Newcastle United Supporters Trust (NUST)

[quayside]

What is SJP Holdings? Do they mean SJHL?

 

Dear God.

 

Isn't SJP Holdings the company Ashley formed to buy the club? May be well off with that one, but I've definitely heard of it before.

 

I think Matt's point is that the company in question isn't called SJP Holdings - it's called St James Holdings Limited (SJHL). They've got the name wrong and their reference to it is nonsensical. And if you are going to enter territory such as this you need to have an eye for detail.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

I just don't understand why they've come out with this now, when they're apparently only a few days away from revealing their plans and engaging in discussion with the club.

[Dave]

What is SJP Holdings? Do they mean SJHL?

 

Dear God.

 

Isn't SJP Holdings the company Ashley formed to buy the club? May be well off with that one, but I've definitely heard of it before.

 

I think Matt's point is that the company in question isn't called SJP Holdings - it's called St James Holdings Limited (SJHL). They've got the name wrong and their reference to it is nonsensical. And if you are going to enter territory such as this you need to have an eye for detail.

 

Oops. I knew I'd read that post wrong.

[TRon]

I just don't understand why they've come out with this now, when they're apparently only a few days away from revealing their plans and engaging in discussion with the club.

 

That should be interesting. I imagine it will go somewhere along the lines of

 

"Get out of our club

get out of our cluuub!

you fat cockney bastard...

get out of our club"

 

negotiations should go swimmingly.

 

 

[Cronky]

I just don't understand why they've come out with this now, when they're apparently only a few days away from revealing their plans and engaging in discussion with the club.

 

It seems that they've struggled to get any serious offers of investment from financial institutions and businesses, and their hope always was that by demonstrating a high level of support for a fans' takeover, that in itself would convince the bigger money to come on board.

 

It's a pipe dream. They could collect 100,000 emails or surveys which say, 'Yes it would be a good thing if the fans owned the club and I'd like to find out more', but that isn't a demonstration that large numbers of people are prepared to part with large amounts of money. And that is what it would take before any institutions of signficance would want to join in.

 

The peddling of this £7 million rumour and this last minute survey feels like a desperate attempt to drum up more support. But it makes them looks amateurish and silly.

[johnnypd]

i reckon the £7m might have some basis in truth, but not in the way they think. bit like martins allegedly withdrawing all that cash every weekend - he probably did it once. likewise, we may well have made a £7m profit for one individual month in the summer with money coming in on season tickets, transfers etc. it's incredibly unlikely that we're making anything close to that every month.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

i reckon the £7m might have some basis in truth, but not in the way they think. bit like martins allegedly withdrawing all that cash every weekend - he probably did it once. likewise, we may well have made a £7m profit for one individual month in the summer with money coming in on season tickets, transfers etc. it's incredibly unlikely that we're making anything close to that every month.

 

It goes further than that though because they've suggested he's making the profit personally "out of the club".

 

And the season ticket revenue won't all be recognised when it's collected either, it'll be spread over the season.

[quayside]

i reckon the £7m might have some basis in truth, but not in the way they think. bit like martins allegedly withdrawing all that cash every weekend - he probably did it once. likewise, we may well have made a £7m profit for one individual month in the summer with money coming in on season tickets, transfers etc. it's incredibly unlikely that we're making anything close to that every month.

 

Maybe but we'll have made losses in plenty of the other months. If annual turnover is £60m - wages alone are probably still between £40m and £50m, never mind the other running costs, which were £50m in the latest accounts (2008) btw = losses.

 

 

[Guest]

Fair play to them on the swift response. Will read it in the morning when I'm less tired to make sense of it.

 

The £7m figure comes from a respected company's Investment document

that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club.

 

The headline figures in summary are for an investment of £95m and the

document states that they would expect "turn the investment of

£95million into a value of between £150million to £205million on

return to the Premiership.The £205m was top end but a 5% return on

investment would equate to over £84m on the predicted turnover.

 

Without going into lots of detail it is based on a £42m reduction in

wages (6months), £14m transfer fees received set against a projected

reduction of ticket revenue based on 34,000 crowds.  We are getting

crowds of 43,000 with the subsequent increase in half year season

tickets. Other reductions include  - outsourcing catering, outsourcing

match programmes, reduction of backroom staff by over 200 and still

continuing, the scaling down of the academy, a parachute payment of

£11.25m, decent television income, perimeter advertising of £50,000

per month, recent sponsorship deals etc etc

 

The perimeter advertising and large Sports Direct sign on the stand

are likely to be free advertising for his business.

 

One newspaper also came out with this same figure last week.

 

In the Sunday papers Mr Ashley said that he would not stay where he

was not wanted and would sell in the summer. We think this is why he

is waiting until then.

 

Since relegation Mr Ashley has invested an alleged £20m and that

figure has never been confirmed and the club has reduced its overdraft

without any significant investment in the playing staff.

 

Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership with the

extra revenue that will entail and we will have to wait to see the

actual published accounts but we think that these figures will stand

up to scrutiny.

[TRon]

Fair play to them on the swift response. Will read it in the morning when I'm less tired to make sense of it.

 

The £7m figure comes from a respected company's Investment document

that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club.

 

The headline figures in summary are for an investment of £95m and the

document states that they would expect "turn the investment of

£95million into a value of between £150million to £205million on

return to the Premiership.The £205m was top end but a 5% return on

investment would equate to over £84m on the predicted turnover.

 

Without going into lots of detail it is based on a £42m reduction in

wages (6months), £14m transfer fees received set against a projected

reduction of ticket revenue based on 34,000 crowds.  We are getting

crowds of 43,000 with the subsequent increase in half year season

tickets. Other reductions include  - outsourcing catering, outsourcing

match programmes, reduction of backroom staff by over 200 and still

continuing, the scaling down of the academy, a parachute payment of

£11.25m, decent television income, perimeter advertising of £50,000

per month, recent sponsorship deals etc etc

 

The perimeter advertising and large Sports Direct sign on the stand

are likely to be free advertising for his business.

 

One newspaper also came out with this same figure last week.

 

In the Sunday papers Mr Ashley said that he would not stay where he

was not wanted and would sell in the summer. We think this is why he

is waiting until then.

 

Since relegation Mr Ashley has invested an alleged £20m and that

figure has never been confirmed and the club has reduced its overdraft

without any significant investment in the playing staff.

 

Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership with the

extra revenue that will entail and we will have to wait to see the

actual published accounts but we think that these figures will stand

up to scrutiny.

 

What swift response? You are posting it second hand from some other source presumably. I still don't understand how all this anti-Ashley stuff from the NUST is going to end in them buying him out which presumably is the point. It is the point isn't it?

 

 

[Guest]

I'm talking about the quick reply to my e-mail...unless they're getting a few queries about it so now have that as a copy & paste job.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Fair play to them on the swift response. Will read it in the morning when I'm less tired to make sense of it.

 

The £7m figure comes from a respected company's Investment document

that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club.

 

The headline figures in summary are for an investment of £95m and the

document states that they would expect "turn the investment of

£95million into a value of between £150million to £205million on

return to the Premiership.The £205m was top end but a 5% return on

investment would equate to over £84m on the predicted turnover.

 

Without going into lots of detail it is based on a £42m reduction in

wages (6months), £14m transfer fees received set against a projected

reduction of ticket revenue based on 34,000 crowds.  We are getting

crowds of 43,000 with the subsequent increase in half year season

tickets. Other reductions include  - outsourcing catering, outsourcing

match programmes, reduction of backroom staff by over 200 and still

continuing, the scaling down of the academy, a parachute payment of

£11.25m, decent television income, perimeter advertising of £50,000

per month, recent sponsorship deals etc etc

 

The perimeter advertising and large Sports Direct sign on the stand

are likely to be free advertising for his business.

 

One newspaper also came out with this same figure last week.

 

In the Sunday papers Mr Ashley said that he would not stay where he

was not wanted and would sell in the summer. We think this is why he

is waiting until then.

 

Since relegation Mr Ashley has invested an alleged £20m and that

figure has never been confirmed and the club has reduced its overdraft

without any significant investment in the playing staff.

 

Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership with the

extra revenue that will entail and we will have to wait to see the

actual published accounts but we think that these figures will stand

up to scrutiny.

 

Am I reading it wrong or does that last paragraph not just say the rest of that stuff isn't true?

[jdckelly]

Fair play to them on the swift response. Will read it in the morning when I'm less tired to make sense of it.

 

The £7m figure comes from a respected company's Investment document

that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club.

 

The headline figures in summary are for an investment of £95m and the

document states that they would expect "turn the investment of

£95million into a value of between £150million to £205million on

return to the Premiership.The £205m was top end but a 5% return on

investment would equate to over £84m on the predicted turnover.

 

Without going into lots of detail it is based on a £42m reduction in

wages (6months), £14m transfer fees received set against a projected

reduction of ticket revenue based on 34,000 crowds.  We are getting

crowds of 43,000 with the subsequent increase in half year season

tickets. Other reductions include  - outsourcing catering, outsourcing

match programmes, reduction of backroom staff by over 200 and still

continuing, the scaling down of the academy, a parachute payment of

£11.25m, decent television income, perimeter advertising of £50,000

per month, recent sponsorship deals etc etc

 

The perimeter advertising and large Sports Direct sign on the stand

are likely to be free advertising for his business.

 

One newspaper also came out with this same figure last week.

 

In the Sunday papers Mr Ashley said that he would not stay where he

was not wanted and would sell in the summer. We think this is why he

is waiting until then.

 

Since relegation Mr Ashley has invested an alleged £20m and that

figure has never been confirmed and the club has reduced its overdraft

without any significant investment in the playing staff.

 

Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership with the

extra revenue that will entail and we will have to wait to see the

actual published accounts but we think that these figures will stand

up to scrutiny.

 

Am I reading it wrong or does that last paragraph not just say the rest of that stuff isn't true?

thats what it seems to read to me in which case

[Cronky]

Fair play to them on the swift response. Will read it in the morning when I'm less tired to make sense of it.

 

The £7m figure comes from a respected company's Investment document

that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club.

 

The headline figures in summary are for an investment of £95m and the

document states that they would expect "turn the investment of

£95million into a value of between £150million to £205million on

return to the Premiership.The £205m was top end but a 5% return on

investment would equate to over £84m on the predicted turnover.

 

Without going into lots of detail it is based on a £42m reduction in

wages (6months), £14m transfer fees received set against a projected

reduction of ticket revenue based on 34,000 crowds.  We are getting

crowds of 43,000 with the subsequent increase in half year season

tickets. Other reductions include  - outsourcing catering, outsourcing

match programmes, reduction of backroom staff by over 200 and still

continuing, the scaling down of the academy, a parachute payment of

£11.25m, decent television income, perimeter advertising of £50,000

per month, recent sponsorship deals etc etc

 

The perimeter advertising and large Sports Direct sign on the stand

are likely to be free advertising for his business.

 

One newspaper also came out with this same figure last week.

 

In the Sunday papers Mr Ashley said that he would not stay where he

was not wanted and would sell in the summer. We think this is why he

is waiting until then.

 

Since relegation Mr Ashley has invested an alleged £20m and that

figure has never been confirmed and the club has reduced its overdraft

without any significant investment in the playing staff.

 

Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership with the

extra revenue that will entail and we will have to wait to see the

actual published accounts but we think that these figures will stand

up to scrutiny.

 

I'll have a go.

 

This looks like it's based on a document from a few months ago when Ashley was trying to sell the club for £95 million. He is pointing out to potential buyers that if they take the club at that price and then get the club promoted, the club would be worth between £150m and £200m - which is probably correct.

 

They then point out the cost-cutting measures that are there to ensure the club is financially stable during the 'promotion season', and conclude that if someone makes the purchase, the return in terms of the increased value of the club is likely to be £84 million IF we are promoted. If we don't get promoted, things are still stable.

 

NUST have taken that figure of £84 million, divided it by 12, and concluded that Ashley is making a profit of £7 million per month. Complete rubbish.

 

What they are not taking into account is that we have not been promoted, and Ashley has already lost £230 million on his own purchase of the club and by clearing the initial £90 million debt.

[TRon]

I'm talking about the quick reply to my e-mail...unless they're getting a few queries about it so now have that as a copy & paste job.

 

I'm just surprised that after all the criticism of Ashley's regime of lack of open communication, someone couldn't have replied here rather than send selective emails. NUST are carrying out a pretty public campaign against Ashley after all.

[quayside]

Fair play to them on the swift response. Will read it in the morning when I'm less tired to make sense of it.

 

The £7m figure comes from a respected company's Investment document

that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club.

 

The headline figures in summary are for an investment of £95m and the

document states that they would expect "turn the investment of

£95million into a value of between £150million to £205million on

return to the Premiership.The £205m was top end but a 5% return on

investment would equate to over £84m on the predicted turnover.

 

Without going into lots of detail it is based on a £42m reduction in

wages (6months), £14m transfer fees received set against a projected

reduction of ticket revenue based on 34,000 crowds.  We are getting

crowds of 43,000 with the subsequent increase in half year season

tickets. Other reductions include  - outsourcing catering, outsourcing

match programmes, reduction of backroom staff by over 200 and still

continuing, the scaling down of the academy, a parachute payment of

£11.25m, decent television income, perimeter advertising of £50,000

per month, recent sponsorship deals etc etc

 

The perimeter advertising and large Sports Direct sign on the stand

are likely to be free advertising for his business.

 

One newspaper also came out with this same figure last week.

 

In the Sunday papers Mr Ashley said that he would not stay where he

was not wanted and would sell in the summer. We think this is why he

is waiting until then.

 

Since relegation Mr Ashley has invested an alleged £20m and that

figure has never been confirmed and the club has reduced its overdraft

without any significant investment in the playing staff.

 

Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership with the

extra revenue that will entail and we will have to wait to see the

actual published accounts but we think that these figures will stand

up to scrutiny.

 

I wouldn't waste too much time on that - it's nonsense.

 

Some points on that occur to me at first glance:

 

- So the idea is that the investment of £95m grows to be worth £205m when we are in the Premiership and 5% is a good return on that  so profits of £84m are possible. Our turnover won't be much more than £84m in the Premiership ffs. Not that  5% of £205m is £84m btw.

 

- Reductions on wages of £42m over 6 months - £42m is probably about our annual wage bill right now, and we are going to save it all in 6 months. Happy days....

 

- Quote "Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership" - ah so Ashley must wait until then to collect his £7m per month....

 

Utter bollox tbh  

[Thespence]

I'm talking about the quick reply to my e-mail...unless they're getting a few queries about it so now have that as a copy & paste job.

 

I'm just surprised that after all the criticism of Ashley's regime of lack of open communication, someone couldn't have replied here rather than send selective emails. NUST are carrying out a pretty public campaign against Ashley after all.

 

I am not following all this but did NUST make a general release & then someone sent in some questions & they answered them. Tbf you not going to get much better than that regardless of the content.

[Cronky]

NUST are sailing pretty close to the wind here. They are trying to attract large amounts of money from ordinary people, and if this '£7 million' figure from the earlier statement is based on that information, then that amounts to a major piece of deceit.

[Stu]

 

NUST have taken that figure of £84 million, divided it by 12, and concluded that Ashley is making a profit of £7 million per month. Complete rubbish.

 

 

[Dave]

I take it the NUST consider 'a source close to Ashley' in the Sunday Mirror to actually be him then?

[jdckelly]

I take it the NUST consider 'a source close to Ashley' in the Sunday Mirror to actually be him then?

they don't seem to have considered the possibility it could be bullshit which is an odd position as taking anything about ashley written in sunday papers unless it has direct quotes is not advisable

[OzzieMandias]

Fair play to them on the swift response. Will read it in the morning when I'm less tired to make sense of it.

 

The £7m figure comes from a respected company's Investment document

that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club.

 

The headline figures in summary are for an investment of £95m and the

document states that they would expect "turn the investment of

£95million into a value of between £150million to £205million on

return to the Premiership.The £205m was top end but a 5% return on

investment would equate to over £84m on the predicted turnover.

 

Without going into lots of detail it is based on a £42m reduction in

wages (6months), £14m transfer fees received set against a projected

reduction of ticket revenue based on 34,000 crowds.  We are getting

crowds of 43,000 with the subsequent increase in half year season

tickets. Other reductions include  - outsourcing catering, outsourcing

match programmes, reduction of backroom staff by over 200 and still

continuing, the scaling down of the academy, a parachute payment of

£11.25m, decent television income, perimeter advertising of £50,000

per month, recent sponsorship deals etc etc

 

The perimeter advertising and large Sports Direct sign on the stand

are likely to be free advertising for his business.

 

One newspaper also came out with this same figure last week.

 

In the Sunday papers Mr Ashley said that he would not stay where he

was not wanted and would sell in the summer. We think this is why he

is waiting until then.

 

Since relegation Mr Ashley has invested an alleged £20m and that

figure has never been confirmed and the club has reduced its overdraft

without any significant investment in the playing staff.

 

Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership with the

extra revenue that will entail and we will have to wait to see the

actual published accounts but we think that these figures will stand

up to scrutiny.

 

I'll have a go.

 

This looks like it's based on a document from a few months ago when Ashley was trying to sell the club for £95 million. He is pointing out to potential buyers that if they take the club at that price and then get the club promoted, the club would be worth between £150m and £200m - which is probably correct.

 

They then point out the cost-cutting measures that are there to ensure the club is financially stable during the 'promotion season', and conclude that if someone makes the purchase, the return in terms of the increased value of the club is likely to be £84 million IF we are promoted. If we don't get promoted, things are still stable.

 

NUST have taken that figure of £84 million, divided it by 12, and concluded that Ashley is making a profit of £7 million per month. Complete rubbish.

 

What they are not taking into account is that we have not been promoted, and Ashley has already lost £230 million on his own purchase of the club and by clearing the initial £90 million debt.

 

You reckon "a respected company's Investment document that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club" means Ashley? I'm not sure quite what it means, but how could it be Ashley "[raising] investment to buy the Club"?

 

Like the rest of this missive, it sounds suspiciously like nonsense.

[ikri]

Fair play to them on the swift response. Will read it in the morning when I'm less tired to make sense of it.

 

The £7m figure comes from a respected company's Investment document

that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club.

 

The headline figures in summary are for an investment of £95m and the

document states that they would expect "turn the investment of

£95million into a value of between £150million to £205million on

return to the Premiership.The £205m was top end but a 5% return on

investment would equate to over £84m on the predicted turnover.

 

Without going into lots of detail it is based on a £42m reduction in

wages (6months), £14m transfer fees received set against a projected

reduction of ticket revenue based on 34,000 crowds.  We are getting

crowds of 43,000 with the subsequent increase in half year season

tickets. Other reductions include  - outsourcing catering, outsourcing

match programmes, reduction of backroom staff by over 200 and still

continuing, the scaling down of the academy, a parachute payment of

£11.25m, decent television income, perimeter advertising of £50,000

per month, recent sponsorship deals etc etc

 

The perimeter advertising and large Sports Direct sign on the stand

are likely to be free advertising for his business.

 

One newspaper also came out with this same figure last week.

 

In the Sunday papers Mr Ashley said that he would not stay where he

was not wanted and would sell in the summer. We think this is why he

is waiting until then.

 

Since relegation Mr Ashley has invested an alleged £20m and that

figure has never been confirmed and the club has reduced its overdraft

without any significant investment in the playing staff.

 

Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership with the

extra revenue that will entail and we will have to wait to see the

actual published accounts but we think that these figures will stand

up to scrutiny.

 

I'll have a go.

 

This looks like it's based on a document from a few months ago when Ashley was trying to sell the club for £95 million. He is pointing out to potential buyers that if they take the club at that price and then get the club promoted, the club would be worth between £150m and £200m - which is probably correct.

 

They then point out the cost-cutting measures that are there to ensure the club is financially stable during the 'promotion season', and conclude that if someone makes the purchase, the return in terms of the increased value of the club is likely to be £84 million IF we are promoted. If we don't get promoted, things are still stable.

 

NUST have taken that figure of £84 million, divided it by 12, and concluded that Ashley is making a profit of £7 million per month. Complete rubbish.

 

What they are not taking into account is that we have not been promoted, and Ashley has already lost £230 million on his own purchase of the club and by clearing the initial £90 million debt.

 

You reckon "a respected company's Investment document that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club" means Ashley? I'm not sure quite what it means, but how could it be Ashley "[raising] investment to buy the Club"?

 

Like the rest of this missive, it sounds suspiciously like nonsense.

 

I've got a feeling they mean the Profitable Group

[Cronky]

Fair play to them on the swift response. Will read it in the morning when I'm less tired to make sense of it.

 

The £7m figure comes from a respected company's Investment document

that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club.

 

The headline figures in summary are for an investment of £95m and the

document states that they would expect "turn the investment of

£95million into a value of between £150million to £205million on

return to the Premiership.The £205m was top end but a 5% return on

investment would equate to over £84m on the predicted turnover.

 

Without going into lots of detail it is based on a £42m reduction in

wages (6months), £14m transfer fees received set against a projected

reduction of ticket revenue based on 34,000 crowds.  We are getting

crowds of 43,000 with the subsequent increase in half year season

tickets. Other reductions include  - outsourcing catering, outsourcing

match programmes, reduction of backroom staff by over 200 and still

continuing, the scaling down of the academy, a parachute payment of

£11.25m, decent television income, perimeter advertising of £50,000

per month, recent sponsorship deals etc etc

 

The perimeter advertising and large Sports Direct sign on the stand

are likely to be free advertising for his business.

 

One newspaper also came out with this same figure last week.

 

In the Sunday papers Mr Ashley said that he would not stay where he

was not wanted and would sell in the summer. We think this is why he

is waiting until then.

 

Since relegation Mr Ashley has invested an alleged £20m and that

figure has never been confirmed and the club has reduced its overdraft

without any significant investment in the playing staff.

 

Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership with the

extra revenue that will entail and we will have to wait to see the

actual published accounts but we think that these figures will stand

up to scrutiny.

 

I'll have a go.

 

This looks like it's based on a document from a few months ago when Ashley was trying to sell the club for £95 million. He is pointing out to potential buyers that if they take the club at that price and then get the club promoted, the club would be worth between £150m and £200m - which is probably correct.

 

They then point out the cost-cutting measures that are there to ensure the club is financially stable during the 'promotion season', and conclude that if someone makes the purchase, the return in terms of the increased value of the club is likely to be £84 million IF we are promoted. If we don't get promoted, things are still stable.

 

NUST have taken that figure of £84 million, divided it by 12, and concluded that Ashley is making a profit of £7 million per month. Complete rubbish.

 

What they are not taking into account is that we have not been promoted, and Ashley has already lost £230 million on his own purchase of the club and by clearing the initial £90 million debt.

 

You reckon "a respected company's Investment document that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club" means Ashley? I'm not sure quite what it means, but how could it be Ashley "[raising] investment to buy the Club"?

 

Like the rest of this missive, it sounds suspiciously like nonsense.

 

I've got a feeling they mean the Profitable Group

 

I take your point. It's not completely clear whether this was Ashley's view of the potential value of the club, or someone else's.

 

The most significant fact is NUST have used this information to imply that Ashley is currently raking off large monthly profits from the club, which is clearly nonsense. Either they don't understand the information, or have decided to put that particular slant on it. Either way, it's a worry.

[OzzieMandias]

Fair play to them on the swift response. Will read it in the morning when I'm less tired to make sense of it.

 

The £7m figure comes from a respected company's Investment document

that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club.

 

The headline figures in summary are for an investment of £95m and the

document states that they would expect "turn the investment of

£95million into a value of between £150million to £205million on

return to the Premiership.The £205m was top end but a 5% return on

investment would equate to over £84m on the predicted turnover.

 

Without going into lots of detail it is based on a £42m reduction in

wages (6months), £14m transfer fees received set against a projected

reduction of ticket revenue based on 34,000 crowds.  We are getting

crowds of 43,000 with the subsequent increase in half year season

tickets. Other reductions include  - outsourcing catering, outsourcing

match programmes, reduction of backroom staff by over 200 and still

continuing, the scaling down of the academy, a parachute payment of

£11.25m, decent television income, perimeter advertising of £50,000

per month, recent sponsorship deals etc etc

 

The perimeter advertising and large Sports Direct sign on the stand

are likely to be free advertising for his business.

 

One newspaper also came out with this same figure last week.

 

In the Sunday papers Mr Ashley said that he would not stay where he

was not wanted and would sell in the summer. We think this is why he

is waiting until then.

 

Since relegation Mr Ashley has invested an alleged £20m and that

figure has never been confirmed and the club has reduced its overdraft

without any significant investment in the playing staff.

 

Obviously, these figures are on return to the Premiership with the

extra revenue that will entail and we will have to wait to see the

actual published accounts but we think that these figures will stand

up to scrutiny.

 

I'll have a go.

 

This looks like it's based on a document from a few months ago when Ashley was trying to sell the club for £95 million. He is pointing out to potential buyers that if they take the club at that price and then get the club promoted, the club would be worth between £150m and £200m - which is probably correct.

 

They then point out the cost-cutting measures that are there to ensure the club is financially stable during the 'promotion season', and conclude that if someone makes the purchase, the return in terms of the increased value of the club is likely to be £84 million IF we are promoted. If we don't get promoted, things are still stable.

 

NUST have taken that figure of £84 million, divided it by 12, and concluded that Ashley is making a profit of £7 million per month. Complete rubbish.

 

What they are not taking into account is that we have not been promoted, and Ashley has already lost £230 million on his own purchase of the club and by clearing the initial £90 million debt.

 

You reckon "a respected company's Investment document that was used to try to raise investment to buy the Club" means Ashley? I'm not sure quite what it means, but how could it be Ashley "[raising] investment to buy the Club"?

 

Like the rest of this missive, it sounds suspiciously like nonsense.

 

I've got a feeling they mean the Profitable Group

 

I take your point. It's not completely clear whether this was Ashley's view of the potential value of the club, or someone else's.

 

The most significant fact is NUST have used this information to imply that Ashley is currently raking off large monthly profits from the club, which is clearly nonsense. Either they don't understand the information, or have decided to put that particular slant on it. Either way, it's a worry.

 

Exactly. They're either daft or they're liars. And either way they're putting unsubstantiated rumour into a communication to potential investors. Would you trust your pension to these people?