mrmojorisin75 Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 think UV's got a point here in a sense, and i know he won't agree with this next part but shepherd imo had fucked up and went too far with what he was doing, had he been allowed to continue in the same manner we'd be truly fucked ashley, on the other hand seems to be overreacting to this, in a sense...he doesn't have to copy what FS did by any means but something in between would have been surely acceptable for most people? for example the infamous debt that needed paying back, what was to stop ashley paying that back with a structured loan of his own that could have been financed/repaid however he wanted within reason? nothing that i can see other than he's a cash payment kind of guy as UV also says all of these decisions were now made before the financial collapse, and while i applaud the principle behind "we own such and such a player 100%" its not viable for us is it because he doesn't have enough cash to own enough good players 100% and we're on the precipice of relegation because of that EDIT: on the taking out a loan thing on the face of things he's saving a few million in interest payments by not owing a bank the cash, but he stands to lose millions more if we go down 'cause he doesn't have, or won't provide, the cash to strengthen the team as it needs to be...all his choices to be fair Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToonTastic Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 There are other banks you know. Other clubs seem to manage to take out loans. If Ashley's cashflow is what is stopping spending (I doubt it tbh) then I'm sure the 17th richest club in the world could manage to take out a £20, 30, 50m loan. Please please please tell me your not suggesting taking out loans to buy players ?? You do realise this is how Leeds ended up where they are don't you ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 There are other banks you know. Other clubs seem to manage to take out loans. If Ashley's cashflow is what is stopping spending (I doubt it tbh) then I'm sure the 17th richest club in the world could manage to take out a £20, 30, 50m loan. Please please please tell me your not suggesting taking out loans to buy players ?? You do realise this is how Leeds ended up where they are don't you ? i would think he means to structure the payments on the existing debt in order to have some cash available for players Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 please elaborate on this bit in italic He chose to pay off the debt in full rather than pay off some and invest more in the team. At least one of the major loans had a condition where it had to be repaid should the club change hands. He didn't choose to repay the loans, in some cases he was forced to. No doubt you'll twist this to prove that it was Ashley's fault for not doing due process. He is choosing to arrest the clubs losses by slashing costs rather than trying to increase profits. How the hell can he increase profits if the club is making a loss? He chooses to pay up front for players rather than spread payments like most other clubs do, thus increasing the losses made by the club in the first years of this changed strategy, and reducing the amount available to spend on incoming players. Possibly because we still had payments to make on Emre & Luque 2 years after they left the club. You cannot tell me he could not put more money into the club if he wanted to, so he is chosing to gamble on our Premiership status with a small depleted squad, just like he did last year. Other than the £30million he's put in to keep the club running? He chose to employ the managers and directors he has which have us in the current state. He placed his business in the hands of people he knows and trusts. That Bastard! He chose to put the club up for sale causing unrest and turmoil, and then not accept any of the bids. I agree that putting the club up for sale was a huge mistake, but who in their right mind would accept an offer for the club that was significantly less than what he paid for it & subsequently invested in it? Non of this was forced on him. Non of these decisions are down to the previous board or the financial climate. They are all his chosen course of action. I don't especially like Ashley, this season has been handled appallingly by everyone involved but he's not some pantomime villain sat in his mansion figuring out how to screw the club over this week. There are other banks you know. Other clubs seem to manage to take out loans. If Ashley's cashflow is what is stopping spending (I doubt it tbh) then I'm sure the 17th richest club in the world could manage to take out a £20, 30, 50m loan. You increase profits by selling out the ground and corporate boxes (by having a better team and winning more games) You increase profits by having cup runs (by having a better team and winning more games) You increase profits by qualifying for Europe (by having a better team and winning more games) You increase profits by selling merchandise to people who want to be associated with a good team (by having a better team and winning more games) You do not increase profits by running down the squad and hence performing poorly on the field, decreasing income from all sources. Jobs for mates rather than qualified people is not my idea of how to run a successful business, and it certainly doesn't seem to be working out for Mike. If I tried to sell my house for what it was worth 2 years ago, I wouldn't get it. Does that mean I couldn't sell my house? No. If Hall & Shepherd had still owned the club it would have cost any buyer less now than when Ashley bought it. He took a gamble on the price of clubs going up and he lost out in the short term. If he