Financial meltdown?

[Guest Brummiemag]

Ashley is destroying our club, and by his actions he could set the club back by 10 years or more.

 

If we get relegated, then in the unlikely event we come straight back up, the the best we can hope for the year after is survival and not many newly promoted clubs survive for very long. It could be 10 years, if at all, before we are challenging for a top four finish.

 

If he had chosen Keegan over Wise and invested in players I'm confident we would have finished 6th to 8th this season, pushing for a top six finish and the UEFA cup next season and then pushing on from there to maybe make a top four challenge in 3 or 4 years time.

 

Ashley has fucked up big time and he's ruining our club.   

 

 

[NE5]

Do you have anything whatsoever to back up that claim?

 

You make some extraordinary claims about what 'people on here' have said but rarely seem able to back them up.

 

A link will do. If you can't provide one (which will be strange if 'lots of people' insisted it), I'll assume you made it up.

 

put up the old server then

 

 

[NE5]

But you cant sell the players to reduce the operating costs, and then sell them again to cover the drop in income. With three of our most valuable assets already off the books we’d have to sell half the squad to break even. Good you might say, but they have to be replaced with something, and something very cheap. Would replacing Collocini with Craig Short fill you with confidence?

 

I don't get what you mean.   If you reduce the operating costs you already cover the drop in income, because income is used to pay the operating costs..  Plus when you sell the player you not only reduce costs through cutting wages but you also bring money in through transfer fees (if you get a fee that is).

 

My point is we won't need to sell half the squad to break even if we reduce the costs enough to begin with.

I’m not surprised. It confuses the hell out of me.

 

There‘s three ‘separate’ losses in the event of relegation.

 

The fall in TV revenue (£44m)

The fall in gate receipts and corporate stuff (£19)

The predicated operating loss if we’d stayed up (£7m)

 

Grand total of to break even next season if we go down, £70m.

 

Now forget Owen. His wages have already been paid upfront with the Northern Rock sponsorship money, and having him off the wage bill would have already been factored into the predicted £7m loss for next season. The same goes for Viduka and probably Geremi who is also out of contract at the end of the season.

 

So if we are to break even we have to find £40m (after parachute payments) to break even.

 

<pause for inevitable quibbling>

 

He's creating an efficient business mate.

 

Doesn't really matter what league we are in or anything, he's just creating an efficient business. Many people on here wanted this. So they ought to be happy with it. Good old Mike, and the "plan" he had which his predecessors never had, ever.

 

We might get some good away trips at Blackpool, Bournemouth, Southend and Plymouth in the next few years.

 

 

who ?

 

as i remember it most just saw that we couldn't just go on racking up more and more debt year on year. as plenty other clubs have come to realise.

 

why bother?

 

I could say the same. Particularly when you - and he - knows perfectly well that my statement that the vast majority of this board disagreed with me is true, and thought that Ashley looking to make profits rather than show ambition on the pitch was the way to go.

 

This is what sets Ashey apart. The performance of the team isn’t the driver for his business. He’s looking to make his money in other ways. It’s a revolutionary approach to running a PL football club of NUFC's size.

 

Is that tongue in cheek?

 

I've been as supportive of Ashleys way of running the club this season, but he has one idea of how to bring success and money into the club and that is to have a structure in place which will uncover 6 or 7 young gems who will either be moulded into a team or moved on. To the side of this is the need to remove large earners with low impact (Viduka et al).

 

This has on the surface all gone pear shaped this season and I can't even begin to defend the current  situation but below the first team this is continuing. There is very little evidence that he is looking at making money through Newcastle in any other way

 

respect your opinion mate, but honestly in reality it doesn't work like this in football. Football only works on the "how well are you doing on the field" principle.

 

 

like valencia ? like portsmouth ?

 

nah, like Liverpool, Arsenal and ironically ourselves when we were also playing in the Champs League and qualifyign regularly for europe.

 

 

you've nailed it................"when we were".

