BONTEMPI Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 So how much does shepherd have to rebuild the club do we estimate? Or is he going to be spending money we don't have again? Not nearly enough to make us a prem club again is the answer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ObaStar Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 The reports are still saying that he will be the lead figure of a consortium which would mean he isn't in full control of the club. he would be chairman so yes he would be Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 The reports are still saying that he will be the lead figure of a consortium which would mean he isn't in full control of the club. Which is also a huge positive, as far as I'm concerned. The mans ambition has never been in doubt, but there have been a number of key gaffes, notably most of the entire post-SBR period and key bits right before it, that do make me question his decision making. If there's another board to answer to that can keep him in check I won't be so worried. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 The reports are still saying that he will be the lead figure of a consortium which would mean he isn't in full control of the club. So he'll be the fall guy again like he was for the Halls? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Here we go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 So, people are happy going from a chairman who had someone above his manager making the deals to a chairman who just ignored what his managers said and bought players who were nothing else than trophy signings? Fuck me, I can't believe that so many are happy to see the fat cunt back. Yes, he's better than Ashley, but to be fair, a three year old bairn would be better than Ashley at this stage, that doesn't mean we should be happy getting him in. People saying "better the devil you know", how is getting someone we know is shite better than getting someone who might be good? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 So, people are happy going from a chairman who had someone above his manager making the deals to a chairman who just ignored what his managers said and bought players who were nothing else than trophy signings? Fuck me, I can't believe that so many are happy to see the fat cunt back. Yes, he's better than Ashley, but to be fair, a three year old bairn would be better than Ashley at this stage, that doesn't mean we should be happy getting him in. People saying "better the devil you know", how is getting someone we know is shite better than getting someone who might be good? Not defending by any means Shepherd buying players behind the manager's backs at the time, however he wouldn't dare do that to Shearer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Why? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro111 Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 And hereth begins the next wacky chapter in the history of NUFC. Fat cunt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I voted yes,he knows Newcastle inside out Similar to how an abuser has an intimate knowledge of their victim? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest johnson293 Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I voted undecided. On one hand it means getting rid of Ashley, and hopefully drawing a line under all thats happened in the last 2 years. On the other hand, its Freddie ****in Shepherd, and he (allegedly) almost bankrupt the club last time, as well as the managerial appointments, undermining of managers, and signings he is alleged to have made. Hopefully though, he may have learned from past errors, even though he publicly denies responsibility for any of it. If Shepherd really is the front runner with a £60m offer, then the others must have bid less, and perhaps may not be much better than Ashley in the longrun, in terms of investments in the team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 So, people are happy going from a chairman who had someone above his manager making the deals to a chairman who just ignored what his managers said and bought players who were nothing else than trophy signings? Fuck me, I can't believe that so many are happy to see the fat cunt back. Yes, he's better than Ashley, but to be fair, a three year old bairn would be better than Ashley at this stage, that doesn't mean we should be happy getting him in. People saying "better the devil you know", how is getting someone we know is shite better than getting someone who might be good? Not defending by any means Shepherd buying players behind the manager's backs at the time, however he wouldn't dare do that to Shearer. Fair point, but what happens when he sacks Shearer? He'll probably see himself as the only Geordie icon left to manage the club and appoint himself Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garth Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 So, people are happy going from a chairman who had someone above his manager making the deals to a chairman who just ignored what his managers said and bought players who were nothing else than trophy signings? f*** me, I can't believe that so many are happy to see the fat c*** back. Yes, he's better than Ashley, but to be fair, a three year old bairn would be better than Ashley at this stage, that doesn't mean we should be happy getting him in. People saying "better the devil you know", how is getting someone we know is s**** better than getting someone who might be good? Not defending by any means Shepherd buying players behind the manager's backs at the time, however he wouldn't dare do that to Shearer. What makes you so confident he won't do that, he's done it before and he'll do it again whether it's Shearer in charge or not. His ego is to big if he thinks he can make a trophy signing whether Shearer wants him or not, he'll do it!. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 So, people are happy going from a chairman who had someone above his manager making the deals to a chairman who just ignored what his managers said and bought players who were nothing else than trophy signings? f*** me, I can't believe that so many are happy to see the fat c*** back. Yes, he's better than Ashley, but to be fair, a three year old bairn would be better than Ashley at this stage, that doesn't mean we should be happy getting him in. People saying "better the devil you know", how is getting someone we know is s**** better than getting someone who might be good? Not defending by any means Shepherd buying players behind the manager's backs at the time, however he wouldn't dare do that to Shearer. Fair point, but what happens when he sacks Shearer? He'll probably see himself as the only Geordie icon left to manage the club and appoint himself I wonder what the odd are on Shepherd appointing Keegan after sacking Shearer? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garth Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 So, people are happy going from a chairman who had someone above his manager making the deals to a chairman who just ignored what his managers said and bought players who were nothing else than trophy signings? f*** me, I can't believe that so many are happy to see the fat c*** back. Yes, he's better than Ashley, but to be fair, a three year old bairn would be better than Ashley at this stage, that doesn't mean we should be happy getting him in. People saying "better the devil you know", how is getting someone we know is s**** better than getting someone who might be good? Not defending by any means Shepherd buying players behind the manager's backs at the time, however he wouldn't dare do that to Shearer. Fair point, but what happens when he sacks Shearer? He'll probably see himself as the only Geordie icon left to manage the club and appoint himself I wonder what the odd are on Shepherd appointing Keegan after sacking Shearer? If that ever happened we would be the laughing stock of the football world. Never mind let's all laugh at Sunderland, let's laugh at Newcastle United. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 If Shepherd really is the front runner with a £60m offer, then the others must have bid less, and perhaps may not be much better than Ashley in the longrun, in terms of investments in the team. Good point. Do we really want the alternative if they're trying to get the club for less than 60% of the asking price? On the other hand that might be all Shepherd's group has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 The price does seem low, hopefully one of the other parties will seize the chance to outbid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 This 100m has always been a joke. It was certainly a joke if Ashley was also expecting to get full value for the debt he's lent the club. Many people have assumed that the asking price was £100 million with the debt written off. The only indication that was the case has come from George Caulkin in the Times. If there is any truth in any of this Shepherd stuff and the offer is £60 million with the new owner taking over the full debt then that is an astonishingly good deal for Ashley and values the club far higher than anyone on here thought it was worth. More info needed on all this for me - especially who is in the consortium. Shepherd doesn't have anything like the money so if its going to fly he needs other backers with very deep pockets alongside him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Might just be £60m with the mooted £20m if we come back up, with no debts etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BONTEMPI Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 If Shepherd really is the front runner with a £60m offer, then the others must have bid less, and perhaps may not be much better than Ashley in the longrun, in terms of investments in the team. Good point. Do we really want the alternative if they're trying to get the club for less than 60% of the asking price? On the other hand that might be all Shepherd's group has. He'll be paying players with Mrs Shephards home cooking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmymag Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 If Shepherd really is the front runner with a £60m offer, then the others must have bid less, and perhaps may not be much better than Ashley in the longrun, in terms of investments in the team. Good point. Do we really want the alternative if they're trying to get the club for less than 60% of the asking price? On the other hand that might be all Shepherd's group has. I'd be more worried if anyone paid anywhere near the asking price for the simple reason that they don't have to. Ashley has created a fire sale and it's his own money he's burning. Fucking idiot! Ashley not you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattypnufc Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Here we go. http://th02.deviantart.net/fs32/300W/i/2008/234/0/9/Here_we_go_joker_ref_pic_by_sullen_skrewt.jpg And here...we..go! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garth Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 If Shepherd really is the front runner with a £60m offer, then the others must have bid less, and perhaps may not be much better than Ashley in the longrun, in terms of investments in the team. Good point. Do we really want the alternative if they're trying to get the club for less than 60% of the asking price? On the other hand that might be all Shepherd's group has. I'd be more worried if anyone paid anywhere near the asking price for the simple reason that they don't have to. Ashley has created a fire sale and it's his own money he's burning. f***ing idiot! Ashley not you. I really can't see Ashley writing off that 100 million especially in this sort of economic climate I bet who ever takes the club on will have to pay back Ashley, probably why they offered so low a price for the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I'm still intrigued as to who would leak this, and what their motives are for doing so. Is it Shepherd testing the reaction? Could it be Ashley trying to force bids out of others? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I'm still intrigued as to who would leak this, and what their motives are for doing so. Is it Shepherd testing the reaction? Could it be Ashley trying to force bids out of others? Why would Shepherd be bothered about the reaction? He's about to buy 100 percent of what he sold a fraction of a while back for not really a great deal more money.I'd imagine the pound signs in his eyes are the most important thing to him right now. Rich, self serving people don't give a scooby what us common proles think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now