Teasy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Again nothing, no response at all to my question. Tell you what, you respond to my question and then I'll respond to yours, you know since I asked first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Again nothing, no response at all to my question. Tell you what, you respond to my question and then I'll respond to yours, you know since I asked first. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 I know it won't happen like Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Again nothing, no response at all to my question. Tell you what, you respond to my question and then I'll respond to yours, you know since I asked first. basically, you said its laughable. I say it isn't. You can't say things are laughable when they suit you ..... with Ashley's record so far I wouldn't dismiss it so easily if I were you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 I know it won't happen like you'll get an answer but it will have little to do with the question and will appear as some ancient buddhist riddle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 see, told you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Again nothing, no response at all to my question. Tell you what, you respond to my question and then I'll respond to yours, you know since I asked first. basically, you said its laughable. I say it isn't. You can't say things are laughable when they suit you ..... with Ashley's record so far I wouldn't dismiss it so easily if I were you I'll dismiss it if it makes absolutely no sense obviously. Much like an article that suggests Ashley has decided to cut his own legs off, I'm not going to believe that story no matter how much I distrust him and I do distrust him by the way. You seem to believe Ashley would gain from putting the club into administration, I'm asking you how would he gain? Its a genuine question for anyone here by the way, have I missed something? How does putting a club he owns completely (including all the debt) into administration help the man? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 been mulling this one myself & i'm clearly out of my depths BUT if ashley simply wanted a way out now regardless wouldn't this be his fastest way of doing that short of giving it away for free? i.e. SJH (iirc) owe the debt to him on some level i'd assume so if he called in his debt on the one side and put the club into admin on the other wouldn't he essentially end up getting some cash back faster than going through the rigmarole of selling to someone else and all that entails? as i say i'm well out of my depth but was just trying to fathom a way it could have an element of truth and the best i've got is he wants out ASAP EDIT: should have said i think it's bollocks and all mind Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 been mulling this one myself & i'm clearly out of my depths BUT if ashley simply wanted a way out now regardless wouldn't this be his fastest way of doing that short of giving it away for free? i.e. SJH (iirc) owe the debt to him on some level i'd assume so if he called in his debt on the one side and put the club into admin on the other wouldn't he essentially end up getting some cash back faster than going through the rigmarole of selling to someone else and all that entails? as i say i'm well out of my depth but was just trying to fathom a way it could have an element of truth and the best i've got is he wants out ASAP EDIT: should have said i think it's bollocks and all mind Nobody owes the debt to him, he bought the club including its debts who are owed by the club itself. He then gave the club an interest free loan so the debts could be paid. So basically the club now owe Ashley over £100 million. That's why this sounds so senseless to me. When a club goes into administration the administrators sell off assets at a fraction of there value for a quick sale in order to pay off the clubs creditors. However in this instance Ashley is the clubs only creditor and everything at the club are his assets. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 been mulling this one myself & i'm clearly out of my depths BUT if ashley simply wanted a way out now regardless wouldn't this be his fastest way of doing that short of giving it away for free? i.e. SJH (iirc) owe the debt to him on some level i'd assume so if he called in his debt on the one side and put the club into admin on the other wouldn't he essentially end up getting some cash back faster than going through the rigmarole of selling to someone else and all that entails? as i say i'm well out of my depth but was just trying to fathom a way it could have an element of truth and the best i've got is he wants out ASAP EDIT: should have said i think it's bollocks and all mind No nobody owes the debt to him. He bought the club including its debts who are owed by the club itself. He then gave the club an interest free loan so the debts could be paid. ok, makes sense - so even if he called in the loan to the club that accounts for less than 50% of his original investment anyways (110m or so iirc?) so alls it would achieve is him getting back a fraction of the money he'd loaned to the club while simultaneously reducing the value of the "other half" of his money? sort of, right? i mean as the 150m he paid to buy the club can't be counted because it's not a loan all he stands able to retrieve would be the loan, or a small part of it should this fucking nonsense story turn out to be true on another note administrators would aggressively look for buyers for the club right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Again nothing, no response at all to my question. Tell you what, you respond to my question and then I'll respond to yours, you know since I asked first. basically, you said its laughable. I say it isn't. You can't say things are laughable when they suit you ..... with Ashley's record so far I wouldn't dismiss it so easily if I were you I'll dismiss it if it makes absolutely no sense obviously. Much like an article that suggests Ashley has decided to cut his own legs off, I'm not going to believe that story no matter how much I distrust him and I do distrust him by the way. You seem to believe Ashley would gain from putting the club into administration, I'm asking you how would he gain? Its a genuine question for anyone here by the way, have I missed something? How does putting a club he owns completely (including all the debt) into administration help the man? Where did he go? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 ok, makes sense - so even if he called in the loan to the club that accounts for less than 50% of his original investment anyways (110m or so iirc?) so alls it would achieve is him getting back a fraction of the money he'd loaned to the club while simultaneously reducing the value of the "other half" of his money? sort of, right? i mean as the 150m he paid to buy the club can't be counted because it's not a loan all he stands able to retrieve would be the loan, or a small part of it should this fucking nonsense story turn out to be true on another note administrators would aggressively look for buyers for the club right? It basically means administrators would come in and sell off Ashley's own assets at a fraction of their value and give the proceeds, minus there own rather large fee, to Ashley. All players would be available for next to nowt and the club would also be available for next to nowt. Unless Ashley desperately, and I mean DESPERATELY, needs a few million now I see no point in it at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 ok, makes sense - so even if he called in the loan to the club that accounts for less than 50% of his original investment anyways (110m or so iirc?) so alls it would achieve is him getting back a fraction of the money he'd loaned to the club while simultaneously reducing the value of the "other half" of his money? sort of, right? i mean as the 150m he paid to buy the club can't be counted because it's not a loan all he stands able to retrieve would be the loan, or a small part of it should this fucking nonsense story turn out to be true on another note administrators would aggressively look for buyers for the club right? It basically means administrators would come in and sell off Ashley's own assets at a fraction of their value and give the proceeds, minus there own rather large fee, to Ashley. All players would be available for next to nowt and the club would also be available for next to nowt. Unless Ashley desperately, and I mean DESPERATELY, needs a few million now I see no point in it at all. Would be better for Ashley if we went down, he pocketed a sum of the cash from player sales and then sold the club for about £100million. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 ok, makes sense - so even if he called in the loan to the club that accounts for less than 50% of his original investment anyways (110m or so iirc?) so alls it would achieve is him getting back a fraction of the money he'd loaned to the club while simultaneously reducing the value of the "other half" of his money? sort of, right? i mean as the 150m he paid to buy the club can't be counted because it's not a loan all he stands able to retrieve would be the loan, or a small part of it should this fucking nonsense story turn out to be true on another note administrators would aggressively look for buyers for the club right? It basically means administrators would come in and sell off Ashley's own assets at a fraction of their value and give the proceeds, minus there own rather large fee, to Ashley. All players would be available for next to nowt and the club would also be available for next to nowt. Unless Ashley desperately, and I mean DESPERATELY, needs a few million now I see no point in it at all. Would be better for Ashley if we went down, he pocketed a sum of the cash from player sales and then sold the club for about £100million. He'd never sell us for that much if we went down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 ok, makes sense - so even if he called in the loan to the club that accounts for less than 50% of his original investment anyways (110m or so iirc?) so alls it would achieve is him getting back a fraction of the money he'd loaned to the club while simultaneously reducing the value of the "other half" of his money? sort of, right? i mean as the 150m he paid to buy the club can't be counted because it's not a loan all he stands able to retrieve would be the loan, or a small part of it should this f***ing nonsense story turn out to be true on another note administrators would aggressively look for buyers for the club right? It basically means administrators would come in and sell off Ashley's own assets at a fraction of their value and give the proceeds, minus there own rather large fee, to Ashley. All players would be available for next to nowt and the club would also be available for next to nowt. Unless Ashley desperately, and I mean DESPERATELY, needs a few million now I see no point in it at all. Would be better for Ashley if we went down, he pocketed a sum of the cash from player sales and then sold the club for about £100million. rubbish. he could sell them as prem players then sell the club as a prem club for more than he could as a championship club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 ok, makes sense - so even if he called in the loan to the club that accounts for less than 50% of his original investment anyways (110m or so iirc?) so alls it would achieve is him getting back a fraction of the money he'd loaned to the club while simultaneously reducing the value of the "other half" of his money? sort of, right? i mean as the 150m he paid to buy the club can't be counted because it's not a loan all he stands able to retrieve would be the loan, or a small part of it should this fucking nonsense story turn out to be true on another note administrators would aggressively look for buyers for the club right? It basically means administrators would come in and sell off Ashley's own assets at a fraction of their value and give the proceeds, minus there own rather large fee, to Ashley. All players would be available for next to nowt and the club would also be available for next to nowt. Unless Ashley desperately, and I mean DESPERATELY, needs a few million now I see no point in it at all. Would be better for Ashley if we went down, he pocketed a sum of the cash from player sales and then sold the club for about £100million. or just put the club up for 100m now, someone would probably take it on Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Kryten, he has no control over sale of the club if he brings administrators in. Or did I just misunderstand your post there? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 I wasnt being serious Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 I wasnt being serious Aye and neither was Nixon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Again nothing, no response at all to my question. Tell you what, you respond to my question and then I'll respond to yours, you know since I asked first. basically, you said its laughable. I say it isn't. You can't say things are laughable when they suit you ..... with Ashley's record so far I wouldn't dismiss it so easily if I were you I'll dismiss it if it makes absolutely no sense obviously. Much like an article that suggests Ashley has decided to cut his own legs off, I'm not going to believe that story no matter how much I distrust him and I do distrust him by the way. You seem to believe Ashley would gain from putting the club into administration, I'm asking you how would he gain? Its a genuine question for anyone here by the way, have I missed something? How does putting a club he owns completely (including all the debt) into administration help the man? People like you said it made sense for Ashley to not spend money and "put the books right", whereas a much smaller number of people like me tried to tell you it made no sense for him not to show ambition and back his manager. Still think the same ? Meanwhile, I look forward to you castigating people who make "sarcastic comments" along the lines of "it's just to sell papers" the next time a newspaper prints a story that you probably hope isn't true, of which I'm sure will be plenty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Again nothing, no response at all to my question. Tell you what, you respond to my question and then I'll respond to yours, you know since I asked first. basically, you said its laughable. I say it isn't. You can't say things are laughable when they suit you ..... with Ashley's record so far I wouldn't dismiss it so easily if I were you I'll dismiss it if it makes absolutely no sense obviously. Much like an article that suggests Ashley has decided to cut his own legs off, I'm not going to believe that story no matter how much I distrust him and I do distrust him by the way. You seem to believe Ashley would gain from putting the club into administration, I'm asking you how would he gain? Its a genuine question for anyone here by the way, have I missed something? How does putting a club he owns completely (including all the debt) into administration help the man? Where did he go? still think "anyone but Shepherd" would be good for the club do you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Again nothing, no response at all to my question. Tell you what, you respond to my question and then I'll respond to yours, you know since I asked first. basically, you said its laughable. I say it isn't. You can't say things are laughable when they suit you ..... with Ashley's record so far I wouldn't dismiss it so easily if I were you I'll dismiss it if it makes absolutely no sense obviously. Much like an article that suggests Ashley has decided to cut his own legs off, I'm not going to believe that story no matter how much I distrust him and I do distrust him by the way. You seem to believe Ashley would gain from putting the club into administration, I'm asking you how would he gain? Its a genuine question for anyone here by the way, have I missed something? How does putting a club he owns completely (including all the debt) into administration help the man? People like you said it made sense for Ashley to not spend money and "put the books right", whereas a much smaller number of people like me tried to tell you it made no sense for him not to show ambition and back his manager. Still think the same ? Meanwhile, I look forward to you castigating people who make "sarcastic comments" along the lines of "it's just to sell papers" the next time a newspaper prints a story that you probably hope isn't true, of which I'm sure will be plenty. What the fuck? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Again nothing, no response at all to my question. Tell you what, you respond to my question and then I'll respond to yours, you know since I asked first. basically, you said its laughable. I say it isn't. You can't say things are laughable when they suit you ..... with Ashley's record so far I wouldn't dismiss it so easily if I were you I'll dismiss it if it makes absolutely no sense obviously. Much like an article that suggests Ashley has decided to cut his own legs off, I'm not going to believe that story no matter how much I distrust him and I do distrust him by the way. You seem to believe Ashley would gain from putting the club into administration, I'm asking you how would he gain? Its a genuine question for anyone here by the way, have I missed something? How does putting a club he owns completely (including all the debt) into administration help the man? People like you said it made sense for Ashley to not spend money and "put the books right", whereas a much smaller number of people like me tried to tell you it made no sense for him not to show ambition and back his manager. Still think the same ? Meanwhile, I look forward to you castigating people who make "sarcastic comments" along the lines of "it's just to sell papers" the next time a newspaper prints a story that you probably hope isn't true, of which I'm sure will be plenty. What the fuck? its a fairly basic concept. The club used to be run this way, and it kept the stadium full and we played regularly in europe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Its got absolutely nowt to do with my post! You're dragging up the same old argument yet again for no other reason then you fucking love talking about it. Sorry but I'm not taking the bait and I doubt anyone else will. 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