Financial meltdown?

[Dave]

Umbro were bought by Nike in March last year.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Umbro were bought by Nike in March last year.

 

Does he/did he own a stake in Nike?

 

Sure I read that somewhere.

[Teasy]

The News of the World never fail to make me laugh.  You'd think if they were going to make up a story they'd at least try to make it believable, but it seems they always try for the opposite approach   Either that or they just have the logic of a five year old.

[NE5]

 

most of the correct points are relevant, but have been said before by me and a small handful of others Dave.

 

Its just that fewer people are disagreeing with them now.

 

 

it's true you know. few people disagree that fred and co done well for a while. it's also true that few disagree that he left us in a mess.

 

no, a mess is where Mr Ashley will leave us, not where the Halls and Shepherd left us - which was a european qualification only 12 months before left and an established top premiership club. But I suppose its all about perspective isn't it. The only thing they did was be victims of their own higher ambitions and expectations.

 

 

euro qualification 12 month earlier...so what ? a year is a long time, ipswich went down a year after qualifying for europe,obviously they must have been good as they were a year before.

 

the clubs finances were in a mess. thats why belgravia and polygon legged it. rising debts built on the back of contracts the club couldn't get out of without making losses on the transfer fees. did someone mention that we were paying our sponsors ?. how clever is that ?

 

never mind. we can't get by day to day.

 

we agree on something though. they were victims of their own ambition. (so was george reynolds)

 

George Reynolds didn't achieve anything.

 

 

true but he was a victim of his ambition.

 

and i've said in the past that if fred had lead NUFC to 5 consecutive league titles then 3 years later had us going backwards and looking like he couldn't change it , i'd say "sorry fred, time to go"

 

Well, lets hope Ashley can at least match the puny achievement of qualifying for europe more than anybody else but 4 teams.

 

 

if he does i hope he doesn't fuck it up afterwards.

 

 

lets hope he does it in the first place, unless you prefer 20-30 years of absolute nothing apart from selling any decent player we find to the big clubs

 

 

[NE5]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

 

[mrmojorisin75]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

 

and nobody cares either, because he doesn't have anything to do with appointing them

[Guest toonlass]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

 

I thought you said that appointing Allardyce was ambitious as he was touted as a potential manager for England?

[madras]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

that decision wasn't mandiarses, just like you say kinnear wasn't your decision (in an attempt to deflect from the "managers are just a lottery" thing)

 

as you know there are no set criteria beyond getting what you think is the best available,same goes for players.

[Taylor Swift]

Interesting tidbit that I found

 

3. Salary caps are good for owners, duh, but here's an interesting look at how profoundly: Jonathan Kraft, owner of the Patriots, said that he would have put in a serious offer to buy a major European soccer club. He loved the market, and he felt some business practices from the Patriots could make it extremely profitable. You would think that one of savviest businessmen in sports, with very deep pockets, would have made the league stronger. But the lack of a salary cap was a deal-breaker. He says he had no way of knowing how much it would cost to keep competitive with clubs run by Russian oligarchs. Kraft was determined to run the club in a "business-like" manner, and was scared off.

 

The owner of the New England Patriots (NFL), a team who's won the title of being the best in the sport 3 times in the past 9 years, is obviously someone who knows how to run a sports franchise. I know that football is different but the concept of running a club on a financially-stable footing is not mutually exclusive to the concept of a successful football club.

[NE5]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

that decision wasn't mandiarses, just like you say kinnear wasn't your decision (in an attempt to deflect from the "managers are just a lottery" thing)

 

as you know there are no set criteria beyond getting what you think is the best available,same goes for players.

 

my question is what is his criteria for appointing managers, other than using hindsight - especially when he has agreed with and backed at least 3 of the 6 to succeed, after Keegan, (ie Allardyce, Robson and Souness) on this very message board.

 

Basic stuff this.

 

 

[mrmojorisin75]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

that decision wasn't mandiarses, just like you say kinnear wasn't your decision (in an attempt to deflect from the "managers are just a lottery" thing)

 

as you know there are no set criteria beyond getting what you think is the best available,same goes for players.

 

my question is what is his criteria for appointing managers, other than using hindsight - especially when he has agreed with and backed at least 3 of the 6 to succeed, after Keegan, (ie Allardyce, Robson and Souness) on this very message board.

 

Basic stuff this.

 

you talk some utter shite sometimes

 

the definition of hindsight is: "recognition of the realities, possibilities, or requirements of a situation, event, decision etc., after its occurrence."

 

it would literally be impossible for someone to use hindsight as criteria to appoint a manager (as the person would have to already been in the job and then out of it again) so please stop saying it

 

i don't know the background to what you're one about with Mandias but i'm guessing you've rustled something up where he said any one one of souness, roeder or allardyce were good appointments and he backed their choice but now IN HINDSIGHT doesn't think they were so great, or something?

 

that's called human nature and the time vs perception ratio NE5; no-one, no-one on this planet is right 100% all of the time and everyone on it at some time or other will have looked back on a situation with hindsight to view it differently, if they don't then they don't have the self awareness, reasoning skills and intelligence to do that which makes them fuckwits

 

i don't expect a response as you've conveniently started to ignore my posts to you now given i'm not leaving you many easy outs these days, if i do get a response you'll no doubt work ashley in somehow

[madras]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

that decision wasn't mandiarses, just like you say kinnear wasn't your decision (in an attempt to deflect from the "managers are just a lottery" thing)

 

as you know there are no set criteria beyond getting what you think is the best available,same goes for players.

 

my question is what is his criteria for appointing managers, other than using hindsight - especially when he has agreed with and backed at least 3 of the 6 to succeed, after Keegan, (ie Allardyce, Robson and Souness) on this very message board.

 

Basic stuff this.

 

 

out of curiosity what is your criteria for appointing managers ?.....would souness and roeder have past that criteria ?

[NE5]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

that decision wasn't mandiarses, just like you say kinnear wasn't your decision (in an attempt to deflect from the "managers are just a lottery" thing)

 

as you know there are no set criteria beyond getting what you think is the best available,same goes for players.

 

my question is what is his criteria for appointing managers, other than using hindsight - especially when he has agreed with and backed at least 3 of the 6 to succeed, after Keegan, (ie Allardyce, Robson and Souness) on this very message board.

 

Basic stuff this.

 

 

out of curiosity what is your criteria for appointing managers ?.....would souness and roeder have past that criteria ?

 

 

my criteria ? Well, if I agree and back an appointment, I don't criticise it later. Thats what mandiarse does. I would have backed, at the time, Dalglish, Robson and Allardyce myself, and saw merit in Gullit and Roeder, for different reasons. That means I can't criticise the board for appointing these managers when I saw some reasoning and merit in them.

 

Hindsight is where you criticise the board for only "getting 1 right" when you backed at least 3 of them at the time, and thats before he finds the balls to admit he backed a manager who had won 4 titles with 2 different clubs, a couple of FA Cups, and 3 manager of the year awards. See one of the quotes in my sig for his remarkable foresight, no wonder he applies hindsight instead.

 

This isn't rocket science.

 

[NE5]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

that decision wasn't mandiarses, just like you say kinnear wasn't your decision (in an attempt to deflect from the "managers are just a lottery" thing)

 

as you know there are no set criteria beyond getting what you think is the best available,same goes for players.

 

my question is what is his criteria for appointing managers, other than using hindsight - especially when he has agreed with and backed at least 3 of the 6 to succeed, after Keegan, (ie Allardyce, Robson and Souness) on this very message board.

 

Basic stuff this.

 

you talk some utter shite sometimes

 

the definition of hindsight is: "recognition of the realities, possibilities, or requirements of a situation, event, decision etc., after its occurrence."