 

 

but now we are not and can't pretend we have the same finances they have. if you think those two would be spending like they have if they spent three or more seasons outside the champs league you are deluded.

 

as i've said to you before. They have gone, are you happy with the replacements ?

 

Or do you accept in your haste to replace them, you made a serious error of judgement in appearing to think that anyone would be better ?

 

Would you have sacked Alan Shearer for missing that penalty against Partizan Belgrade, and missing the chance in the 1998 Cup final when Keown stepped on the ball, or not showing more leadership in the 1999 Cup Final after Keane went off and he never got a kick ? To replace him with "anybody", for instance, Shola Ameobi --- who lots of people on here insisted that he would fill the boots of Shearer 

 

This is your argument mate. You say they are accountable. They have been made accountable. So what exactly is your beef ?

 

To be fair, you are far from the only one who didn't understand the need to back managers, thinking it would be automatic, rather than a choice, like myself and one or two others pointed out. Hopefully, you all won't make the same mistake again.

 

What amazes me - even now - is the fact that you and others like you, were so naive, you actually thought I/we were trying to "wind you up". I hope now you can see that I was being deadly serious.

 

 

you know where i think we'd have been had the previous stayed and no, ashley hasn't worked out anywhere near like i'd wanted.

 

would i have sacked shearer for that one thing...of course not, if he turned in consistently poor performances over 3 years i'd look to get shot though.

 

whats my beef ? you know full well that it's that by the end of the shepherd era we were going backwards quickly both on and off the pitch. something you are blind to because of what they done previously.

 

i agree about the need to back managers but i also understandf you can't do it year on year,losing money,racking up debts,failing on the pitch as plenty other clubs are now finding out. (and didn't you say allardyce was brought in to run the place on next to nowt as at bolton).

 

and you are confusing me with someone else as i never said "anyone but fred". ask your brother at the time of polygon etc i was coming out with the careful what you wish for line but as time went on and things got worse and worse the straws i would grab at to get out of it got shorter and shorter.

 

in short i accept we are in the shit, but i also think we'd have been in as much if not more shit had fred stayed.

 

there is absolutely no way the old board would have sat back and watched the team go down, while making a profit in transfer windows, and keeping faith with a manager who had serious health problems. Not a chance.

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

There's also no way the old board could have dealt with the debts that they themselves had created. Fred should be in his knees every morning thanking god that Ashley came along.

 

[NE5]

There's also no way the old board could have dealt with the debts that they themselves had created. Fred should be in his knees every morning thanking god that Ashley came along.

 

 

now now, naughty naughty

 

 

[Teasy]

But he's right though, how could they afford to finance the continued losses the club has made, especially while spending big in the transfer market?  We lost £35 million last season without spending anything on players and that had to be finances by Ashley's own money.  Where would Fred have found £35 million in the current financial climate?, let alone extra for transfers.

 

However I agree that Shepherd would never have allowed this pathetic managerial situation to happen.  He's put some dick heads in charge but he would never allow a coach who can't win a game to take us into the last 8 games of the season while he waits for a caretaker manager to recover from heart surgery!  He would realise the importance of having a manager, he'd of brought somebody in quite a few games ago.

[NE5]

But he's right though, how could they afford to finance the continued losses the club has made, especially while spending big in the transfer market?  We lost £35 million last season without spending anything on players and that had to be finances by Ashley's own cash.

 

so relegation due to lack of investment and zero ambition is the answer ?

 

Shame on those who scorn the people who gave us the best decade and a half of the last 50 years by a million miles.

 

As HTL said yesterday, how many of you actually thought we were winding you up, when only a handful of people including me and him knew what we were talking about.

 

You should be telling the likes of Liverpool and Arsenal how they are doing it all wrong, and their priority should be to make a profit and sell their highest earning players.

 

 

[Teasy]

Shame on us for not loving Shepherd because we were good in the past?, its the past.  We were shit for years under Shepherd before Ashley came in, unfortunately we were also racking up unmanageable debts that would have buried the club completely.

 

The main problem here isn't lack of investment IMO, its the managerial situation.  You seem to think that when someone defends Ashley's handling of the financial situation at the club that they're defending everything Ashley's done.  I don't think anyone here is, not one of us.

 

You and HTL were right on what by the way?, that we should have stayed with Shepherd?, I don't agree.  With Ashley we've got a clown who doesn't realise the importance of having a proper manager or the seriousness of our current situation who might end up getting us relegated.  With Shepherd we had a clown who liked to look the big man by throwing our money around to the point where we were heading for administration.  Who to choose, who to choose...  Can I choose neither?

[Guest fading star]

Shame on us for not loving Shepherd because we were good in the past?, its the past.  We were s*** for years under Shepherd before Ashley came in, unfortunately we were also racking up unmanageable debts that would have buried the club completely.

 

The main problem here isn't lack of investment IMO, its the managerial situation.  You seem to think that when someone defends Ashley's handling of the financial situation at the club that they're defending everything Ashley's done.  I don't think anyone here is, not one of us.

 

You and HTL were right on what by the way?, that we should have stayed with Shepherd?, I don't agree.  With Ashley we've got a clown who doesn't realise the importance of having a proper manager or the seriousness of our current situation who might end up getting us relegated.  With Shepherd we had a clown who liked to look the big man by throwing our money around to the point where we were heading for administration.  Who to choose, who to choose...  Can I choose neither?

Yes, but you got both.

 

It’s a tired debate and not worth rehashing. At the end of the day Ashley has to be judged on what he does, and on that front he’s guilty as sin. Guilty of letting the squad turn to rot. Guilty of appointing Keegan / letting Keegan go. Guilty of appointing Kinnear, and guilty of sticking with JFK when a proper permanent manager was needed…. not once, but twice this season. This alone condemns him.

 

[NE5]

Shame on us for not loving Shepherd because we were good in the past?, its the past.  We were shit for years under Shepherd before Ashley came in, unfortunately we were also racking up unmanageable debts that would have buried the club completely.

 

The main problem here isn't lack of investment IMO, its the managerial situation.  You seem to think that when someone defends Ashley's handling of the financial situation at the club that they're defending everything Ashley's done.  I don't think anyone here is, not one of us.

 

You and HTL were right on what by the way?, that we should have stayed with Shepherd?, I don't agree.  With Ashley we've got a clown who doesn't realise the importance of having a proper manager or the seriousness of our current situation who might end up getting us relegated.  With Shepherd we had a clown who liked to look the big man by throwing our money around to the point where we were heading for administration.  Who to choose, who to choose...  Can I choose neither?

 

we weren't shit during the last few years of the Shepherd and Halls.

 

We are shit now though. If Mike Ashley finishes 13th in the league he will call it success, and so will those who blindly and stupidly thought the last years of the Halls and Shepherd were shit, they will be doing cartwheels if Ashley finishes in mid table in the top league.

 

Thats the message that myself, HTL and a small handful of others tried to tell you.

 

Anyway, this sort of discussion isn't allowed anymore. I hope you will now have more understanding of what shit is, although I have a feeling that if he doesn't sell soon you may see what it REALLY is.

 

 

 

 

[ikri]

Shame on us for not loving Shepherd because we were good in the past?, its the past.  We were shit for years under Shepherd before Ashley came in, unfortunately we were also racking up unmanageable debts that would have buried the club completely.

 

The main problem here isn't lack of investment IMO, its the managerial situation.  You seem to think that when someone defends Ashley's handling of the financial situation at the club that they're defending everything Ashley's done.  I don't think anyone here is, not one of us.

 

You and HTL were right on what by the way?, that we should have stayed with Shepherd?, I don't agree.  With Ashley we've got a clown who doesn't realise the importance of having a proper manager or the seriousness of our current situation who might end up getting us relegated.  With Shepherd we had a clown who liked to look the big man by throwing our money around to the point where we were heading for administration.  Who to choose, who to choose...  Can I choose neither?

 

we weren't shit during the last few years of the Shepherd and Halls.

