Jump to content

(Long) Breakdown of our recent finances


BottledDog

Recommended Posts

P.P.P.S. I wonder if we will all moan about "not winning things with kids" if we ever reach the model's pinnacle (see Arsenal -Wenger)

can you imagine that? :lol:

 

5 years of steady progress, Pardew turns out to field teams playing Brazil football but lack the ultimate end that a few 10+ million players give you and everyone turns on ashley for that, it'd be mint

 

back to reality how long 'til Spurs fans start?

Link to post
Share on other sites

...we DID NOT go into administration but we DID get relegated. Lets deal in what has happened rather would could but never did.

 

:clap:

 

Everyone plays pseudo accountants when this old chestnut comes up.

 

Large debt can have agreed payment plans that would never bring a company close to administration. It's commonplace in big business. There is absolutely ZERO evidence that the banks didn't have a comfortable agreement with the last regime.

 

Accounts were s***...yeh. Business model flawed...yeh. But this talk of being saved from administration holds no water at all. It just didn't happen. No matter how much people look into the hypothetical future of the time.

 

I'm in no way defending FS's time here, btw.

 

Of course the club didn't go into administration but any sort of analysis of the situation (as it was at that time) reveals some serious issues. You are saying that in the summer of 2007 the club could have scheduled its existing debt to suit the needs of both the banks and the club itself, thats quite possible but its not really the biggest problem. A more pressing factor is how it was going to avoid incurring further debt. A loss of £30m had just been incurred - what collateral had the club got to raise debt to fund that? How was the club going to turn itself from making huge losses into a profit making business that generated positive cash flows and didn't need further debt financing? There is also the fact that the club was technically insolvent as I mentioned above  - unfortunately that situation and its implications won't go away.

 

We do of course have the benefit of hindsight now, and there was nothing hypothetical about the collapse of the financial markets that was just around the corner in 2007. How that might have impacted on the club's already distressed situation is open to debate but there has to be a likelihood that the effect would not have been positive.       

Link to post
Share on other sites

This debate is kinda moot anyway. Without the injection of cash from Ashley the club would have been inslolvent.

 

Am I right in thinking Sir John Hall who sold his shares for £55,342,223 & the Shepherd family who got £37.6million for theres would of let or would been unable to stop Newcastle going inslolvent.

 

I'm not an expert but to me it looked like the credit lines were nearly dried up and the loans/future earnings were already tied up/spent. It was also at a time that player wages were becoming a danger at a fair few clubs. The greed of agents and players has nearly destroyed the game imo.

 

 

been saying this to gimp for the jast 5 years

 

And i have been telling you we need a salary cap across the board.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest neesy111

Corrrect me if im wrong but was ffs planning a 300m development of sjp and the surroudning area before ma arrived

 

The guy who looking after it Steve Walton got the sacked by Ashley & is now SAFC chief exec.

 

No chance that would have happened with the credit crunch and economic recession.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i cant help but feel that the tone is slightly biased in favour of ashley, there's nothing there i didnt already know tbf, apart from exact figures

 

It's more or less just facts and numbers.

 

yep, and there was more in favour of ashley and less in favour of fred

Link to post
Share on other sites

i cant help but feel that the tone is slightly biased in favour of ashley, there's nothing there i didnt already know tbf, apart from exact figures

 

It's more or less just facts and numbers.

 

yep, and there was more in favour of ashley and less in favour of fred

 

Telling, isn't it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i cant help but feel that the tone is slightly biased in favour of ashley, there's nothing there i didnt already know tbf, apart from exact figures

 

It's more or less just facts and numbers.

 

yep, and there was more in favour of ashley and less in favour of fred

 

Telling, isn't it.

 

fucked if i know, they're both cunts

Link to post
Share on other sites

i cant help but feel that the tone is slightly biased in favour of ashley, there's nothing there i didnt already know tbf, apart from exact figures

 

It's more or less just facts and numbers.

 

yep, and there was more in favour of ashley and less in favour of fred

 

Telling, isn't it.

 

f***ed if i know, they're both c***s

 

:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest TheSummerOf69

From the blog:

 

 

 

Severance payments made to departing managers… amount to a staggering £17 million over the last five years

 

In 2003/04... their total revenue was only £2 million lower than Liverpool’s, but the clubs are now separated by almost £100 million. 

:tickedoff:

 

Where Newcastle do score very highly is in gate receipts, thanks to their impressively large and loyal support. Although this has fallen.... this was unbelievably still the tenth highest of the Money League clubs, superior to Milan, Inter, Lyon and Borussia Dortmund among others.

 

The club’s commercial revenue of £19 million might be considered a touch disappointing, especially as it dropped by £7 million in 2009... some might be due to fans boycotting the club’s merchandise as a protest against the unpopular owner.

 

The Halls (Sir John and Douglas) receiving a total of £95 million over the years, while the Shepherds (Freddy and Bruce) had to make do with £55 million.

 

 

 

Signs that Ashley's antics have hit him in the pocket, with falling attendances and reduced commercial revenue, as well as the severance payments and the cost of Wise's signings.

 

The Halls are the real bad guys, though. When we were heading for the third division and really needed help, they gave Keegan no money and he walked out, only to be persuaded back by Terry Mac and keep us up. Then, one brief close season later when KK had spent only about half a million and turned the worst ever Toon team (by final league position) into one that won it's first 11 games and were headed for the riches of the Premier League... then Hall invested, in the team and the stadium, because he could smell the money. All £150 million of it, that they and the Shepherds sucked out and burgered off with. And that's not even counting the huge payments to themselves and their families within the club's 'budget'.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the blog:

 

Severance payments made to departing managers amount to a staggering £17 million over the last five years

 

In 2003/04, the year after Newcastle last reached the Champions League, their total revenue was only £2 million lower than Liverpools, but the clubs are now separated by almost £100 million. 

:tickedoff:

 

Where Newcastle do score very highly is in gate receipts, thanks to their impressively large and loyal support. Although this has fallen from £35 million in 2005 to £29 million in 2009, this was unbelievably still the tenth highest of the Money League clubs, superior to Milan, Inter, Lyon and Borussia Dortmund among others.

 

The clubs commercial revenue of £19 million might be considered a touch disappointing, especially as it dropped by £7 million in 2009, though much of this was because of the decision to outsource the clubs catering operations and some might be due to fans boycotting the clubs merchandise as a protest against the unpopular owner.

 

The Halls (Sir John and Douglas) receiving a total of £95 million over the years, while the Shepherds (Freddy and Bruce) had to make do with £55 million. cenaries on generous long-term contracts.

 

 

-------------------------

 

 

Signs that Ashley's antics have hit him in the pocket, with falling attendances and reduced commercial revenue, as well as the severance payments and the cost of Wise's signings.

 

The Halls are the real bad guys, though. When we were heading for the third division and really needed help, they gave Keegan no money and he walked out, only to be persuaded back by Terry Mac. Then, one brief close season later when KK had spent only about half a million and turned the worst ever Toon team (by final league position) into one that won it's first 11 games and were headed for the riches of the Premier League... then Hall invested, in the team and the stadium, because he could smell the money. All £150 million of it, that they've sucked out and burgered off with.

 

 

That season when we were nearly relegated and KK was promised funds from Hall which didn't appear, it was Halls wife who stumped up the cash.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest TheSummerOf69

 

That season when we were nearly relegated and KK was promised funds from Hall which didn't appear, it was Halls wife who stumped up the cash.

 

 

KK had to pay Terry Mac out of his own pocket didn't he?

That day when Terry persuaded KK back to fight relegation to the 3rd division could have left the Toon's recent history so different if he hadn't been here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reality is, and we all know this. The club would have be a lot worse off then we are now (it could have been like southampton) if Shepard had control of the club much longer then he did.

 

 

"The reality is, and we all know this." errrrrrrrrrr no we dont. Go back to 2007 & you have just herd the news the UK's 25th wealthiest person worth £1.9 billion has taken over NUFC. Did that pan out the way we all thought?

 

 

 

erm, try reading that again it might make more sense the second time, but here a hint just incase you don't get it the second time.

 

IF Shepard had kept control !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Freddie borrowed at 12% interest? That's what we call a 'five years from folding' rate around here. It seems that Shepherd really left us fucked when he left as he had used every single one of the club's assets to finance the spending under Souness. What a total idiot. If he had stayed, there's no doubt in my mind that we would have gone into administration because he was not going to put a dime of his own money into the club. The fact that we still lost twenty something million in Ashley's first year pretty much says it all, as there's no way Shepherd would have been able to roll over the money in that year because we had run out of assets to secure financing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...