 

it would literally be impossible for someone to use hindsight as criteria to appoint a manager (as the person would have to already been in the job and then out of it again) so please stop saying it

 

i don't know the background to what you're one about with Mandias but i'm guessing you've rustled something up where he said any one one of souness, roeder or allardyce were good appointments and he backed their choice but now IN HINDSIGHT doesn't think they were so great, or something?

 

that's called human nature and the time vs perception ratio NE5; no-one, no-one on this planet is right 100% all of the time and everyone on it at some time or other will have looked back on a situation with hindsight to view it differently, if they don't then they don't have the self awareness, reasoning skills and intelligence to do that which makes them fuckwits

 

i don't expect a response as you've conveniently started to ignore my posts to you now given i'm not leaving you many easy outs these days, if i do get a response you'll no doubt work ashley in somehow

 

see my post to madras mate.

 

 

[madras]

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million.

 

Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

 

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ?

 

Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ?

 

Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

 

 

that decision wasn't mandiarses, just like you say kinnear wasn't your decision (in an attempt to deflect from the "managers are just a lottery" thing)

 

as you know there are no set criteria beyond getting what you think is the best available,same goes for players.

 

my question is what is his criteria for appointing managers, other than using hindsight - especially when he has agreed with and backed at least 3 of the 6 to succeed, after Keegan, (ie Allardyce, Robson and Souness) on this very message board.

 

Basic stuff this.

 

 

out of curiosity what is your criteria for appointing managers ?.....would souness and roeder have past that criteria ?

 

 

my criteria ? Well, if I agree and back an appointment, I don't criticise it later. Thats what mandiarse does. I would have backed, at the time, Dalglish, Robson and Allardyce myself, and saw merit in Gullit and Roeder, for different reasons. That means I can't criticise the board for appointing these managers when I saw some reasoning and merit in them.

 

Hindsight is where you criticise the board for only "getting 1 right" when you backed at least 3 of them at the time, and thats before he finds the balls to admit he backed a manager who had won 4 titles with 2 different clubs, a couple of FA Cups, and 3 manager of the year awards. See one of the quotes in my sig for his remarkable foresight, no wonder he applies hindsight instead.

 

This isn't rocket science.

 

sure you can criticise the board if you admit you were wrong aswell. the difference is,as you have pointed out, you didn't make those decisions. thats what it all comes down to,admitting mistakes.

 

if i'd been manager of nufc i'd have been sacked years ago, does it mean i can't put in my two'penneth ? or i shouldn't say "they got it wrong" just because it means i got it wrong also ?

 

just admit it, fred was getting an awful lot wrong,regardless of who agreed with him and who didn't,from managers to finances.

 

edit......the other difference is that fred paid himself a salary of best part of half a mill a year so there ought to more reason to say he got it wrong as opposed to a fan who opinion counts for sod all realistically.

[mrmojorisin75]

 

Hindsight is where you criticise the board for only "getting 1 right" when you backed at least 3 of them at the time, and thats before he finds the balls to admit he backed a manager who had won 4 titles with 2 different clubs, a couple of FA Cups, and 3 manager of the year awards. See one of the quotes in my sig for his remarkable foresight, no wonder he applies hindsight instead.

 

This isn't rocket science.

 

 

hindsight would be agree at the time there were merits for an appointment, lets say souness, then once the wheels have come off and things have gone wrong look back and say there probably weren't (m)any after all...hindsight is basically a reassessment of a situation after it's happened, such as the appointment of a manager

 

agreeing there might be merit in an appointment and then once it's failed recognising it as a failure is a different thing entirely

 

as you say not rocket science

 

i'll hold my hands up and say when the souness appointment was announced i thought it was underwhelming but would perhaps steady the ship worst case plus his cup win with every club was fresh in the mind...i could see merits in it at the time, just not big ones

 

with hindsight the writing was on the wall with souness and his past record with player relationships so i can see how it was a bad appointment more clearly, and i also recognise it as a total failure on every level at the club starting with the people who backed him once it became clear what he was doing, i.e. asserting his own ego at the expense of the club and team