Is Mike Ashley the worst person ever to have been associated with NUFC?

[Guest BooBoo]

We're a single injury to Ba away from looking like strugglers though. The squad has no depth in some key areas- strikers and centre back and then of course there's no cover if/when Enrique goes.

[Guest]

We're a single injury to Ba away from looking like strugglers though. The squad has no depth in some key areas- strikers and centre back and then of course there's no cover if/when Enrique goes.

 

If we haven't signed a new striker by September I'd agree but I'd be very surprised if we don't add one more.

[Taylor Swift]

The £6m for Ben Arfa surely has to be deducted from the £35m that we got from Carroll.

[biggs]

Good article from True Faith here

Those of us who tuned in to BBC Radio Newcastle’s interview with Alan Pardew last Monday had our “card marked” about the monies the club was spending strengthening the squad this summer. Following Pardew’s radio interview, Derek Llambias, Mike Ashley’s hard to like Managing Director told us some of the money received from the Carroll deal would be kept back for January in case we needed to spend then too. This is the January transfer window, Alan Pardew tells us has little value in it. All of the monies received from Carroll would stay in the club we were er, “assured”.

Without the benefit of the club’s accounts in front of me, I can, only at best come up with some uneducated guesswork and questions but here goes:

Why is it, the Carroll money is the only money the club has its disposal for virtually everything? Why, for example, is the Carroll money used to pay for under-soil heating at the club’s training ground? Weren’t we previously told Mike Ashley was funding that himself?

 

Why is it, when the new players who have signed for us this season, their wages over the life of their contract is being paid for from the Carroll money? Why are we the only club in the country who seems to operate this way? Why aren’t wages spread over their contract (or until they leave) from the club’s future revenue as is the norm? Why are deals being stacked up this way, when we know there is every chance the players will not see out their contract and will leave before it ends anyway?

 

Why is it when players leave the club and their wages are no longer a liability for us that this is not factored in to the deals the manager can make to bring in new players? For example since January 2011 we have lost several well paid players from the squad (Andy Carroll (£30Kpw), Sol Campbell (£40Kpw) and Kevin Nolan (£40Kpw))? Very roughly that could mean e.£5m pa has been removed from the payroll but the club is paying future salaries from the Carroll money despite the reductions to the payroll from players outgoing.

 

As above, the club is planning to remove further liabilities from the payroll in the form of Alan Smith (£60Kpw), Xisco (£60Kpw), Leon Best (U/K), Nile Ranger (U/K) and the strong likelihood of Jose Enrique (£30Kpw) and Joey Barton (£60Kpw) leaving, why is the club unable to be competitive with its offer of wages to new players, i.e. Daniel Sturridge, Charles N’Zogbia? Removing those players from the payroll could free up a further e.£3m pa from the payroll.

 

What is the club’s expected player salaries to total turnover anticipated to be this financial year?

 

Why did the club use the Carroll money to pay Chiek Tiote’s improved contract? Or has that been incorrectly reported by the press?

 

What is the club’s other revenue (in the form of season tickets, merchandise, TV, sponsorship and corporate) now being used for?

 

How much does the club remain in debt to Mike Ashley?

 

Is the club’s non-Carroll money (season tickets, merchandise, corporate, TV, sponsorship) being used to repay Mike Ashley his loans?

 

Is this financial strategy for the club being deployed to prepare the club for sale?

 

Does the club have a potential purchaser?

 

Or is this financial strategy, namely NO CAPITAL OUTLAY, to be deployed as the club’s standard method for running the business indefinitely?

 

In my opinion, there is far too much of the smoke and mirrors going on at the club right now and whether Ashley-Llambias-Pardew give a damn, the growing mood amongst supporters, in my opinion is one of mistrust towards the hierarchy for what is perceived as being less than 100% honest. As I see it. Declining to be interviewed directly by a supporters publication or anyone else ahead of the April deadline for season ticket renewals removes any claim they could even imagine making of transparency.

 

Its my opinion, Ashley-Llambias probably couldn’t give a toss about what we think of them. Their previously scandalous treatment of club icons Kevin Keegan and Alan Shearer demonstrates that but I do know their manner of running the club is leading to the disillusionment of many long term and loyal supporters, some of whom have decided to end their association with Newcastle United after many years. Some are regretting the purchase of season tickets and feel conned. Some will only be back when Ashley-Llambias-Pardew have gone.

 

Why Alan Pardew is allowing himself to be part of this operation is a subject of some salacious gossip (and nowhere does salacious gossip quite like Tyneside and its environs) and its accuracy remains to be seen but it becomes extremely dangerous for the manager to be seen as part of the “cockney mafia” and a hierarchy, in my opinion, who are viewed as dishonest by a large section of supporters. They will never remove the stain of admitting to lying to the supporters and seem disinterested in doing so. Communications are as lamentable now as they ever have ever been, despite this being previously admitted and a promise made to correct it.

 

But if Pardew indulges in this “marking cards” garbage he is going to find himself in a very cold and lonely place. If he brings a Newcastle United party back from the Village of the Damned in August with nowt to show for the trip, I guess we Geordies might just have tired of his wide boy schmaltz by then. Right now, Pardew is at serious risk of becoming Joe Kinnear with an O Level. Please don’t bullshit us, we‘ve heard it all before!

 

But back to the questions:

 

Will the club avoid selling players at a point in this transfer window when it is impossible to replace them? I have fears about Tiote, Barton and Enrique being flogged in the last few days as per what has happened under Ashley (N‘Zogbia, Given, Carroll).

 

Why have we seemingly been priced out of signing Charles N’Zogbia for a reported £9m fee when we were “supposed” to have bid £10m for him in January? Or was that also incorrectly reported?

 

The club has three recognised centre halves following the departure of Sol Campbell at the end of the season. Is three centre-halves enough? Cover at right-back?

 

Why are we constantly drip-fed stuff about the club that is unremittingly negative regarding our status in the game (e.g. Alan Pardew claiming we can’t compete on wages with Spurs and Liverpool?) given we have the third largest stadium in the country, with the third highest attendances (despite being relegated two seasons ago and being focussed on nothing other than avoiding relegation for the foreseeable future), being a one club city in a regional capital, having an enviable hinterland of potential corporate customers, a recognised European brand and recent history of playing Champions League and UEFA Cup football?

 

Why isn’t the club being marketed to potential investors in according with our status in the game? Other than the PUMA kit deal and Northern Rock sponsorship (which was a renewal of a current deal), what additional revenue have they brought into the club via their commercial operations?

 

Mike Ashley has a reported personal wealth of £1.1bn. He is the fifth wealthiest owner of a football club in the PL. He claims to be a supporter. I don’t know a Newcastle United supporter worthy of the description who would allow the club to continue to be run as if it was on the bones of its arse with that kind of personal wealth at their disposal. Does Mike Ashley have any plans to invest any of his personal money into the club?

 

Why is the club operating to a scope of ambition no greater than Stoke, Bolton, Blackburn, Wigan, Fulham?

 

 

I’ll not hold my breath waiting for answers.

[Guest BooBoo]

Great piece.

[Zero]

Are we entitled to complain that the owner does not put his own money into the club?

[biggs]

Are we entitled to complain that the owner does not put his own money into the club?

Its a free country say what you feel ,some chairman say they do and others use the income the club generates from all the above mentioned in the True Faith article and that is how football works unless you dip into the red like many clubs do but by all accounts we are hardly dipping into the Carroll monies and thats the crux of the matter .

[Zero]

Then there's another question: should we use all the 35m generated immediately? Even if we have to pay over the odds e.g. 10m for Long?

As long as Ashley didn't take away the money (including reducing the loan debt), and the money is still within the club and is ready for use, I really think we can't complain much.

[Guest thenorthumbrian]

Then there's another question: should we use all the 35m generated immediately? Even if we have to pay over the odds e.g. 10m for Long?

As long as Ashley didn't take away the money (including reducing the loan debt), and the money is still within the club and is ready for use, I really think we can't complain much.

 

"We won't get fooled again"

Some people will always be fooled.

 

[biggs]

Then there's another question: should we use all the 35m generated immediately? Even if we have to pay over the odds e.g. 10m for Long?

As long as Ashley didn't take away the money (including reducing the loan debt), and the money is still within the club and is ready for use, I really think we can't complain much.

There is a growing concern by the majority of Toon fans that our owner is not reinvesting that money and just going for the cheap option and wage caps seem to have an effect on this ,imho there has never been a better time to push on but the powers that be seem incabable of grasping this due to there practicall zero football knowledge and how the process works .I do not expect the 35 million to be spunked in one big jizz but i dont like the fact it will get eaten away by agents fees ,salary for the length of the contract etc ,i have never known of this occurance in football before until now .

[OzzieMandias]

Are we entitled to complain that the owner does not put his own money into the club?

 

While in the very same article also having a moan ("How much does the club remain in debt to Mike Ashley?") about the consequences of him already having put in a shitload.

 

[Guest BooBoo]

I think the most pressing question is, why is the Carroll money simply the only money we have?

 

The notion of "money will be kept in the club" is all very good in theory but they should expect unrest when we're fobbed off with shite like it being used to cover wages for the entirety of a 6 year contract or a refurbishment of the training ground.

 

Where is the rest of the club's money? Every time an expense is needed, the Carroll jar gets dipped into. The only way the AC sale being acceptable was if the money was to be spent on some top quality replacements. As fans, none of us are rubbing our hands about tales of money being set aside for contracts. It's simply one excuse after another not to spend on transfer fees.

[Guest Geordiesned]

Then there's another question: should we use all the 35m generated immediately? Even if we have to pay over the odds e.g. 10m for Long?

As long as Ashley didn't take away the money (including reducing the loan debt), and the money is still within the club and is ready for use, I really think we can't complain much.

 

You really believe we can't complain much? I have to say I'm staggered by that kind of viewpoint. Especially if you've just read that excellent TF article which spells out all of my fears.

 

 

[biggs]

Then there's another question: should we use all the 35m generated immediately? Even if we have to pay over the odds e.g. 10m for Long?

As long as Ashley didn't take away the money (including reducing the loan debt), and the money is still within the club and is ready for use, I really think we can't complain much.

I really think you have been brainwashed tbh and if you think what Ashley and co are doing is acceptable you should really start questioning your mentality 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Then there's another question: should we use all the 35m generated immediately? Even if we have to pay over the odds e.g. 10m for Long?

As long as Ashley didn't take away the money (including reducing the loan debt), and the money is still within the club and is ready for use, I really think we can't complain much.

 

I basically agree with you mate, I've said before that it's easy to argue it would be reckless to spend the whole of that money now and not think of future seasons. My whole principle is that it's just some extra income for the club that goes onto the bottom line.

 

Trying to justify the Carroll sale in retrospect by what we do with the money is futile IMO. We accepted the deal because we need money and the fee was too good to turn down. What we then do with the money should be assessed, but not as a way to justify or criticise the sale.

 

Don't expect many people to agree, obviously.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I think the most pressing question is, why is the Carroll money simply the only money we have?

 

The notion of "money will be kept in the club" is all very good in theory but they should expect unrest when we're fobbed off with shite like it being used to cover wages for the entirety of a 6 year contract or a refurbishment of the training ground.

 

Where is the rest of the club's money? Every time an expense is needed, the Carroll jar gets dipped into. The only way the AC sale being acceptable was if the money was to be spent on some top quality replacements. As fans, none of us are rubbing our hands about tales of money being set aside for contracts. It's simply one excuse after another not to spend on transfer fees.

 

Who says it is?

[TBG]

Mike Ashley has a reported personal wealth of £1.1bn

 

Doubt it.

[Guest BooBoo]

Ian- well why are the club not using other sources to fund the basic running costs of the club? Where's the Sky money? The season ticket money? The Premier League prize money?

 

It's all vanished.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Mike Ashley has a reported personal wealth of £1.1bn

 

Doubt it.

 

Even if that figure is correct, most of it will be tied up in what he owns in Sports Direct, his brands like Kangol and his ownership of the club.

 

Money wise, he's hardly looking in the whoopsie ailse in ASDA, but cash would be a small part of his wealth

[oldtype]

Ian- well why are the club not using other sources to fund the basic running costs of the club? Where's the Sky money? The season ticket money? The Premier League prize money?

 

It's all vanished.

 

Where would you theorize this "vanished" money is going? Because if it's into Ashley's back pocket that would be embezzlement.

[biggs]

I think the most pressing question is, why is the Carroll money simply the only money we have?

 

The notion of "money will be kept in the club" is all very good in theory but they should expect unrest when we're fobbed off with s**** like it being used to cover wages for the entirety of a 6 year contract or a refurbishment of the training ground.

 

Where is the rest of the club's money? Every time an expense is needed, the Carroll jar gets dipped into. The only way the AC sale being acceptable was if the money was to be spent on some top quality replacements. As fans, none of us are rubbing our hands about tales of money being set aside for contracts. It's simply one excuse after another not to spend on transfer fees.

 

Who says it is?

They said it would be reinvested in the team and i dont expect all in one go ,the normal revenue for a football club that is used for transfers normall comes from that stream ,no one has said anything about that but its the promise of the Carroll money being spent that is the main point in question .Do you think the Carroll money should cover agents fees and wages etc ?

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Ian- well why are the club not using other sources to fund the basic running costs of the club? Where's the Sky money? The season ticket money? The Premier League prize money?

 

It's all vanished.

 

It hasn't disappeared, it will be in the accounts. The club is making regular losses and has a load of debt. My whole point is that all income covers all outgoings, I don't see any reason to ring-fence the Carroll money like this (except that Pardew unwisely claimed it would be reinvested in the team).

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

Then there's another question: should we use all the 35m generated immediately? Even if we have to pay over the odds e.g. 10m for Long?

As long as Ashley didn't take away the money (including reducing the loan debt), and the money is still within the club and is ready for use, I really think we can't complain much.

I really think you have been brainwashed tbh and if you think what Ashley and co are doing is acceptable you should really start questioning your mentality 

 

What would you do?

[biggs]

Ian- well why are the club not using other sources to fund the basic running costs of the club? Where's the Sky money? The season ticket money? The Premier League prize money?

 

It's all vanished.

 

Where would you theorize this "vanished" money is going? Because if it's into Ashley's back pocket that would be embezzlement.

Im no expert on running a football club but Ashley is the owner ,but he is probably saving it for a rainy day 

[Guest BooBoo]

It also sticks in the throat that we get patronised with guff like "there's no such thing as free transfers"'and "the agent fees were very expensive."