bovineblue Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Ashley had a good chance to get out the last time the club was up for sale (possibly at a profit). Nobody met his unrealistic inflated asking price back then. Perhaps the same is true now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Part of me wants Ashley to carry on next year then at least some stability will be in place (albeit until the next crisis) The sensible side of me still wants the fat cunt out! I have to say, it's starting to look like the only real possibilities are either Ashley staying on for another year, or a Shepherd consortium which will be struggling for cash. Out of those two options, and considering the fact I think it's highly unlikely we'll be promoted next season no matter who the new owner is, I think I'd have to go with the best option being Ashley staying simply so he has to shoulder the burden of next year's wage bill. The Shepherds can wait until next season to be our saviours again when the club has less liabilities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Ashley had a good chance to get out the last time the club was up for sale (possibly at a profit). Nobody met his unrealistic inflated asking price back then. Perhaps the same is true now. i honestly think putting the club up then was a publicity exercise and he deliberatly put a ridiculous price so either, he sells at a stupid price or he ends up keeping it which he wanted. as has been said a few times on here i think his plan was to stop up with minimum investment till he could get shot of the high wage earners then invest through the clubs earnings and sustainable debt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 I am starting to believe that he cannot have a buyer at the terms he is sticking out for and no longer cares how far we fall. The club has to have leadership at this critical time and he is preventing it by speculating on salvaging a buck or two. You have lost this gamble you idiot, try somewhere else to regain your money. For pities sake Ashley begone and let us get on with salvaging what you and your predecessor have ruined!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Ashley had a good chance to get out the last time the club was up for sale (possibly at a profit). Nobody met his unrealistic inflated asking price back then. Perhaps the same is true now. i honestly think putting the club up then was a publicity exercise and he deliberatly put a ridiculous price so either, he sells at a stupid price or he ends up keeping it which he wanted. as has been said a few times on here i think his plan was to stop up with minimum investment till he could get shot of the high wage earners then invest through the clubs earnings and sustainable debt. Nah, that theory doesn't hold water at all. He'd have got a full time manager in (until the end of the season at least) from the start. The only reason we ended up with Kinnear is because noone else would take the job for only a month. If he never intended to sell he wouldn't have limited himself like that, nor would he have abandoned his DoF structure. Edit: To clarify, I do think his price last time was too high, I just don't think that was intentional so he could keep the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Ashley had a good chance to get out the last time the club was up for sale (possibly at a profit). Nobody met his unrealistic inflated asking price back then. Perhaps the same is true now. i honestly think putting the club up then was a publicity exercise and he deliberatly put a ridiculous price so either, he sells at a stupid price or he ends up keeping it which he wanted. as has been said a few times on here i think his plan was to stop up with minimum investment till he could get shot of the high wage earners then invest through the clubs earnings and sustainable debt. Nah, that theory doesn't hold water at all. He'd have got a full time manager in (until the end of the season at least) from the start. The only reason we ended up with Kinnear is because noone else would take the job for only a month. If he never intended to sell he wouldn't have limited himself like that, nor would he have abandoned his DoF structure. i think he'd have abandoned the DoF to keep shearer if we'd stopped up. the kinnear point could be right though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Ashley had a good chance to get out the last time the club was up for sale (possibly at a profit). Nobody met his unrealistic inflated asking price back then. Perhaps the same is true now. i honestly think putting the club up then was a publicity exercise and he deliberatly put a ridiculous price so either, he sells at a stupid price or he ends up keeping it which he wanted. as has been said a few times on here i think his plan was to stop up with minimum investment till he could get shot of the high wage earners then invest through the clubs earnings and sustainable debt. Nah, that theory doesn't hold water at all. He'd have got a full time manager in (until the end of the season at least) from the start. The only reason we ended up with Kinnear is because noone else would take the job for only a month. If he never intended to sell he wouldn't have limited himself like that, nor would he have abandoned his DoF structure. i think he'd have abandoned the DoF to keep shearer if we'd stopped up. the kinnear point could be right though. Appointing Shearer temporarily as a last ditch attempt to stay up last season I can understand, but I really can't see Ashley ever giving Shearer the job permanently. He'd be putting himself in exactly the same position with Shearer as he was with Keegan - a demanding manager with the supporters on his side. I think Shearer would be every bit as likely to walk as Keegan if he didn't get what he was promised, and I don't think he'd have taken the job in the Premiership unless he was promised significant funds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
