RIP sale thread.

[Dave]

There will be no announcement today, other than talks are on going with Moat and a North-West based consortium who will be performing DD this week after giving the relevant financial information over the last weekend

 

Can I just point out for the benefit of everyone else that this chap posts on Toontastic and pretends he knows anything on there too.

[Guest Redheugh]

Thanks, Dave

[Guest sicko2ndbest]

Thanks, Dave

 

redheugh you have posted that it wont be moat on ttastic. put up or shut the f*** up

 

too many wum on this board

[Sargey]

Redheugh, did you used to be on the lottery?

 

 

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00384/mystic-meg-horoscop_384331a.jpg

[NG32]

Thanks, Dave

 

walk the walk mate. 

 

Or forever you will be a mackem

[TRon]

I wonder what Shearer makes of all this bearing in mind that Moat's inability to raise the funds before now means that if Shearer comes in he'll have to work with  threadbare squad with no prospect of buying any players till January? assuming his demands that certain players stayed for him to take the job with Ashley, it would be ironic if Moat could only afford the club by selling those same players.

[mattypnufc]

Can I ask where this idea of Moat not having enough funds comes from?

 

The only thing that has been confirmed here is that the Overdraft facility is going through the process of ensuring it is able to continued in Moats name. 

 

The rest is speculation/conjecture made up from the rags surely, based purely on assumptions - even Louise (makem bastard) taylors detailed speculative piece?

[manorpark]

Can I ask where this idea of Moat not having enough funds comes from?

 

The only thing that has been confirmed here is that the Overdraft facility is going through the process of ensuring it is able to continued in Moats name. 

 

The rest is speculation/conjecture made up from the rags surely, based purely on assumptions - even Louise (makem b******) taylors detailed speculative piece?

 

Well, it does seem that it is taking the 'Moat Consortium' (shall we call it) quite some time to get the NUFC overdraft level agreed with the banks (what else could the delay be about?) and so from that you can speculate that the consortium does not have as much money behind it as Ashley has. 

 

And, when you consider the fact that Ashley has nowhere near enough money to run a competitive and potentially successful ('big spending', of necessity, to be successful) Premier League Club, what hope can we have for the Moat Consortium, for the future?

 

"Rid of Ashley" might well turn out to be it's best (if not its only) plus-point!

[quayside]

Can I ask where this idea of Moat not having enough funds comes from?

 

The only thing that has been confirmed here is that the Overdraft facility is going through the process of ensuring it is able to continued in Moats name. 

 

The rest is speculation/conjecture made up from the rags surely, based purely on assumptions - even Louise (makem b******) taylors detailed speculative piece?

 

Well, it does seem that it is taking the 'Moat Consortium' (shall we call it) quite some time to get the NUFC overdraft level agreed with the banks (what else could the delay be about?) and so from that you can speculate that the consortium does not have as much money behind it as Ashley has. 

 

And, when you consider the fact that Ashley has nowhere near enough money to run a competitive and potentially successful ('big spending', of necessity, to be successful) Premier League Club, what hope can we have for the Moat Consortium, for the future?

 

"Rid of Ashley" might well turn out to be it's best (if not its only) plus-point!

 

Totally agree with that.

[simonsays]

Can I ask where this idea of Moat not having enough funds comes from?

 

The only thing that has been confirmed here is that the Overdraft facility is going through the process of ensuring it is able to continued in Moats name. 

 

The rest is speculation/conjecture made up from the rags surely, based purely on assumptions - even Louise (makem b******) taylors detailed speculative piece?

 

Well, it does seem that it is taking the 'Moat Consortium' (shall we call it) quite some time to get the NUFC overdraft level agreed with the banks (what else could the delay be about?) and so from that you can speculate that the consortium does not have as much money behind it as Ashley has. 

 

And, when you consider the fact that Ashley has nowhere near enough money to run a competitive and potentially successful ('big spending', of necessity, to be successful) Premier League Club, what hope can we have for the Moat Consortium, for the future?

 

"Rid of Ashley" might well turn out to be it's best (if not its only) plus-point!

 

I think all you can draw from the fact that the renewal of the overdraft is taking so long is that Barclays are unwilling to give a Premiership level overdraft to a Championship club.  I honestly believe that even if Ashley remains in charge Barclays will still be looking to reduce the overdraft.

[quayside]

Can I ask where this idea of Moat not having enough funds comes from?

 

The only thing that has been confirmed here is that the Overdraft facility is going through the process of ensuring it is able to continued in Moats name. 

 

The rest is speculation/conjecture made up from the rags surely, based purely on assumptions - even Louise (makem b******) taylors detailed speculative piece?

 

Well, it does seem that it is taking the 'Moat Consortium' (shall we call it) quite some time to get the NUFC overdraft level agreed with the banks (what else could the delay be about?) and so from that you can speculate that the consortium does not have as much money behind it as Ashley has. 

 

And, when you consider the fact that Ashley has nowhere near enough money to run a competitive and potentially successful ('big spending', of necessity, to be successful) Premier League Club, what hope can we have for the Moat Consortium, for the future?

 

"Rid of Ashley" might well turn out to be it's best (if not its only) plus-point!

 

I think all you can draw from the fact that the renewal of the overdraft is taking so long is that Barclays are unwilling to give a Premiership level overdraft to a Championship club.  I honestly believe that even if Ashley remains in charge Barclays will still be looking to reduce the overdraft.

 

So says Louise Taylor. She may be right but banks will generally offer any overdraft facility providing it is adequately secured and there is a business plan in place that shows the bank is not simply funding trading losses. Moat may be unable to satisfy one or both of those requirements. To be honest the club's turnover is now probably somewhere in the region of £50 million so an overdraft requirement as large as £20 million suggests there is something not hanging together with the business plan. 

[manorpark]

Can I ask where this idea of Moat not having enough funds comes from?

 

The only thing that has been confirmed here is that the Overdraft facility is going through the process of ensuring it is able to continued in Moats name. 

 

The rest is speculation/conjecture made up from the rags surely, based purely on assumptions - even Louise (makem b******) taylors detailed speculative piece?

 

Well, it does seem that it is taking the 'Moat Consortium' (shall we call it) quite some time to get the NUFC overdraft level agreed with the banks (what else could the delay be about?) and so from that you can speculate that the consortium does not have as much money behind it as Ashley has. 

 

And, when you consider the fact that Ashley has nowhere near enough money to run a competitive and potentially successful ('big spending', of necessity, to be successful) Premier League Club, what hope can we have for the Moat Consortium, for the future?

 

"Rid of Ashley" might well turn out to be it's best (if not its only) plus-point!

 

I think all you can draw from the fact that the renewal of the overdraft is taking so long is that Barclays are unwilling to give a Premiership level overdraft to a Championship club.  I honestly believe that even if Ashley remains in charge Barclays will still be looking to reduce the overdraft.

 

So says Louise Taylor. She may be right but banks will generally offer any overdraft facility providing it is adequately secured and there is a business plan in place that shows the bank is not simply funding trading losses. Moat may be unable to satisfy one or both of those requirements. To be honest the club's turnover is now probably somewhere in the region of £50 million so an overdraft requirement as large as £20 million suggests there is something not hanging together with the business plan.   

 

Moats difficulty may well be in convincing the banks that the much lower Turnover figure of £50M-£60M (or whatever) will only last for 12 months!!!

 

May have difficulty convincing ME of that!

[Guest DMan]

With all the talk about players leaving to reduce the overdraft, does anyone think we will actually bring any players in? Or are we going to try and challenge for promotion with a decimated squad?

[geordiedean]

there is no way we will get promoted with the squad we have, i feel this is all a deliberate ploy by fat mike to almost guarantee we dont bounce back straight away..without at least half a dozen new players we will be in this div again next season

[Guest sicko2ndbest]

Oh the choices:

 

1) Lose top players get taken over

 

2) Keep top players keep fat man

 

[relámpago blanco]

Oh he choices:

 

1) Lose top players get taken over

 

2) Lose top players keep fat man

 

FYP

[BlueStar]

We're not fucking organised enough to actually buy players.  Selling players is easy because the other club does all the hard work.  You know, stuff like deciding how much we're going to sell the player for.

[Guest]

Oh the choices:

 

1) Lose top players get taken over

 

2) Keep top players keep fat man

 

 

If it was a straight choice between 1 & 2, I'd pick 2 every time.

[Guest The Libertine]

there is no way we will get promoted with the squad we have, i feel this is all a deliberate ploy by fat mike to almost guarantee we dont bounce back straight away..without at least half a dozen new players we will be in this div again next season

 

 

[BlueStar]

Even with everything up in the air, we should at least be sorting out getting Lovenkrands back, bearing in mind he actually wants to come here and he'll be cheap.  I don't think any future owner or manager would be pissed off with having him in the squad.

[Keefaz]

Even with everything up in the air, we should at least be sorting out getting Lovenkrands back, bearing in mind he actually wants to come here and he'll be cheap.  I don't think any future owner or manager would be pissed off with having him in the squad.

 

Why isn't this happening? Should be a doddle to sort out, I'd have thought.

[Frazzle]

Says he wants to wait to see if any PL clubs come in for him first.

[TRon]

Even with everything up in the air, we should at least be sorting out getting Lovenkrands back, bearing in mind he actually wants to come here and he'll be cheap.  I don't think any future owner or manager would be pissed off with having him in the squad.

 

Why isn't this happening? Should be a doddle to sort out, I'd have thought.

 

Maybe he isn't cheap by Championship standards? Maybe the future owner isn't in a position to agree to adding to the wage bill without clearing it with Barclays? It could be any number of things.

[Guest sicko2ndbest]

Oh the choices:

 

1) Lose top players get taken over

 

2) Keep top players keep fat man

 

 

If it was a straight choice between 1 & 2, I'd pick 2 every time.

 

Honestly?

 

When i say lose top players i am talking maybe Jonas and Taylor.

[Guest sicko2ndbest]

http://timesonline.typepad.com/thegame/2009/08/why-is-alan-shearer-not-newcastle-manager-.html

 

I love Caulkin 

 

ONE of these days, we may get around to analysing the football. Who knows, we might even have a look at the systems, study the opposition - their strengths and their weaknesses - get to know the players, the idiosyncrasies of the manager and the foibles of their supporters.

 

One of these days, but not just yet. At Newcastle United, events off the field remain frustrating and tiresome, but also vital and somehow compelling.

 

Summer used to be about cricket, tennis, golf and, for those of us particularly obsessed, scouring newspapers for a single, half-page article about football. Over the last couple of decades, the game has changed and the world with it, and June, July and August have become a bombardment of transfer rumours, protracted courtships, disputes, pre-season tours, gossip and record-signings.

 

Not at St James’ Park, however. Not this year. Newcastle have either sold or lost ten players with first-team experience and bought precisely nobody, but the column inches and phone-ins and forums have still been filled. We have read about consortia and debts and deferred payments and overdrafts and investment banks and confidentially clauses; you don’t need to be an accountant to work here, but it helps.

 

On the face of it - a club up for sale, no manager in place - little has changed, although bit by bit, the dynamics have shifted. There are those who believe with steadfast assurance that the whole thing has been bluffery on behalf of Mike Ashley, that his attempts to sell Newcastle were always a diversion and their argument is as valid as any. Others wait for updates with fingers crossed; an end to the torment feels close, but just beyond reach.

 

So many different, competing groups have claimed an interest in Newcastle and the funds to improve them, earned themselves free publicity and then promptly disappeared. Was that always their motivation? If so, how do they benefit from the deception? Deadlines have been pronounced and then elapsed and in the rush to embrace any new development, credibility has been chipped away.

 

And yet this is the climate which Ashley’s Newcastle has forged. What are we to make of the ‘Malaysians’ taken on a tour of Newcastle by Derek Llambias, the club’s managing director, but who Seymour Pierce, the bank charged with handling the sale, insist never made contact? 

 

What happened to the “more than two” bids in excess of £100m that Llambias claimed in early July? Why could Joe Kinnear never stick to the same story?

 

And, to ram home a point for the umpteenth time, why is Alan Shearer not manager? Why are we still asking that when Ashley described hiring the former England captain for the final eight games of last season as the “best decision” of his awful spell at the club? When Llambias said that Shearer was “110 per cent,” the man for the job, that he represented the “perfect appointment.”

 

Smokescreens, half-truths and public announcements that dissipate in a puff of smoke. At Newcastle, there is nobody to speak to, nobody to believe, and questions must be posed to others; a nudge here, wink there, a “source” wherever. Journalists do their best, but all of us are caught in the dilemma of either reporting everything, giving succour to the wannabes and never-weres or sticking to a single line and being accused of complacency.

 

Here, to our best knowledge, is where things stand. Barry Moat is Seymour Pierce’s preferred bidder. Which means that after weeks of negotiations and attempts to rouse interested parties, Keith Harris, Seymour Pierce’s executive chairman, has identified Moat as the best hope of both coming close to Ashley’s £100m asking price and securing Newcastle’s future. There is no other show in town.

 

Moat is a well-known Tyneside businessman. He is friendly with Shearer and would install him in the dug-out. Both of those things offer some assurance. And yet raising funds has clearly not been straightforward, from which we can deduce that Newcastle, for all its potential and fanbase, has simply not been attractive to substantive investors and that, initially at least, a club run by Moat would not be awash with money.

 

Moat and Ashley are now close enough to an agreement to call it all-but done. The glitch has emanated from Barclays, who not only wish to see a significant reduction in Newcastle’s present £39m overdraft facility - for which you can hardly blame them - but are also reluctant to provide Moat with the resources he needs to run the club. 

 

Moat is now attempting to raise it for himself.

 

In the background, there are some intriguing whispers, that Moat has backing from an individual in the United States who, for a variety of reasons, will not step forward until Ashley has gone. Whether it comes to anything is another matter and, in any case, if the Ashley era has taught us anything, it should be that billionaire saviours are not always ... well, saviours.

 

Meanwhile, the clock ticks. From the bank, there is pressure for the club to sell more high-earning players and from Chris Hughton, the interim manager, there are repeated hints that, as things stand, Newcastle’s squad is simply too small to cope with a grueling campaign in the Coca Cola Championship. With the transfer window closing next Tuesday, wriggle room is limited.

 

And then, to return to the beginning, there is the football itself. In the most trying, unpromising of circumstances, Newcastle have excelled. They are unbeaten in four matches, they have conceded a single goal and share the leadership of the division with Cardiff City, Middlesbrough and West Bromwich Albion. In a similar role last season, Hughton appeared swamped, but now looks serene. Is either observation accurate?

 

Consider this, too. Of the 11 players who started against Crystal Palace on Saturday, Shearer was pressing to keep only Steve Harper, the goalkeeper, and Steven Taylor, the centre-half (Habib Beye and Sebastien Bassong having both left). Joey Barton, who Shearer had informed would never play for him again following his dismissal at Anfield, remains an active member of the squad, fitness allowing.

 

The likes of Shola Ameobi and Ryan Taylor have expressed a desire for Hughton to be appointed on a permanent basis and last season’s underachievers have somehow come together and either realised that their careers were stalling or that they owed something tangible to Newcastle. They have reacted to the turmoil at the club by forging a spirit, by working things out for themselves.

 

Their resilience has been heartening and necessary, because Newcastle, as a club and a city, were desperate for something, anything, to cling to. In the dressing-room and the training-ground, responsibility has been grasped and that has entailed fundamental, reality-shifting change, allowing players such as Ameobi, Alan Smith and Kevin Nolan to finally express themselves.

 

This column has consistently nailed its colours to Shearer’s mast and continues to do so, but with every day that passes, the task facing him becomes more onerous; contrary to perceived wisdom, Newcastle’s fine start only exacerbates that. Ashley must go. The club he has wrecked deserves stability and, at a time when bonds have been frayed, an emotional resonance with supporters. Shearer provides it, but the challenge is formidable.