nufc losing £500,000 a week

[Happy Face]

At the end of the day whether or not you like Mike Ashley we need to shut up with the Anti Ashley songs whilst he is funding the running of the club. I would hate us to go into Administration and the longer we are vocally anti Ashley the more likely he is to pull his money and send the club into Admin.

 

I think that's exactly what Elizabeth Fritzl told herself about her dad.

 

"I can't fight him off me, He might put me out on the streets"

[bealios]

Genuine question, all those doubting that Ashley was genuinely prepared to sell the club over the summer, what do you think he was trying to achieve by "pretending" to sell it?

 

 

[Liam Liam Liam O]

At the end of the day whether or not you like Mike Ashley we need to shut up with the Anti Ashley songs whilst he is funding the running of the club. I would hate us to go into Administration and the longer we are vocally anti Ashley the more likely he is to pull his money and send the club into Admin.

 

I think that's exactly what Elizabeth Fritzl told herself about her dad.

 

"I can't fight him off me, He might put me out on the streets"

 

I hadn't realised the "Fat Cockney rapist" banner was supposed to be so literal.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I think the Ashley as Fritzl metaphor is a bit of a long shot.

[quayside]

The high wage bill is partly due to having a number of players who we couldn't shift, and a lot of players without relegation wage reduction clauses in their contracts. Neither of these is really Ashley's fault, all the fact of relegation probably was.

 

Mike Ashley signed the contracts of EVERY player at the club so it's totally his fault.

 

Would be interesting to find out how he would have been treated if he'd shipped out four or five more of our best players to reduce the losses to £10m a season.

 

I suspect the headlines would be 'NUFC losing £250k a week!!!' and also 'Mike Ashley asset stripping c***'.

 

Something along those lines.

 

The headlines should just be "Ashley spouts more bollocks".

 

The papers should report our profit and loss when the accounts are released and only then.  Thecertainly shouldn't run a headline about us losing half a million every week as a statement of fact, when the source is the same people to have admitted in court that misleading fans and the media is what they do.

 

On the other hand, as quayside has already pointed out upthread, whenever they have made a statement about the finances, it has proved, on later examination of the accounts, to be true.

 

Really?

 

Back in 2008 they were contradicting themselves all over the shop.

 

"This club had £100million-worth of debt which has now been cleared"

 

"I then poured another £110 million into the club not to pay off the debt but just to reduce it. The club is still in debt. Even worse than that, the club still owes millions of pounds in transfer fees."

 

"Financially we're very sound. We don't owe a bean as far as the club are concerned"

 

Then the accounts showed United’s debt was £22.6m.

 

Selective choice of quotes there, to make it sound like Ashley claimed he had loaned £210m when he never said any such thing.

 

The facts were that he did stick in £100 million and Llambias said that a further £10 million had been stuck in post June 2008, which should show up in the 2009 accounts, making £110 in total. And the club didn't owe a bean to anyone external at that stage.

 

And the accounts did not show a debt of £22.6m, where did you get that from 

 

Note 14 in the 2008 accounts says the " loan of £100 million from Mr MJW Ashley is unsecured. The loan agreement is that interest can be charged at a rate of LIBOR + 0.5%, however no interest has been charged in the year to 30 June 2008."

 

I never intended that to come across as " he said £210m".

 

The first quote said £100m had cleared all the debt.

 

The second unrelated quote said £110m hadn't been enough to clear the debt.

 

Two contradicting stories that show, on finances, like everything else, they make it up as they go along.

 

The £22.6m figure came from this report on the accounts...

 

http://www.journallive.co.uk/north-east-news/todays-news/2009/01/23/newcastle-united-club-accounts-reveal-state-of-play-61634-22758691/

 

So it hasn't occurred to you that a business making losses needs funding as it goes along. The £100 million did clear the external debt at that time but as the club lost more money further funds were needed to bale it out.

 

And the article quite clearly states that the figure of £22.6m is the net current liabilities. Ashley's loan does not form part of that figure because he was not going to call it in within a period of 12 months.

 

I fully understand that not everyone understands this stuff but drawing sweeping conclusions based on minimal knowledge is a shyte idea tbh.

 

I appreciate that and I'm grateful to people like you who point out mistakes of a lay person like me.  But wouldn't you agree the claim that we were debt free in May 2008 was a season ticket pushing distortion of the facts at best, just on the basis of the outstanding transfer liabilities they knew existed and later used as evidence of crushing debt?

 

Again it's a case of derfinitions. Generally when you talk about a company's debt you are referring to its major external long term funding. The day to day liabilities that are incurred on running the business aren't included. Everyone knew Ashley paid off the external debt, it was in the 2007 accounts and widely reported in the press. He had to pay most of it off because there was a change of ownership clause in the loan agreements and not having done any due diligence he was unaware of this when he bought the club.

 

The statement you refer to is clearly aimed at making the point that the club was not in the hands of external lenders who could foreclose. And if it's true (as is widely rumoured) that he was prepared to sell the club and write that debt off then the statement has  even wider implications.

 

Well I don't buy that either.

 

The way I see it he's talking to papers sold to non-accountants like me.  When he says...

 

"The debt has now been cleared" it translates to "Go and buy season tickets, it'll all get spent on players"

 

and then 4 months later when he says he didn't really.....

 

"pay off the debt, just reduced it."  it translates to "I can't afford to buy any players, I've saved the club"

 

The cycle of promises and execuses repeats consistently around transfer window time.

 

In December he was all about putting in a bit of money having stabilised the club, supporting Hughton and ensuring promotion, but now he's losing £2m every month and we're the next Portsmouth.

 

I think that you have a tendency to reach dramatic conclusions from very little.

 

I won’t deny that Ashley puts a spin on the finances but when he says he’s put money in the evidence to date is that it’s the truth. And I know full well what his track record is like when it comes to what he’s said on other matters.

 

I really can’t get my head round your last sentence. As I see it he tried to do all of those things - and surely the very point is that we aren’t the next Portsmouth, because unlike them we don’t have an owner who has walked away.

 

[Happy Face]

Genuine question, all those doubting that Ashley was genuinely prepared to sell the club over the summer, what do you think he was trying to achieve by "pretending" to sell it?

 

No more Hull scenes.

[Stu]

[Matt]

At the end of the day whether or not you like Mike Ashley we need to shut up with the Anti Ashley songs whilst he is funding the running of the club. I would hate us to go into Administration and the longer we are vocally anti Ashley the more likely he is to pull his money and send the club into Admin.

 

Don't be daft. Are you suggesting that Ashley will try to recover the money he lent to a company he wholly owns by appointing an independent specialist to run it?

 

Remember you get LESS money back in administration through a CVA, you just get your money at long last. As long as Ashley is both owner and creditor administration is simply not going to happen, it would be totally nonsensical.

[Mick]

This thread just proves the lengths some people will go to slag off Ashley.  I doubt that we have ever had more personal wealth invested in the club, even after taking inflation into account. 

[bealios]

 

I think everyone's entitled to slag off Ashley for the series of misguided and disastrous football and personnel decisions he has made since taking over, but as soon as those people start attacking the financial aspects it tends to dilute a previously perfectly valid point about his crapness at football decisions.

 

The latest published accounts contained a statement from independent auditors (who cannot by law be another PR voice for Ashley) that NUFC were not a valid going concern, and they could only give the required statement of solvency whilst he continued to guarantee investment of funds. That was whilst we were in the Premier League. That enough should be enough to quieten any debate about whether he is somehow profiting from NUFC, so we can all focus on how crap his previous decisions have been (and whether they are starting to improve...)

 

 

[Happy Face]

For the record, I've never slagged off the finance Ashley has put in the club.

 

Just his "public relations".

[Stu]

For the record, I've never slagged off the finance Ashley has put in the club.

 

Just his "public relations".

 

If that's the case, then perhaps adopting a different approach to the finance-related threads would stop people (like myself) getting the impression that you are questioning "the finance Ashley has put in the club"

[Happy Face]

For the record, I've never slagged off the finance Ashley has put in the club.

 

Just his "public relations".

 

If that's the case, then perhaps adopting a different approach to the finance-related threads would stop people (like myself) getting the impression that you are questioning "the finance Ashley has put in the club"

 

I thought this was a 'club source says' thread.  Nowt to do with reality.

[Guest Pie]

If Freddie had managed the club better then he wouldnt have had to sell. Only one person to blame for the meltdown. His choice to employ Souness and spunk tens of millions.

[Stu]

For the record, I've never slagged off the finance Ashley has put in the club.

 

Just his "public relations".

 

If that's the case, then perhaps adopting a different approach to the finance-related threads would stop people (like myself) getting the impression that you are questioning "the finance Ashley has put in the club"

 

I thought this was a 'club source says' thread.  Nowt to do with reality.

 

As LLLO said earlier, article looks to be a re-hash of the December story.

[madras]

If Freddie had managed the club better then he wouldnt have had to sell. Only one person to blame for the meltdown. His choice to employ Souness and spunk tens of millions.

there is no "one person" to blame for this. fred and ashley bare more responsibility than most though.

[Heron]

I'd love to know how much the fans have actually spent in terms of Merchandise, 3 and one year season tickets, beer and pies, etc and on the day ticket sales. I bet in a season that covers about 20million.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

I'd love to know how much the fans have actually spent in terms of Merchandise, 3 and one year season tickets, beer and pies, etc and on the day ticket sales. I bet in a season that covers about 20million.

 

It's all in the accounts & isn't enough to cover the costs evidently.

[Heron]

I'd love to know how much the fans have actually spent in terms of Merchandise, 3 and one year season tickets, beer and pies, etc and on the day ticket sales. I bet in a season that covers about 20million.

 

It's all in the accounts & isn't enough to cover the costs evidently.

 

I didn't say it would cover the costs...