really wanted to sell he had to accept a loss. Sorry, but that's just how it is. If he didn't attempt to sell it for less than he paid, then he didn't realistically try to sell it at all. I don't think the situation of the club is down to Ashley being malicious, however it was always going to be highly likely given the incompetence and mismanagement of him and his employees. Just like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Other clubs seem to manage to take out loans. Perhaps you can momentarily ditch your obsession with the past and link to a recent example. Me, I see Liverpool's owners desperate to sell to a cash-rich customer because they can't refinance their debt, and the club with the Premiership's second-richest benefactor operating a sell-to-buy policy because even an injection of £600 million (!) hasn't been enough to buy sustainable success for Chelsea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Just like that. Just like in 2001, yes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 One of these days UV will amuse us all by pointing out what he thinks 2009 has in common with 2001. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Other clubs seem to manage to take out loans. Perhaps you can momentarily ditch your obsession with the past and link to a recent example. Me, I see Liverpool's owners desperate to sell to a cash-rich customer because they can't refinance their debt, and the club with the Premiership's second-richest benefactor operating a sell-to-buy policy because even an injection of £600 million (!) hasn't been enough to buy sustainable success for Chelsea. While Spurs have benefited from specific circumstances, the now-commonplace payment of transfer fees in instalments has seen an increase in the use of football-specific facilities to keep the transfer market moving. These niche products have boomed in the last year, driven by changes in the way that transfer deals are done and the pressure on cash flows. Where once deals were done on fairly straightforward cash terms, the size of modern transfer fees - there were six worth more than £10m in January alone - have left even the largest clubs having to pay in tranches. With selling clubs keen to get their hands on all the money up front, a small number of banks, specialist football finance houses and at least one player agency have developed bespoke loan products for football. Banks are increasingly being asked to provide facilities that allow the selling club to receive the full transfer fee up front, with the debt effectively being repaid by the buying club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Other clubs seem to manage to take out loans. Perhaps you can momentarily ditch your obsession with the past and link to a recent example. Me, I see Liverpool's owners desperate to sell to a cash-rich customer because they can't refinance their debt, and the club with the Premiership's second-richest benefactor operating a sell-to-buy policy because even an injection of £600 million (!) hasn't been enough to buy sustainable success for Chelsea. While Spurs have benefited from specific circumstances, the now-commonplace payment of transfer fees in instalments has seen an increase in the use of football-specific facilities to keep the transfer market moving. These niche products have boomed in the last year, driven by changes in the way that transfer deals are done and the pressure on cash flows. Where once deals were done on fairly straightforward cash terms, the size of modern transfer fees - there were six worth more than £10m in January alone - have left even the largest clubs having to pay in tranches. With selling clubs keen to get their hands on all the money up front, a small number of banks, specialist football finance houses and at least one player agency have developed bespoke loan products for football. Banks are increasingly being asked to provide facilities that allow the selling club to receive the full transfer fee up front, with the debt effectively being repaid by the buying club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Just like that. Just like in 2001, yes. Dead easy. It's a mystery as to why everyone isn't doing it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Uv perhaps you should look up the definition of the word "profit" because you don't seem to understand what it means. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Posted this in a different thread, but it seems more appropriate here............ Say, I don't know, 2,500 turn up at this protest that is planned for a week on Sunday. The say conservatively 500 of them were never going to the match anyway. That leaves 2,000 out of say 50,000 going to the match, which means 96% have ignored the calls of NUSC to protest. Will NUSC look at a different means of getting their point across? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Just like that. Just like in 2001, yes. Dead easy. It's a mystery as to why everyone isn't doing it. The successful teams are. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToonTastic Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Just like that. Just like in 2001, yes. Dead easy. It's a mystery as to why everyone isn't doing it. The successful teams are. Like Spurs sitting below us in the league Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Just like that. Just like in 2001, yes. Dead easy. It's a mystery as to why everyone isn't doing it. The successful teams are. Why doesn't everyone just do it? Assuming it's that easy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Just like that. Just like in 2001, yes. Dead easy. It's a mystery as to why everyone isn't doing it. The successful teams are. Like Spurs sitting below us in the league I never said it was foolproof. So with Ashley's muppets in charge maybe it would be unwise (no pun intended) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
relámpago blanco Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Just like that. Just like in 2001, yes. Dead easy. It's a mystery as to why everyone isn't doing it. The successful teams are. Like Spurs sitting below us in the league I never said it was foolproof. So with Ashley's muppets in charge maybe it would be unwise (no pun intended) to be fair to wise you can't argue with his signings other than possibly Xisco but he hasn't been given a decent chance. Would keegan have found Bassong or Jonas? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Other clubs seem to manage to take out loans. Perhaps you can momentarily ditch your obsession with the past and link to a recent example. Me, I see Liverpool's owners desperate to sell to a cash-rich customer because they can't refinance their debt, and the club with the Premiership's second-richest benefactor operating a sell-to-buy policy because even an injection of £600 million (!) hasn't been enough to buy sustainable success for Chelsea. While Spurs have benefited from specific circumstances, the now-commonplace payment of transfer fees in instalments has seen an increase in the use of football-specific facilities to keep the transfer market moving. These niche products have boomed in the last year, driven by changes in the way that transfer deals are done and the pressure on cash flows. Where once deals were done on fairly straightforward cash terms, the size of modern transfer fees - there were six worth more than £10m in January alone - have left even the largest clubs having to pay in tranches. With selling clubs keen to get their hands on all the money up front, a small number of banks, specialist football finance houses and at least one player agency have developed bespoke loan products for football. Banks are increasingly being asked to provide facilities that allow the selling club to receive the full transfer fee up front, with the debt effectively being repaid by the buying club. So point me to an example of a club doing this. The first sentence, pointing to a preceding paragraph which you did not quote, points out that Spurs have not. Here's the link UV did not bother to provide: http://www.footballeconomy.com/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 please elaborate on this bit in italic He chose to pay off the debt in full rather than pay off some and invest more in the team. At least one of the major loans had a condition where it had to be repaid should the club change hands. He didn't choose to repay the loans, in some cases he was forced to. No doubt you'll twist this to prove that it was Ashley's fault for not doing due process. He is choosing to arrest the clubs losses by slashing costs rather than trying to increase profits. How the hell can he increase profits if the club is making a loss? He chooses to pay up front for players rather than spread payments like most other clubs do, thus increasing the losses made by the club in the first years of this changed strategy, and reducing the amount available to spend on incoming players. Possibly because we still had payments to make on Emre & Luque 2 years after they left the club. You cannot tell me he could not put more money into the club if he wanted to, so he is chosing to gamble on our Premiership status with a small depleted squad, just like he did last year. Other than the £30million he's put in to keep the club running? He chose to employ the managers and directors he has which have us in the current state. He placed his business in the hands of people he knows and trusts. That Bastard! He chose to put the club up for sale causing unrest and turmoil, and then not accept any of the bids. I agree that putting the club up for sale was a huge mistake, but who in their right mind would accept an offer for the club that was significantly less than what he paid for it & subsequently invested in it? Non of this was forced on him. Non of these decisions are down to the previous board or the financial climate. They are all his chosen course of action. I don't especially like Ashley, this season has been handled appallingly by everyone involved but he's not some pantomime villain sat in his mansion figuring out how to screw the club over this week. There are other banks you know. Hello! Global financial meltdown currently going on, or had that passed you by? Other clubs seem to manage to take out loans.Like spurs who are sitting exactly where at the moment? Or Sunderland who are vastly higher in the premiership table right? Spending millions does not guarantee success. If Ashley's cashflow is what is stopping spending (I doubt it tbh) then I'm sure the 17th richest club in the world could manage to take out a £20, 30, 50m loan. You increase profits by selling out the ground and corporate boxes (by having a better team and winning more games) You increase profits by having cup runs (by having a better team and winning more games)We were already having league problems when Ashley came in, that cannot be turned around just like that. We need stability such as Villas before we can be going on cup runs. Look where Pompey are now! You increase profits by qualifying for Europe (by having a better team and winning more games)See my point above. You increase profits by selling merchandise to people who want to be associated with a good team (by having a better team and winning more games)How does NUSC's stance of boycotting merchandise stand, because not buying merchandise is deliberatly witholding money from the club which could be used to build a team. You do not increase profits by running down the squad and hence performing poorly on the field, decreasing income from all sources. Jobs for mates rather than qualified people is not my idea of how to run a successful business, and it certainly doesn't seem to be working out for Mike. If I tried to sell my house for what it was worth 2 years ago, I wouldn't get it. You would be less likely to get it in todays marketDoes that mean I couldn't sell my house? No. If Hall & Shepherd had still owned the club it would have cost any buyer less now than when Ashley bought it. He took a gamble on the price of clubs going up and he lost out in the short term. You know this how? Anyway Ashley didn't own the club 2 years ago. This time 2 years ago it still belonged to Hall and Shepherd.If he really wanted to sell he had to accept a loss. Sorry, but that's just how it is. If he didn't attempt to sell it for less than he paid, then he didn't realistically try to sell it at all. I don't think the situation of the club is down to Ashley being malicious, however it was always going to be highly likely given the incompetence and mismanagement of him and his employees. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Any anti-Ashley strategy that's predicated on the assumption that he really, really, really ought to sell up at a loss is doomed to failure for obvious reasons. He may eventually decide to cut his losses, though I think it's unlikely NUSC will harm the club enough to force the issue. But what do we get then? Owners with even less money than him, most likely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Please tell me UV didn't just have a go at a "jobs for the boys" approach, whilst at the same time sticking up the old board? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Okay, enough with the bickering. Also, the Old Board/New Board thread is over there, take any discussion concerning such things out of this thread and into there from now on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Some different comments regarding NUSC from emails sent to .com "As for the NUSC...hopefully the ring-leaders will rebrand themselves as the Anti-Ashley brigade and a genuine supporters club will come together. I'm all for fan representation but I think Llambias hit the nail on the head when he said the current NUSC think they are bigger than they are. When their committee accept that Ashley isn't the devil in disguise and show a genuine willingness to work with him (they could do much worse than take a lesson from the oft-derided as "a bunch of kids" but ultimately successful Toon Ultras/Bring Back the Noise).(SD)" "As expected the interview with Derek Llambias this week has thrown up the usual mix of debatable issues. However, its the emergence of NUSC and the clubs reaction to this organisation that I find most interesting. If, as both parties seem to acknowledge, there is a monthly fans forum meeting, at which NUSC have a representative then on exactly what grounds do NUSC have the right to ask for a special meeting to address their agenda. Shall we all call Derek and ask for a monthly catch up? Who exactly elected NUSC the voice of the fans. I find NUSC a very troubling organisation and can sympathise with the clubs suspicions. The planned protest for February 22nd will achieve what exactly? Let Ashley know he's not liked? That's been done. Bring unwanted negativity to the game and the ground? Yes. Attract that special sort of Newcastle fan that only shows up at the ground for the Sky cameras to unfurl a banner that gets them on the news. Absolutely. There is a real danger that the club and the rest of the populated world start to think NUSC represents the fans when they don't, and I know of many other fans who feel the same way. You cannot express the views of such a body of people through one group, but rather through multiple mediums, such as your site, fanzines, call in shows. One of the great things about NUFC.com is that you don't ever claim to speak for the fans. We don't always agree, hell there are over 30,000 supporters (who will still be there when the sh*t hits the fan) but we all want the club to do well, we all seem to agree that the way to do this is through leaving the off field troubles off the field and bringing our passion, support and positivity to the games. I believe NUSC, in seeking a dialogue with the club, only seeks to further the ambitions of a few supporters keen to give their ten penneth-worth. Their views are relevant, just don't slap a sticker on it and call it my view, because its not. (AP)" "It's funny how the likes of NUSC etc call Llambias for not communicating then the moment he does (however tentatively) they take pot shots at him, ripping him apart etc. Now i am not saying i trust him, or that he is doing a good job... but give the bloke a chance. NUSC have landed a few blows to Llambias and Ashley, who were quite rightly hurt and taken aback around the time of the Keegan saga... but Llambias has landed one back when he says NUSC aren't representative of all fans opinions. I have had a season ticket since we got relegated under Jim Smith (i was 9 at the time) and I have my own opinions and they certainly don't match theirs. When NUSC talk, they should do so like NUFC.com do, and that is with the caveat that they are speaking on behalf of their members and not normal fans. And Llambias was right, they took the wrong tone and continue to do so. They are probably the 800 or so people that sky rent to stand outside the ground every time something of note happens at NUFC, and it looks like they'll be at it again against Everton. All of this "we've never been in a worse state" or "never been so badly run" - b****cks!!! I think these fans think everything was hunky dory under Shepherd (not to mention the Mckeag era). They forget our squad has been packed full of 'never has beens' and 'never wases' with players like Steven Carr and Shola Ameobi picking up £30,000 and £40,000 a week and on top of that, these highly paid pros are consistently injured - leading to us consistently having the worst injury record in the league. It is about time someone came in, put some sort of wage structure in place and started running the club properly and not taking money out of it like Shepherd did. The way they ran the club (Douglas Hall taking £1million salary a year + dividends and god knows what else and for what???) and NUSC never thought to set up their little organisation then to protest about that??? No... because Shepherd pandered to them by splashing big money on players that got us into mid-table!!! The only way to turn a club around is by getting in a decent manager. That is the difference between sitting in the bottom half or challenging for the champions league - ask Villa fans (Oneill), AZ Alkmaar fans (Van Gaal), Man Utd fans (Ferguson) or look at us under Keegan and Robson. Good managers can turn average teams around with little money and then on to greater things! Ashley and the others have made mistakes - the main one being Wise - but i think he has good intentions. Their failure in the transfer market is rightly held against them and rightly people have vented their anger. But the way forward for now is to pull together and then see where we are at the end of the season. Protesting now will not do any good to the team or the players. The players are without a manager - they don't want to be without support as well. (PL)" "The Llambias interview has confirmed these people have little or no experience in top-flight football, he admitted it himself, mistake after mistake after mistake. I also thought his attitude to the NUSC showed his true colours, contempt for the genuine hardcore fans.(EB)" "To the question “Why did Mr Ashley refuse to respond to the request of meeting NUSC representatives at a location of his choice? he replies “We are in dialogue with them”. However accurate or in accurate that statement is, he has not answered the question. I hope the Chronicle will push him for a straight answer." "Clearly the club was in dire straits before Ashley took over and the club probably would have went the way of the banks without FFS being bought out (haven't FFS and Sir John done well!!) I believe its time to move on both for the board and the fans, an olive branch has been offered...do we pick it up or continue to wallow in self pity over KK. NUSC are unlikely to be heard by the board as (apparently) their sole aim is to remove the owner...with no sensible suggestion of a buyer. If we're stuck with Ashley let's be true supporters and get behind the club (includes the board, NUSC etc) and move onto a better future together. There is no white knight (Arab Billionaire) waiting in the wings, at least the guy stuck his hand into his pocket. Time to back the toon......(MH)" "The interview, the "supporters club" responses etc are just more nonsense in the "what on earth has happened / can happen next to this club" soap opera that has given journalists an easy job for years." "Regarding the Llambias story I feel that he hasn't helped his cause that much by being derogatory to NUSC, however we have broader shoulders then him and should let it go and go to the invited meeting whenever that will be and get our point/requests across to show we are a professional organisation." "We need to get in a manager, communicate with NUSC and buy some players in the summer before our injury hit threadbare squad is ravaged any more. (NT)" "I thought his comments on NUSC were spot on too, when I first heard about a supporters group I thought it was an excellent idea and something that we've needed for a long time but the way they've gone about everything has been an embarrassment in my eyes, threatening to write to Adidas and other sponsors demanding they pull out of the club unless Ashley sells up was pathetic and the actions of people who are more like a guerrilla warfare movement rather than a supporters club. They claim they have 6,000 applicants yet the majority will be people like myself who signed up at the beginning because they thought a supporters club was a great idea. The fact that less than 20% have signed up to be full members suggests that opinions of NUSC have dropped dramatically. It also turns out that one of the people on their committee has been on the supporters panel for a while now, which goes against them claiming to have no contact with the club." "However, what I do know is that action has to be taken, and that I can't think of any better way of showing to Llambias, Wise and Ashley that we are not happy about the situation at all. Doing nothing is not an option. Unfortunately I no longer live in Newcastle, but have become a NUSC member and we all need to support their actions, even if we are not sure they are totally right. What Llambias' answers do is give those who are totally opposed to the march a reason not to march, and ammunition to have a go at those who do. If we start squabbling between ourselves then we are well and truly done for." "Two things really leap out: the lack of football knowledge and the patronizing attitude particularly to the NUSC who I have as yet no affiliation with but now may well do." "I found some of what Llambias said as a bit insulting - his attack on NUSC was uncalled for." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Bit rich highlighting your own. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Bit rich highlighting your own. I haven't wrote to them, I've just highlighted every other comment. 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