relámpago blanco Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Why wont the arse just accept it. He's had bids but hes being so unreasonable. I've heard some of the bidders will repay some of the loan along with servicing the overdraft at a slightly reduced fee for the club. He wants 100m, the overdraft servicing and the 100m loan repayed as in installments but way above the current base rate. So really any owner could end up paying anything from 250m-300m. IS HE A FECKING LUNATIC. Man City were bought for 60m or something and he wants 300m for a championship club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 He'll be on the blower to Kinnear before you know it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Why wont the arse just accept it. He's had bids but hes being so unreasonable. I've heard some of the bidders will repay some of the loan along with servicing the overdraft at a slightly reduced fee for the club. He wants 100m, the overdraft servicing and the 100m loan repayed as in installments but way above the current base rate. So really any owner could end up paying anything from 250m-300m. IS HE A FECKING LUNATIC. Man City were bought for 60m or something and he wants 300m for a championship club. source ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
relámpago blanco Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Why wont the arse just accept it. He's had bids but hes being so unreasonable. I've heard some of the bidders will repay some of the loan along with servicing the overdraft at a slightly reduced fee for the club. He wants 100m, the overdraft servicing and the 100m loan repayed as in installments but way above the current base rate. So really any owner could end up paying anything from 250m-300m. IS HE A FECKING LUNATIC. Man City were bought for 60m or something and he wants 300m for a championship club. source ? Someone I know, his wife works at the club. Thats where I heard that he'd stopped all dealings with the club (not doing anything with regards to advertsing, getting sponsors in) and wouldn't appoint a manager, had sent half the staff home. Also told me last week she was sent home when they showed the consortium around. It's all rumour based but it would explain why the club hasn't been sold and someone else told me they'd heard the same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Ashley had a good chance to get out the last time the club was up for sale (possibly at a profit). Nobody met his unrealistic inflated asking price back then. Perhaps the same is true now. i honestly think putting the club up then was a publicity exercise and he deliberatly put a ridiculous price so either, he sells at a stupid price or he ends up keeping it which he wanted. as has been said a few times on here i think his plan was to stop up with minimum investment till he could get shot of the high wage earners then invest through the clubs earnings and sustainable debt. Nah, that theory doesn't hold water at all. He'd have got a full time manager in (until the end of the season at least) from the start. The only reason we ended up with Kinnear is because noone else would take the job for only a month. If he never intended to sell he wouldn't have limited himself like that, nor would he have abandoned his DoF structure. i think he'd have abandoned the DoF to keep shearer if we'd stopped up. the kinnear point could be right though. Appointing Shearer temporarily as a last ditch attempt to stay up last season I can understand, but I really can't see Ashley ever giving Shearer the job permanently. He'd be putting himself in exactly the same position with Shearer as he was with Keegan - a demanding manager with the supporters on his side. I think Shearer would be every bit as likely to walk as Keegan if he didn't get what he was promised, and I don't think he'd have taken the job in the Premiership unless he was promised significant funds. Very interesting point you make. You really have to wonder if this is what prompted the desire to sell the club this time around. It did appear as though Mike Ashley was all set to appoint Shearer and make a go of getting us back up, but after they met something changed. It's like Ashley knew he wouldn't be able to meet Shearer's demands and so couldn't secure him as manager, which meant another Keegan scenario was likely. Hence the selling up or the pretense that he would? Just like he did after the Keegan fiasco? We are at the point where it would probably be less harmful if Ashley just came out and said he wasn't selling the club and would instead make an effort to get it back on track, but at the same time he couldn't appoint Shearer as manager. Then appoint a manager (i.e. not Kinnear) get rid of the players we can't afford and get in a bunch of talented but affordable youngsters in the mould of the Guthries and Bassongs etc and hope it works out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 I don't know why anyone's even worried. Ashley has set the club up for stability and long term improvement. Someone on here told me that, so let's just chill the fuck out eh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Why wont the arse just accept it. He's had bids but hes being so unreasonable. I've heard some of the bidders will repay some of the loan along with servicing the overdraft at a slightly reduced fee for the club. He wants 100m, the overdraft servicing and the 100m loan repayed as in installments but way above the current base rate. So really any owner could end up paying anything from 250m-300m. IS HE A FECKING LUNATIC. Man City were bought for 60m or something and he wants 300m for a championship club. source ? Someone I know, his wife works at the club. Thats where I heard that he'd stopped all dealings with the club (not doing anything with regards to advertsing, getting sponsors in) and wouldn't appoint a manager, had sent half the staff home. Also told me last week she was sent home when they showed the consortium around. It's all rumour based but it would explain why the club hasn't been sold and someone else told me they'd heard the same. It is rumour but I could believe it. I've never been convinced that Ashley would just write off £110 million or whatever of debt. He's never said the debt was written off and the asking price was £100 million to buy the club, implying you take on all debt. I think his starting point is that he is prepared to lose £34 or £35million on what he paid for the club but he wants everything else back. It's going nowhere if he digs in on this imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 The problem is the longer it drags on, the less any buyer will be willing to pay due to the amount of work involved in a shorter timeframe and the increased risk of not coming straight back up. If Ashley won't accept less there's a real danger that we simply come to a stalemate. Ashley clearly misjudged just how interested people would be in the initial £100m price tag, thinking someone would quickly snap it up. We're probably close to the point at which Freddy Shepherd's £60m bid starts looking interesting... Aye. Let's not forget also, he probably didn't even have to look at the books. he he... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 True or not, the situation in the Guardian article is basically our worst nightmare and something which is looking more and more likely with each passing day - potential buyers scared off when they see the books and drifting into the new season with no players, effectively no owner and effectively no manager. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 True or not, the situation in the Guardian article is basically our worst nightmare and something which is looking more and more likely with each passing day - potential buyers scared off when they see the books and drifting into the new season with no players, effectively no owner and effectively no manager. Have said it somewhere in this thread, you can't be asking for a 100m for a club that costs 20m every 3 months to run (as is). He (MA) is either greedy or doesn't want to sell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
relámpago blanco Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 True or not, the situation in the Guardian article is basically our worst nightmare and something which is looking more and more likely with each passing day - potential buyers scared off when they see the books and drifting into the new season with no players, effectively no owner and effectively no manager. Have said it somewhere in this thread, you can't be asking for a 100m for a club that costs 20m every 3 months to run (as is). He (MA) is either greedy or doesn't want to sell. I think he's greedy and now doesnt give a shit what happens to the club. I've a feeling he'd rather run us into the ground and asset strip than he would accept a lower price Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 r.i.p. NUFC as we've known it for the last 20 odd years Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobby_solano Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 as melodramatic as that sounds, it does seem to be happening there doesn't seem to be any light at the end of a very long dark tunnel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianovthetoon Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 I know these things rarely have an impact, but I'm gonna try anyway http://www.petitiononline.com/nufc1873/petition.html Post it to as many message boards, facebook groups as you know, just be interesting see if we can get a few names on this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveItIfWeBeatU Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 It makes no sense. Mike Ashley wants to sell but the closer we get to the start of the season and the end of the transfer window the club's worth decreases. Who'd buy the club near the end of the transfer window? They'd have next to no time to make any changes. Once the window closes there is no incentive to buy it. He'll never find anyone willing to pay £100m and service a £100m loan on top. Buyers could buy a Premiership club for a hell of a lot less. The fact that the club will have hardly any paying fans by the start of the season surely reduces the value of the club too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 as melodramatic as that sounds, it does seem to be happening there doesn't seem to be any light at the end of a very long dark tunnel and to use the old adage, in our case the light at the end of the tunnel will probably be an oncoming train. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Ashley had a good chance to get out the last time the club was up for sale (possibly at a profit). Nobody met his unrealistic inflated asking price back then. Perhaps the same is true now. i honestly think putting the club up then was a publicity exercise and he deliberatly put a ridiculous price so either, he sells at a stupid price or he ends up keeping it which he wanted. as has been said a few times on here i think his plan was to stop up with minimum investment till he could get shot of the high wage earners then invest through the clubs earnings and sustainable debt. Nothing he's done even remotely suggests that. Wages went up under him for a start. I agree he didn't want to sell the first time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Why wont the arse just accept it. He's had bids but hes being so unreasonable. I've heard some of the bidders will repay some of the loan along with servicing the overdraft at a slightly reduced fee for the club. He wants 100m, the overdraft servicing and the 100m loan repayed as in installments but way above the current base rate. So really any owner could end up paying anything from 250m-300m. IS HE A FECKING LUNATIC. Man City were bought for 60m or something and he wants 300m for a championship club. source ? Pompey 20m Villa 42m Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts