cubaricho Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Don't think it is a case of falling for it, it is just blind hope that we get him out of Toon asap. If he doesn't sell it would be nice to think that the fans would just not turn up to the games and then he will really feel it financially, but that won't happen either. And the point of that would be? other than allowing the makems screaming "where were you when you were s***" at us should we get promoted.. Leave the protests to the b****** tree huggers.. I've renewed my season ticket regardless of what the club does.. and will continue to support the squad regardless. So are you saying nobody should bother going to matches and supporting the team? Supporters support through thick and thin. That's all. Sorry for late reply, NO I am not saying that supporters should stay away at all, but unfortunately Ashley knows this too and all it means is he has more time to strip the club of assets and get all his money back. He may be selling the club for 100 Million, but what about the money from all the outgoing transfers (Milner, N'zogbia, Duff, etc) he has banked that, he has got the parachute payment from the Prem, he is getting revenue from the fans, etc. Even if he sells for 100, I doubt he will actually be that much down on his original investment, remember when he came we apparently didn't owe anyone a penny, now we have a 40 Million overdraft, I am sure that 40 Mill went in his pocket as well. Your post just highlighted how little you actually know about the situation. There's not one thing in this post that is correct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Just to put another perspective on the nonsense of the 72 million wage bill would mean we had 22 first team players on about 65k a week Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ujpest doza Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 We will wait and see what tomorrow brings then. I'd like to know when the £22m or so from transfers will be deducted from the £39m overdraft. I simply cant believe anyone would be stupid enough to pay MA anywhere near £100m and take on a £39m overdraft. Fees won't have been paid upfront and most of cash received will have been spent paying wages. Exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Don't think it is a case of falling for it, it is just blind hope that we get him out of Toon asap. If he doesn't sell it would be nice to think that the fans would just not turn up to the games and then he will really feel it financially, but that won't happen either. And the point of that would be? other than allowing the makems screaming "where were you when you were s***" at us should we get promoted.. Leave the protests to the b****** tree huggers.. I've renewed my season ticket regardless of what the club does.. and will continue to support the squad regardless. So are you saying nobody should bother going to matches and supporting the team? Supporters support through thick and thin. That's all. Sorry for late reply, NO I am not saying that supporters should stay away at all, but unfortunately Ashley knows this too and all it means is he has more time to strip the club of assets and get all his money back. He may be selling the club for 100 Million, but what about the money from all the outgoing transfers (Milner, N'zogbia, Duff, etc) he has banked that, he has got the parachute payment from the Prem, he is getting revenue from the fans, etc. Even if he sells for 100, I doubt he will actually be that much down on his original investment, remember when he came we apparently didn't owe anyone a penny, now we have a 40 Million overdraft, I am sure that 40 Mill went in his pocket as well. Your post just highlighted how little you actually know about the situation. There's not one thing in this post that is correct. Not saying I know anything about the situation, I just have an opinion like everyone else, I know nobody at the club or anybody that has anything to do with it, not claiming the figures are exact but where am I wrong? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 In order for a deal to go through, some more players will need shifted from the books, that is what is holding up the sale of the club in my opinion, which has probably already been agreed in principle. It could be that selling Taylor, Jonas and Collocini (or two of the three) will be enough to satisfy Barclays. However Taylor doesn't appear ready and willing to leave while no-one has shown any concrete interest in our two Argies. Until one or two of those players get sold, the sale will drag on and on I feel. I doubt Shearer won't be returning as manager either as he would only return if certain players were kept and he was able to bring in some new players he had already checked out surely. By the time a sale comes round the transfer window will have slammed shut and the possibly up to 3 more of our 'stars' will have left for pastures new. Moat has already proved he has the actual funds to buy the club or rather meet Ashley's asking price as he wouldn't have gotten past due diligence which he has also obviously carried out. Seymour Pierce have also recommend Moat's bid and of course he and Ashley were sat together. What this all means for me basically is that everything is in place for a deal to be concluded, the money and the mutual agreement of SP, Moat and Ashley etc. All that remains is to satisfy Barclays who want to see the operating costs of the club brought down and of course some cash to flow through the coffers (and that means selling players) before facilitating that rather large overdraft that the club will require in order to pay the bills. I'm no ITK but I know for a fact that a few weeks back none of the players had been paid for a few weeks, hence the 6-1 defeat to Leyton Orient which was their way of saying we want f***ing paid or this is what you'll get. i have a bad feeling that your right It wouldn't surprise me at all to see Taylor, Jonas and Colo leave with no-one other than a few loanees/freebies maybe coming in by Sept 1st. I truly believe this is what is holding up a conclusion to this saga, we need to sell a few players to bring down operating costs and to bring some money into the cash flow. It stands to reason as Moat doesn't have the kind of money Ashley does, so Barclays will be transferring his debt to someone with less means to pay it, naturally they will want that debt to be lowered. Cash flow is also important for running costs. The club needs money coming in, be it now or at a later date. In this climate Barclays will not want their investment to be placed into the hands of one individual, the club needs to become self sufficient. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 We will wait and see what tomorrow brings then. I'd like to know when the £22m or so from transfers will be deducted from the £39m overdraft. I simply cant believe anyone would be stupid enough to pay MA anywhere near £100m and take on a £39m overdraft. Fees won't have been paid upfront and most of cash received will have been spent paying wages. The club pays player wages (among other things) using the overdraft. Origanally there was no overdraft, he has creamed his original buy money out of the overdraft, he put 134 Million to buy the club and apparently another 100 in to clear debt, we where in Prem for a year, netting him about 40-50 Mill, Parachute payment this year (about 15-20 Mill?) about 60-70 Million in transfer money and about 20 mill in outgoing transfers. Club turnover and merchandies sales cover the players wages so he is laughing all the way to the bank. Only this year will the high earner eat into his club profits, that why we have seen £0 investment on any front (manager and players) I don't mean to take the piss at all mate, but you're about as wrong as you can be there. I'm not going to get into this financial stuff again if I can help it, do a search on the forum for NUFC finances. Just to give you an idea, if you think Ashley has made any money from the club simply because NUFC have brought lots of money in you're completely forgetting to consider the outgoings of the club, not least the £72m per year wage bill we had in the Premiership. We did have a high wage bill but you seriously think that merchandise, tv rights and gate reciepts didn't cover that? Don't make me laugh. If the club was that much in the shit Ashley would be willing to sell for £1 and there wouldnt be any takers, get real, football clubs make a fortune, where we not 7th in the richest clubs list last year? Are you being serious? Man you need to research these things before talking like that, you're going to end up looking like a tool otherwise. The club accounts are freely available, most of the info you need from the last set are available on this forum and a quick guide is listed here: http://www.nufc-finances.org.uk/ In total the club brought in £99m (that's total revenue, so it includes merchandise, TV money, sponsorship and everything else the club made money from) and sent out £120m (£129m if you look at actual cash flow). The year before that was similar, the club has lost about £50m-£60m in the last two seasons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Don't think it is a case of falling for it, it is just blind hope that we get him out of Toon asap. If he doesn't sell it would be nice to think that the fans would just not turn up to the games and then he will really feel it financially, but that won't happen either. And the point of that would be? other than allowing the makems screaming "where were you when you were s***" at us should we get promoted.. Leave the protests to the b****** tree huggers.. I've renewed my season ticket regardless of what the club does.. and will continue to support the squad regardless. So are you saying nobody should bother going to matches and supporting the team? Supporters support through thick and thin. That's all. Sorry for late reply, NO I am not saying that supporters should stay away at all, but unfortunately Ashley knows this too and all it means is he has more time to strip the club of assets and get all his money back. He may be selling the club for 100 Million, but what about the money from all the outgoing transfers (Milner, N'zogbia, Duff, etc) he has banked that, he has got the parachute payment from the Prem, he is getting revenue from the fans, etc. Even if he sells for 100, I doubt he will actually be that much down on his original investment, remember when he came we apparently didn't owe anyone a penny, now we have a 40 Million overdraft, I am sure that 40 Mill went in his pocket as well. Your post just highlighted how little you actually know about the situation. There's not one thing in this post that is correct. Not saying I know anything about the situation, I just have an opinion like everyone else, I know nobody at the club or anybody that has anything to do with it, not claiming the figures are exact but where am I wrong? Let me highlight what's wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Don't think it is a case of falling for it, it is just blind hope that we get him out of Toon asap. If he doesn't sell it would be nice to think that the fans would just not turn up to the games and then he will really feel it financially, but that won't happen either. And the point of that would be? other than allowing