 

We are shit now though. If Mike Ashley finishes 13th in the league he will call it success, and so will those who blindly and stupidly thought the last years of the Halls and Shepherd were shit, they will be doing cartwheels if Ashley finishes in mid table in the top league.

 

Thats the message that myself, HTL and a small handful of others tried to tell you.

 

Anyway, this sort of discussion isn't allowed anymore. I hope you will now have more understanding of what shit is, although I have a feeling that if he doesn't sell soon you may see what it REALLY is.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes we fucking were.

 

If you didn't spot just how shit we were under Souness & Roeder then you weren't watching the same club as the rest of us.

[NE5]

Shame on us for not loving Shepherd because we were good in the past?, its the past.  We were shit for years under Shepherd before Ashley came in, unfortunately we were also racking up unmanageable debts that would have buried the club completely.

 

The main problem here isn't lack of investment IMO, its the managerial situation.  You seem to think that when someone defends Ashley's handling of the financial situation at the club that they're defending everything Ashley's done.  I don't think anyone here is, not one of us.

 

You and HTL were right on what by the way?, that we should have stayed with Shepherd?, I don't agree.  With Ashley we've got a clown who doesn't realise the importance of having a proper manager or the seriousness of our current situation who might end up getting us relegated.  With Shepherd we had a clown who liked to look the big man by throwing our money around to the point where we were heading for administration.  Who to choose, who to choose...  Can I choose neither?

 

we weren't shit during the last few years of the Shepherd and Halls.

 

We are shit now though. If Mike Ashley finishes 13th in the league he will call it success, and so will those who blindly and stupidly thought the last years of the Halls and Shepherd were shit, they will be doing cartwheels if Ashley finishes in mid table in the top league.

 

Thats the message that myself, HTL and a small handful of others tried to tell you.

 

Anyway, this sort of discussion isn't allowed anymore. I hope you will now have more understanding of what shit is, although I have a feeling that if he doesn't sell soon you may see what it REALLY is.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes we fucking were.

 

If you didn't spot just how shit we were under Souness & Roeder then you weren't watching the same club as the rest of us.

 

the moral of the story is as I've just said.

 

To repeat, we weren't shit.

 

If you think it was, you've seen nothing yet.

 

Continue thinking you know best.

 

 

[Dave]

So if we go down, that's not shit because we could be in League One? Strange logic.

[cp40]

Horse shit on the legends, has just claimed theres a rumour, if the toon dont get any points in the next 3 games, Ashley is going to put the club into administration.

[NE5]

So if we go down, that's not shit because we could be in League One? Strange logic.

 

I thought that you had learned something from the last 18 months.

 

Obviously not.

 

I'll remind you that in the Halls' and Shepherd's 2nd last season, we finished 7th. Before 1992, we only finished 7th or higher twice in over 30 years.

[Frazzle]

But he's right though, how could they afford to finance the continued losses the club has made, especially while spending big in the transfer market?  We lost £35 million last season without spending anything on players and that had to be finances by Ashley's own cash.

 

so relegation due to lack of investment and zero ambition is the answer ?

 

Shame on those who scorn the people who gave us the best decade and a half of the last 50 years by a million miles.

 

As HTL said yesterday, how many of you actually thought we were winding you up, when only a handful of people including me and him knew what we were talking about.

 

You should be telling the likes of Liverpool and Arsenal how they are doing it all wrong, and their priority should be to make a profit and sell their highest earning players.

 

 

 

Arsenal and Liverpool kept reaching the CL, we didn't, the wages and transfer fees weren't sustainable without CL football.  I don't understand how you can't get this?

[Guest toonlass]

So if we go down, that's not shit because we could be in League One? Strange logic.

 

I thought that you had learned something from the last 18 months.

 

Obviously not.

 

I'll remind you that in the Halls' and Shepherd's 2nd last season, we finished 7th. Before 1992, we only finished 7th or higher twice in over 30 years.

 

Here we go again, different thread, same arguments from NE5.

[Dave]

So if we go down, that's not shit because we could be in League One? Strange logic.

 

I thought that you had learned something from the last 18 months.

 

Obviously not.

 

I'll remind you that in the Halls' and Shepherd's 2nd last season, we finished 7th. Before 1992, we only finished 7th or higher twice in over 30 years.

 

Yes, things are worse now than they were in years gone by. I don't know why you feel at pains to keep pointing it out. Everyone knows.

 

But we were shit years before any of us had even heard of Mike Ashley, and were running into serious problems with the finances. There's only you who cannot recognise and acknowledge this.

 

And in any case, by your weird logic even if we finish 17th this year that's fine, because we only finished 17th or higher x times in the last x years before year x. That's what you seem to be saying, and I find it bizarre.

 

Don't bother replying.

[NE5]

So if we go down, that's not shit because we could be in League One? Strange logic.

 

I thought that you had learned something from the last 18 months.

 

Obviously not.

 

I'll remind you that in the Halls' and Shepherd's 2nd last season, we finished 7th. Before 1992, we only finished 7th or higher twice in over 30 years.

 

Yes, things are worse now than they were in years gone by. I don't know why you feel at pains to keep pointing it out. Everyone knows.

 

But we were shit years before any of us had even heard of Mike Ashley , and were running into serious problems with the finances. There's only you who cannot recognise and acknowledge this.

 

And in any case, by your weird logic even if we finish 17th this year that's fine, because we only finished 17th or higher x times in the last x years before year x. That's what you seem to be saying, and I find it bizarre.

 

Don't bother replying.

 

rubbish.

 

There is also more than me who think this. And - if you still haven't seen the idea - the continued downward spiral and subsequent downturn in attendance figures - from a capacity expanded stadium - will tell you. Do you really think 52,000 people turned up to watch shit ? Wait and see how many now drop out.

 

 

[NE5]

But he's right though, how could they afford to finance the continued losses the club has made, especially while spending big in the transfer market?  We lost £35 million last season without spending anything on players and that had to be finances by Ashley's own cash.

 

so relegation due to lack of investment and zero ambition is the answer ?

 

Shame on those who scorn the people who gave us the best decade and a half of the last 50 years by a million miles.

 

As HTL said yesterday, how many of you actually thought we were winding you up, when only a handful of people including me and him knew what we were talking about.

 

You should be telling the likes of Liverpool and Arsenal how they are doing it all wrong, and their priority should be to make a profit and sell their highest earning players.

 

 

 

Arsenal and Liverpool kept reaching the CL, we didn't, the wages and transfer fees weren't sustainable without CL football.  I don't understand how you can't get this?

 

I'd like to enlighten you, but it isn't allowed.

 

 

[Dave]

Okay, I'll ask anyone else to respond if they disagree with that fairly simple statement.

 

NUFC were shit for the final few years of the Shepherd regime, and were running into serious problems with the finances.

 

Please reply if you dispute this.

[Guest fading star]

We weren’t as shit as we are now. We were never this close to being relegated under FF, and for most of his tenure NUFC were anything but shit.

 

Our financial position wasn’t great, but two years after Ashley took over the club’s debt has increased, and if we go down the chances of ever clearing it look remote.

 

Quibble all you want , but these are facts.

[Cajun]

So we were shit and the finances were getting a little out of control.

[Dave]

We weren’t as shit as we are now. We were never this close to being relegated under FF, and for most of his tenure NUFC were anything but shit.

 

Our financial position wasn’t great, but two years after Ashley took over the club’s debt has increased, and if we go down the chances of ever clearing it look remote.

 

Quibble all you want , but these are facts.

 

That statement doesn't say anything about Mike Ashley.

 

Is it inconceivable that both the latter years of Shepherd's tenure AND the years of Ashley so far have BOTH been shit? That's my view on it. One being worse than the other doesn't excuse mistakes made by both.

[Syrette]

To repeat, we weren't shit.

 

If you think it was, you've seen nothing yet.

 

 

 

You're insane.