paper top players, underperforming - maybe even thinking he was grabbing a bargain.  Too good to refuse so grabs at it, then being stung with true state of our finances and having to begrudgingly support us to protect his investment.

 

Thirdly, how many people in the world had ever heard of Mike Ashley before he took us over? for a reclusive man he was enjoying all the popularity he was receiving at the start.

 

As Mick says the people behind Man City tried for us before them and Ashley told them where to go, these are some of the very richest people on Earth, who have since demonstrated the kind of money they're happy to spend, do you really think he was simply holding out for someone richer? I'm not sure that I've ever seen anything other than speculation over what his price was, but even if he did start out with a high price, I'm sure that would have been open to negotiation as everything is in business. Also, everything he's done has been about planning for the long-term; buying loads of kids, getting the wages and finances under control, bringing in the much derided system and so-on. These are hardly things that are going to secure him a short-term profit, particularly through selling to some mega-rich money-is-no-object type, I mean how many youth team players are in Chelsea's side each week and how many do you reckon will be in Citeh's side after a couple of seasons? The only things those kind of people are interested in are success on the pitch and the kudos of owning a big-name club, that's why City's owners tried for us first and why DIC are only interested in Liverpool. Therefore a much better way of trying to attract those kind of people would have been to make a few big-name signings get a world-renowned manager, play good football, win games and fuck the debt, fuck the youth team, fuck the expense, fuck the club's future, as he wouldn't have intended being around to see it anyway.

 

Also, as you say there's the lack of proper due-diligence thing, that's not the actions of someone looking for a profit, is it? If all you're interested in is making money then surely you go over the finances with a fine-tooth comb beforehand don't you? Especially if you know that others have already done due-diligence and subsequently not proceeded with the purchase.

 

Whilst it's obvious he's not prepared to walk away having got totally burnt financially, there's simply no logic in the argument that he only ever intended to make a quick buck.

 

You're second point is more valid and you're right that he did seem to give in quite easily after KK walked out, but I think that was more to do with just how shocked he was at the reaction and the way everyone seemed to just decide that the club was entirely in the wrong and that Keegan entirely in the right, despite not knowing any of the facts. That's continued since despite Keegan not actually having said anything about it directly, whilst everything the club has said has been dismissed out-of-hand as lies by the vast majority. I think it makes much more logical sense that he had gotten into this for a bit of fun and thought: "fuck that!" when it all kicked off. You're third point could therefore well be true, but I don't really see what the problem is with that, if it is? Again, whist I think that there is truth in what you say about him not having realised the true state of the club's finances I don't think that would be the reason that he would now simply be begrudgingly protecting his investment - if indeed that is what he's doing, rather than genuinely trying to give it another go. Like I've said above, if he was only interested in the money he'd have done the financial checks more thoroughly before he bought the club. I think it's much more likely that he would be begrudgingly trying to protect his investment due to becoming disillusioned with owning the club due to the fans reaction after KK's departure turning something enjoyable into something that was anything but enjoyable. If that's what's happened then I think it's much more likely that he fell out of love with the club - so to speak - rather than for purely financial reasons.

 

This is why I was so against the protests and is one of the reasons that I'm so opposed to NUSC. People say that they only have the club's best interests at heart and I'm sure that's what they think they're doing, but personally I think that they are totally mistaken and their actions are absolutely diametrically opposed to what's best for the club in reality. I think that the biggest single danger facing the club is the threat of it's owner seeing it as something that's not worth the bother and deciding to simply keep it ticking over until the recession is over and he can get rid of it without totally screwing himself financially. Perhaps that's already happened and it's too late, but we as fans better hope and pray that him deciding to take the club off the market and get more involved is due to a genuine desire to give it another go, I think that there are signs there that it could be, I hope so. Some people need to face up to a couple of facts, namely; Mike Ashley is our owner and he will remain our owner for the foreseeable future, as there simply isn't anyone else out there. Given that, the best thing the fans can do, for the good of the club, is to try and get him to enjoy owning it, so that he wants it to be successful and is willing to spend his money on it. Whatever your views on the Keegan thing - and let's face it; that's what's caused everyone to kick-off, as most were happy previously - it's in the past, it's time to get over it - if not, forget it - and look at what's best for the club, our club, the thing we're supposed to support. However much people love him, Keegan is one man, and one man can never be allowed to be bigger than the club.

 

I'm not saying that people need to love Mike Ashley, or even like him, but that they need to put their feelings towards him for what he did or didn't do to Kevin Keegan aside and realise that we need him more than he needs us at present and it is in our (the club's) best interests to encourage him, rather than force him away. Otherwise we will run the risk of cutting our nose off to spite our face and the only thing that will suffer is us and NUFC. People need to understand and accept that before it's too late, I hope they do, as being able to say I told you so will not provide me with any pleasure whatsoever. If things change and a shining knight comes along and NUSC can finally answer the question "what happens next?" then great, but until then NUSC and those who think like they do need to think about the consequences of their words and actions or in other words they need to shut the fuck up.

 

 

 

Have a feeling that NE5 will either totally ignore it or proclaim it to be a "load of shite                    mackems.gif "

 

 

[madras]

Can some people still not see that Mike Ashley is determined to recoup his investment?

 

I've been out tonight with a Man U season ticket holder (who knows his futty and respects newcastle fans) 2 blue noses, 3 villa fans, a wolves fan. and 3 newcastle fans and they all think Ashley is the worst owner in the Premier league. They all without exception think the only reason he's still there is because he cant sell up at a price which will recoup his outlay.

Not one person thinks he has the interests of the club at heart.

 

Please convince me they are all wrong?

 

 

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great.

 

 

i tell you that non newcastle supporting friends of mine laughed at NUFC for appointing souness and roeder and it is dismissed. someone else tells you that some non nufc fans think along your lines and it is taken on board and is supposed to mean something.

 

 

i can see a pattern forming.

 

so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did.

 

mackems.gif

 

The difference is, I know that nobody laughed at us/me when we were qualifying for europe more than everybone but 4 teams. I also don't take the presumption that they are, to heart.

 

I'm so pleased you think all the 87 clubs that haven't qualified for europe as often as us, found something to laugh at.

 

I think you and some others should get out more and stop taking these WUM's on phone ins to heart.

 

Whats your take on Chelsea sacking Phil Scolari ? How can that be, a world cup winner, and I thought it was only us who appointed managers who failed and didn't give them time  Have you read the reports that Zola may take over in the summer ? Amazing, someone who has only been a manager for a few months, surely its only us who do things like that too ? 

 

 

 

 

erm i'm not actually bothered about what he thought. i'd have disagreed with him about dalglish and also with those who were carrying on about fred the way many are now about ashley ("just want them out and anyone will be better, despite no-one looking like they are willing to step into the breech or carrying the financial clout needed). you shouldn't try to lump everyone who disagrees with you in the same boat and lets face it ,it would need to be a cruise liner.

 

my whole disagreement with you has been about the position the club was in when ashley took over.

 

i'm sure i've answered the scolari one before, but hey ho. it's a one that didn't pay off and was always more of a risk than it seemed due to him never having managed in european league football. even the fact he won a world cup can be lessoned when you think of the players at his disposal. i take it you weren't that miffed when we appointed kinnear in "the lottery" ?

 

I think if we stay up, it will be almost entirely down to Kinnear for getting their heads up and restoring some spirit among the players.

 

Next season will be just the same as this though, until the inevitable happens. And the club will be nearer to where it was when the Halls and Shepherd found it. But I'm sure Ashley continuing his prudency on crowds of 20,000 will be the right policy to get us back into europe again.

 

Why don't you tell us what you would describe the appointments of football managers to be, when such a sure fire certainty as a World Cup Winner is sacked after a few months, and the long term replacement is being touted as someone who has been a manager for only a few months ? Or do you still think we are the only club who ever do this, and all the 87 clubs who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did were getting it right while we were getting it all wrong ??

 

 

if we stop up we'll disagree as to why then. i think the squad has enough quality but not enough depth and kinnear hasn't done anything for me to think he's changed things. they don't seem to be playing with extra spirit or extra tactical nouse.

 

you speak of next season but i think had fred and sam stayed this season would have seen championship football and real panic on the financial front (.thats why after backing fred, as things turned, so did I).

 

as for your question about appointments i'll give you an honest and straight forward answer......you'll see that i said scolari,due to his lack of euro league experience wasn't a sure fire bet. personally i'd have went for a manger with euro league experience (preferably english,spanish or german leagues) for the other 87 clubs it should have been easier for us to attract a better quality of manager (instead of souness) as we were a team who had finished 5th and managers tend to want to go to the better performing clubs as we were than.

 

 

haven't you yet realised the irony that you are defending apointing poor managers on the grounds that they aren't certain to be a success yet are complaining that we aren't trying to buy the best players who are just as uncertain . i'll save you answering to this bit as you'll say  that i am saying that we should get a top manager but not top players,my answer is that we should get the best of both that we can afford,even using debt as necessary but not the level of debt fred built up and not with the totally unsustainble wages.