 

I don't know how all this finance malarkey works either. Was merely, stating.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

I'd love to know how much the fans have actually spent in terms of Merchandise, 3 and one year season tickets, beer and pies, etc and on the day ticket sales. I bet in a season that covers about 20million.

 

It's all in the accounts & isn't enough to cover the costs evidently.

 

I didn't say it would cover the costs...

 

I don't know how all this finance malarkey works either. Was merely, stating.

 

 

From the May 2008 accounts..........

 

http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/9607/turnover.jpg

 

The 2009 figures will be available from the end of March so i'll post them then.  Obviously for this season we'll have to wait until March 2011.

[Heron]

I'd love to know how much the fans have actually spent in terms of Merchandise, 3 and one year season tickets, beer and pies, etc and on the day ticket sales. I bet in a season that covers about 20million.

 

It's all in the accounts & isn't enough to cover the costs evidently.

 

I didn't say it would cover the costs...

 

I don't know how all this finance malarkey works either. Was merely, stating.

 

 

From the May 2008 accounts..........

 

http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/9607/turnover.jpg

 

The 2009 figures will be available from the end of March so i'll post them then.  Obviously for this season we'll have to wait until March 2011.

 

Cheers, scary money that...I wonder how much goes out...

 

What do you reckon that is this year? About £75m?

[Liam Liam Liam O]

I'd love to know how much the fans have actually spent in terms of Merchandise, 3 and one year season tickets, beer and pies, etc and on the day ticket sales. I bet in a season that covers about 20million.

 

It's all in the accounts & isn't enough to cover the costs evidently.

 

I didn't say it would cover the costs...

 

I don't know how all this finance malarkey works either. Was merely, stating.

 

 

From the May 2008 accounts..........

 

http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/9607/turnover.jpg

 

The 2009 figures will be available from the end of March so i'll post them then. Obviously for this season we'll have to wait until March 2011.

 

Cheers, scary money that...I wonder how much goes out...

 

What do you reckon that is this year? About £75m?

 

Current season? I'd guess around £60m, would be a guess though. 2007 was only £87m in the Premier Leagu after all. The media revenue & lack of corporate tickets being filled will take a massive hit, offset in part by the parachute payment.

[Heron]

I'd love to know how much the fans have actually spent in terms of Merchandise, 3 and one year season tickets, beer and pies, etc and on the day ticket sales. I bet in a season that covers about 20million.

 

It's all in the accounts & isn't enough to cover the costs evidently.

 

I didn't say it would cover the costs...

 

I don't know how all this finance malarkey works either. Was merely, stating.

 

 

From the May 2008 accounts..........

 

http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/9607/turnover.jpg

 

The 2009 figures will be available from the end of March so i'll post them then.  Obviously for this season we'll have to wait until March 2011.

 

Cheers, scary money that...I wonder how much goes out...

 

What do you reckon that is this year? About £75m?

 

Current season?  I'd guess around £60m, would be a guess though.  2007 was only £87m in the Premier Leagu after all.  The media revenue & lack of corporate tickets being filled will take a massive hit, offset in part by the parachute payment.

 

Aye, it'll be interesting to see like. We will have made a loss no doubt but it's partly their fault anyway so they can fuck off.

[GuyP]

I'd love to know how much the fans have actually spent in terms of Merchandise, 3 and one year season tickets, beer and pies, etc and on the day ticket sales. I bet in a season that covers about 20million.

 

It's all in the accounts & isn't enough to cover the costs evidently.

 

I didn't say it would cover the costs...

 

I don't know how all this finance malarkey works either. Was merely, stating.

 

 

From the May 2008 accounts..........

 

http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/9607/turnover.jpg

 

The 2009 figures will be available from the end of March so i'll post them then.  Obviously for this season we'll have to wait until March 2011.

 

Cheers, scary money that...I wonder how much goes out...

 

What do you reckon that is this year? About £75m?

 

Current season?  I'd guess around £60m, would be a guess though.  2007 was only £87m in the Premier Leagu after all.  The media revenue & lack of corporate tickets being filled will take a massive hit, offset in part by the parachute payment.

 

the tv money is the one thatll be hit hardest like

[timnufc22]

most of the decisions have come from a need to change and not through malice. Bad choices are not necessarly wicked choices.

 

I cant understand how you can put decisions such as letting Dennis Wise tell the manager to look on YouTube at this 'great player' when Wise has never seem him play and he's leading the manager down the garden path in order to satisfy some agents, into the context you've just said above. The same goes for a lot of other things such as the stadium name change.

 

Its obviously not malice I know in terms of "I'm gonna show everyone Im a b******!", but its total ignorance to put it lightly, and seemingly putting his mates/ego first ahead of the club. I dont wanna get into a pointless argument, I understand that on the financial side in that any fan should obviously be happy he has the money to finance the club, because I as a fan think that; at least he's got the money and we havent got someone financially crippling the club with huge loans, I fully undertsand that. But that dosent mean he hasnt screwed the club over in other ways with his disgraceful decisions, which continued up until only October last year, which is why anger towards him (with prespective in mind also) is blatently understandable.