the makems screaming "where were you when you were s***" at us should we get promoted.. Leave the protests to the b****** tree huggers.. I've renewed my season ticket regardless of what the club does.. and will continue to support the squad regardless. So are you saying nobody should bother going to matches and supporting the team? Supporters support through thick and thin. That's all. Sorry for late reply, NO I am not saying that supporters should stay away at all, but unfortunately Ashley knows this too and all it means is he has more time to strip the club of assets and get all his money back. He may be selling the club for 100 Million, but what about the money from all the outgoing transfers (Milner, N'zogbia, Duff, etc) he has banked that, he has got the parachute payment from the Prem, he is getting revenue from the fans, etc. Even if he sells for 100, I doubt he will actually be that much down on his original investment, remember when he came we apparently didn't owe anyone a penny, now we have a 40 Million overdraft, I am sure that 40 Mill went in his pocket as well. Your post just highlighted how little you actually know about the situation. There's not one thing in this post that is correct. Not saying I know anything about the situation, I just have an opinion like everyone else, I know nobody at the club or anybody that has anything to do with it, not claiming the figures are exact but where am I wrong? Let me highlight what's wrong. Lol, just a minor mistake then. Be very interesting to see this years accounts Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 The club will pay wages with whatever cash they have to hand- the overdraft nets off against cash in the bank so it's not a case of money going anywhere else other than against the overdraft- it's all one big pot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 We did have a high wage bill but you seriously think that merchandise, tv rights and gate reciepts didn't cover that? Don't make me laugh. If the club was that much in the s*** Ashley would be willing to sell for £1 and there wouldnt be any takers, get real, football clubs make a fortune, where we not 7th in the richest clubs list last year? Its not about covering all those costs but sustaining them. The club couldn't sustain those kind of operating costs, not when the future prospects of the club in terms of revenue was one of less income and that was before relegation... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 We did have a high wage bill but you seriously think that merchandise, tv rights and gate reciepts didn't cover that? Don't make me laugh. If the club was that much in the s*** Ashley would be willing to sell for £1 and there wouldnt be any takers, get real, football clubs make a fortune, where we not 7th in the richest clubs list last year? Its not about covering all those costs but sustaining them. The club couldn't sustain those kind of operating costs, not when the future prospects of the club in terms of revenue was one of less income and that was before relegation... Not denying that the club was running on excessive wages, just know that Ashley will not walk away from this club having been taken for as much as people think he has been, how many players have we sold in the last 2 years compared to those we brought in? Wages now down to 48 Million apparently with last years Sky money, merchandise and gate receipts to be included, add on top of that money from player sales and do you think the deficit will be up or down? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brazilianbob Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Despite all the doom and gloom regarding club finances, if I was Barry Moat the first thing I would do when I became owner would be to take out a long term £60m mortgage on the ground to fund transfers and to clear the overdraft. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Despite all the doom and gloom regarding club finances, if I was Barry Moat the first thing I would do when I became owner would be to take out a long term £60m mortgage on the ground to fund transfers and to clear the overdraft. Who will give you that mortgage at the moment, especially when the club doesn;t own the land the stadium is built on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Geordiekev Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Despite all the doom and gloom regarding club finances, if I was Barry Moat the first thing I would do when I became owner would be to take out a long term £60m mortgage on the ground to fund transfers and to clear the overdraft. Who will give you that mortgage at the moment, especially when the club doesn;t own the land the stadium is built on. I'm sure Ashley would fund it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 We did have a high wage bill but you seriously think that merchandise, tv rights and gate reciepts didn't cover that? Don't make me laugh. If the club was that much in the s*** Ashley would be willing to sell for £1 and there wouldnt be any takers, get real, football clubs make a fortune, where we not 7th in the richest clubs list last year? Its not about covering all those costs but sustaining them. The club couldn't sustain those kind of operating costs, not when the future prospects of the club in terms of revenue was one of less income and that was before relegation... Not denying that the club was running on excessive wages, just know that Ashley will not walk away from this club having been taken for as much as people think he has been, how many players have we sold in the last 2 years compared to those we brought in? Wages now down to 48 Million apparently with last years Sky money, merchandise and gate receipts to be included, add on top of that money from player sales and do you think the deficit will be up or down? The 2009 accounts were forecast to have a reduced loss in comparison to the previous year. But a reduced loss isn't going to make anyone money. The Sky money, merchandise and gate receipts you mention will be included in the 2009 accounts, as will the £72m wage bill which wasn't reduced until recently. Also remember that wages are not the clubs only costs. The wages are now £48m (perhaps even slightly lower) but the TV money will now be £14m (parachute payment) instead of £35m. Foreign TV money will now be £0 instead of £8m (?), merchandise will be lower as well. Costs have dropped but earnings will have dropped even more. Anyway I'm breaking my promise of not getting into the financial stuff tonight so I'm going to stop now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Icke - Son of God Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Despite all the doom and gloom regarding club finances, if I was Barry Moat the first thing I would do when I became owner would be to take out a long term £60m mortgage on the ground to fund transfers and to clear the overdraft. Good job you're not Barry fucking Moat then, isn't it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Icke - Son of God Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 In order for a deal to go through, some more players will need shifted from the books, that is what is holding up the sale of the club in my opinion, which has probably already been agreed in principle. It could be that selling Taylor, Jonas and Collocini (or two of the three) will be enough to satisfy Barclays. However Taylor doesn't appear ready and willing to leave while no-one has shown any concrete interest in our two Argies. Until one or two of those players get sold, the sale will drag on and on I feel. I doubt Shearer won't be returning as manager either as he would only return if certain players were kept and he was able to bring in some new players he had already checked out surely. By the time a sale comes round the transfer window will have slammed shut and the possibly up to 3 more of our 'stars' will have left for pastures new. Moat has already proved he has the actual funds to buy the club or rather meet Ashley's asking price as he wouldn't have gotten past due diligence which he has also obviously carried out. Seymour Pierce have also recommend Moat's bid and of course he and Ashley were sat together. What this all means for me basically is that everything is in place for a deal to be concluded, the money and the mutual agreement of SP, Moat and Ashley etc. All that remains is to satisfy Barclays who want to see the operating costs of the club brought down and of course some cash to flow through the coffers (and that means selling players) before facilitating that rather large overdraft that the club will require in order to pay the bills. I'm no ITK but I know for a fact that a few weeks back none of the players had been paid for a few weeks, hence the 6-1 defeat to Leyton Orient which was their way of saying we want fucking paid or this is what you'll get. That's horseshite of the highest order. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 In order for a deal to go through, some more players will need shifted from the books, that is what is holding up the sale of the club in my opinion, which has probably already been agreed in principle. It could be that selling Taylor, Jonas and Collocini (or two of the three) will be enough to satisfy Barclays. However Taylor doesn't appear ready and willing to leave while no-one has shown any concrete interest in our two Argies. Until one or two of those players get sold, the sale will drag on and on I feel. I doubt Shearer won't be returning as manager either as he would only return if certain players were kept and he was able to bring in some new players he had already checked out surely. By the time a sale comes round the transfer window will have slammed shut and the possibly up to 3 more of our 'stars' will have left for pastures new. Moat has already proved he has the actual funds to buy the club or rather meet Ashley's asking price as he wouldn't have gotten past due diligence which he has also obviously carried out. Seymour Pierce have also recommend Moat's bid and of course he and Ashley were sat together. What this all means for me basically is that everything is in place for a deal to be concluded, the money and the mutual agreement of SP, Moat and Ashley etc. All that remains is to satisfy Barclays who want to see the operating costs of the club brought down and of course some cash to flow through the coffers (and that means selling players) before facilitating that rather large overdraft that the club will require in order to pay the bills. I'm no ITK but I know for a fact that a few weeks back none of the players had been paid for a few weeks, hence the 6-1 defeat to Leyton Orient which was their way of saying we want fucking paid or this is what you'll get. That's horseshite of the highest order. that is shite that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I'm no ITK but I know for a fact that a few weeks back none of the players had been paid for a few weeks, hence the 6-1 defeat to Leyton Orient which was their way of saying we want fucking paid or this is what you'll get. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 We did have a high wage bill but you seriously think that merchandise, tv rights and gate reciepts didn't cover that? Don't make me laugh. If the club was that much in the s*** Ashley would be willing to sell for £1 and there wouldnt be any takers, get real, football clubs make a fortune, where we not 7th in the richest clubs list last year? Its not about covering all those costs but sustaining them. The club couldn't sustain those kind of operating costs, not when the future prospects of the club in terms of revenue was one of less income and that was before relegation... Not denying that the club was running on excessive wages, just know that Ashley will not walk away from this club having been taken for as much as people think he has been, how many players have we sold in the last 2 years compared to those we brought in? Wages now down to 48 Million apparently with last years Sky money, merchandise and gate receipts to be included, add on top of that money from player sales and do you think the deficit will be up or down? The 2009 accounts were forecast to have a reduced loss in comparison to the previous year. But a reduced loss isn't going to make anyone money. The Sky money, merchandise and gate receipts you mention will be included in the 2009 accounts, as will the £72m wage bill which wasn't reduced until recently. Also remember that wages are not the clubs only costs. The wages are now £48m (perhaps even slightly lower) but the TV money will now be £14m (parachute payment) instead of £35m. Foreign TV money will now be £0 instead of £8m (?), merchandise will be lower as well. Costs have dropped but earnings will have dropped even more. Anyway I'm breaking my promise of not getting into the financial stuff tonight so I'm going to stop now. Ok not going into to financail detail then but don't you think it would be safe to assume that 2010 accounts (thus far) will show NUFC making a profit once merchandise, player sales and gate reciepts have been included? Duff = 4 Mill Beye = 2 Mill Bassong = 8 Mill Martins = 10 Mill to 12 Mill? Edgar = 1-2 Mill? Possibles: Taylor - 6-8 Mill Colo and Gutierrez = 10-12 Mill (Combined) Outgoing= -0 Mill Plus revenue with TV, Merchandise and Gate receipts? I think the one thing that grates me is that in amongst all this cost cutting, it is still jobs for the boys, Wise still getting paid apparently, Mort, Llambias, Kinnear etc. Doesn't seem to be any cost cutting applied to those people. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 We did have a high wage bill but you seriously think that merchandise, tv rights and gate reciepts didn't cover that? Don't make me laugh. If the club was that much in the s*** Ashley would be willing to sell for £1 and there wouldnt be any takers, get real, football clubs make a fortune, where we not 7th in the richest clubs list last year? Its not about covering all those costs but sustaining them. The club couldn't sustain those kind of operating costs, not when the future prospects of the club in terms of revenue was one of less income and that was before relegation... Not denying that the club was running on excessive wages, just know that Ashley will not walk away from this club having been taken for as much as people think he has been, how many players have we sold in the last 2 years compared to those we brought in? Wages now down to 48 Million apparently with last years Sky money, merchandise and gate receipts to be included, add on top of that money from player sales and do you think the deficit will be up or down? The 2009 accounts were forecast to have a reduced loss in comparison to the previous year. But a reduced loss isn't going to make anyone money. The Sky money, merchandise and gate receipts you mention will be included in the 2009 accounts, as will the £72m wage bill which wasn't reduced until recently. Also remember that wages are not the clubs only costs. The wages are now £48m (perhaps even slightly lower) but the TV money will now be £14m (parachute payment) instead of £35m. Foreign TV money will now be £0 instead of £8m (?), merchandise will be lower as well. Costs have dropped but earnings will have dropped even more. Anyway I'm breaking my promise of not getting into the financial stuff tonight so I'm going to stop now. Ok not going into to financail detail then but don't you think it would be safe to assume that 2010 accounts (thus far) will show NUFC making a profit once merchandise, player sales and gate reciepts have been included? Duff = 4 Mill Beye = 2 Mill Bassong = 8 Mill Martins = 10 Mill to 12 Mill? Edgar = 1-2 Mill? Possibles: Taylor - 6-8 Mill Colo and Gutierrez = 10-12 Mill (Combined) Incoming = -0 Mill Plus revenue with TV, Merchandise and Gate receipts? I think the one thing that grates me is that in amongst all this cost cutting, it is still jobs for the boys, Wise still getting paid apparently, Mort, Llambias, Kinnear etc. Doesn't seem to be any cost cutting applied to those people. how is kinear being paid when his contract expired injune or july? and the rest are being paid as per their contracts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 He apparently offered Kinnear a 2 year contract, and surely Ashley didn't just stop paying Kinnears contract when he was taken ill or that would be breach of contract? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMc Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 His contract ended. He never signed the 'lucrative' one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 i believe it never existed tbh, was him spouting off more shit Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 His contract ended. He never signed the 'lucrative' one Just seems funny that Ashley can afford to give Kinnear a 2 year contract from a financially crippled club (according to board) but can't give Shearer a rolling short term one? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts