We always back our managers at Newcastle....

[macbeth]

 

Blah blah blah

 

 

You spend far more time working on financial posts than football related posts. 

 

You really reckon something like £2m per season on players would make a difference, do you?

 

In any case, there's no limits to the misrepresentation you come up with in response to your frankly pathetic jealousy of people who are more successful than you are.  You're a sad bloke. You really have a chip about people who are better off than you are, don't you mate?

 

Sorry I will argue this one always, in the saddest and pettiest way.

 

The club giving away £35m is wrong. How can do you justify that figure. Board run the business to lose £23m and then give away £35m. The first figure is form incompetence, the second from pure greed.

 

I have no issue with those better off than myself. I will admit to being bitter and twisted that my football team has been bled dry by its owners. If it was Douglas Hall or Mother Theresa doing ti I woudl be equally annoyed.

 

The £2m per season that you mention is actually £4m. It only seems a small amount cos you have divided the £35m by 9. If the money had not been given away where woudl it be. It may have been spent on the way along, or it may all be sitting in the bank, ready to give £20 to Roeder in January, or maybe it could have been used to pay off the debt on the ground? Again, I fail to see how anyone can say it has benefit NUFC to take none of those options and instead just give it away.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

 

Blah blah blah

 

 

You spend far more time working on financial posts than football related posts. 

 

You really reckon something like £2m per season on players would make a difference, do you?

 

In any case, there's no limits to the misrepresentation you come up with in response to your frankly pathetic jealousy of people who are more successful than you are.  You're a sad bloke. You really have a chip about people who are better off than you are, don't you mate?

 

Sorry I will argue this one always, in the saddest and pettiest way.

 

The club giving away £35m is wrong. How can do you justify that figure. Board run the business to lose £23m and then give away £35m. The first figure is form incompetence, the second from pure greed.

 

I have no issue with those better off than myself. I will admit to being bitter and twisted that my football team has been bled dry by its owners. If it was Douglas Hall or Mother Theresa doing ti I woudl be equally annoyed.

 

The £2m per season that you mention is actually £4m. It only seems a small amount cos you have divided the £35m by 9. If the money had not been given away where woudl it be. It may have been spent on the way along, or it may all be sitting in the bank, ready to give £20 to Roeder in January, or maybe it could have been used to pay off the debt on the ground? Again, I fail to see how anyone can say it has benefit NUFC to take none of those options and instead just give it away.

 

 

 

PLC's give dividends.

 

How much money has been made available to successive managers during the period the club has been giving dividends?

 

Thanks in advance

[macbeth]

There may be people out there with a better handle on how to run a typical business, but football is different. I don't think you understand that, mate.

 

You will not find many businessmen who won't try and claim their business is "unique". I do understand it is different. I think that you have been dazzled by the whole razzamatazz and see it as different when it isn't really. There is still, for example, a need to plan your business, to select key personnel, to make sure, over the long term, you spend what you earn.

 

Even if a new Board were prepared to back a manager as much as the current Board, it would still all rest on their ability to select the right manager. The fact some other group may not hand out dividends, may try to run the club more in line with your idea of how a business should operate does not mean they will have the ability to select the right manager.

 

But the current board have paid out huge dividends AND haven't selected the right manager. If the key decision is getting the right manager, and you view is that that is all hat matters, thean at all times they should be concentrating solely on having that key individual in place. Regardless of the merits of their appointments it could be argued that the timing and the recruitment process of these key individuals has been seriously flawed. It would seem on your key criteria that "they don't know what they're doing".

 

 

[James]

NE5, and HTL why do yo always spout garbage? Are you saying that 17th in the league is good enough? - it is not, and there is only one person to blame - Shepherd. Any suggestion otherwise is bullshit.

[macbeth]

 

Blah blah blah

 

 

You spend far more time working on financial posts than football related posts. 

 

You really reckon something like £2m per season on players would make a difference, do you?

 

In any case, there's no limits to the misrepresentation you come up with in response to your frankly pathetic jealousy of people who are more successful than you are.  You're a sad bloke. You really have a chip about people who are better off than you are, don't you mate?

 

Sorry I will argue this one always, in the saddest and pettiest way.

 

The club giving away £35m is wrong. How can do you justify that figure. Board run the business to lose £23m and then give away £35m. The first figure is form incompetence, the second from pure greed.

 

I have no issue with those better off than myself. I will admit to being bitter and twisted that my football team has been bled dry by its owners. If it was Douglas Hall or Mother Theresa doing ti I woudl be equally annoyed.

 

The £2m per season that you mention is actually £4m. It only seems a small amount cos you have divided the £35m by 9. If the money had not been given away where woudl it be. It may have been spent on the way along, or it may all be sitting in the bank, ready to give £20 to Roeder in January, or maybe it could have been used to pay off the debt on the ground? Again, I fail to see how anyone can say it has benefit NUFC to take none of those options and instead just give it away.

 

 

 

PLC's give dividends.

 

How much money has been made available to successive managers during the period the club has been giving dividends?

 

Thanks in advance

 

PLCs don't give dividends at the level NUFC have done. Paying out at ~6% when the likes of Tesco only pay 2% highlights that.

 

The amount of monay paid out on players has no connection to the amount paid in dividends. Why link the two ?

 

Instead link the amount paid out in divdiends to the amount paid in interest on the ground development. The club could be sitting with no debt on the ground, no interest to pay for the next 10 years. What a superb position to be in. No, instead we'll pay £4.5m per year in interest. You prefer the club to be in debt, and the shareholders to have the money. This woudl have made no difference at all to the amount paid out on players, but would have made the whole club more safe financially.

 

If disaster struck and we were relegated the first call on the club money is he mortgage. The board could have removed that threat, but instead invested the money in pension funds for Hall & Shepherd.

 

 

 

 

[Guest TampaToon]

Even more tripe highlighted for you in bold. As I said, there has never been any suggestion that Fred funds the club from his own pocket. None at all.  You're clearly not in a position to be aware of that fact, christ knows where you're getting this load of shite from.

 

where am i getting it from? hmmm...

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,293-2440656,00.html

“I’ve made mistakes but so has everyone in football,” he said. “Probably the biggest criticism is that I’ve been too kind to managers with funds and too generous to players. But when you are in Newcastle, you are competing with Tottenham Hotspur, Chelsea, Manchester United and we are 300 miles from London.

 

“To get them (players) up here we have certain things against us. I’ve been accused of many things but I can’t be accused of not providing for the manager or giving players great wages. Yes, there have been mistakes, but regardless of what people say I have only ever dismissed two managers.

 

translation: "look at me, i'm such a nice guy, i've sacrificed so much for the club - if anything i'm too giving."

 

http://www.icnewcastle.co.uk/ (Oct 24, can't find article link)

This led Sir John to add: "Since the Halls and the Shepherds took over the club we have spent over £200m on players as well as making St James' Park into one of the best stadia in Europe, so none of our managers can say that we have not backed them.

 

translation - "look at us, we're such nice guys, we've sacrificed so much for the club - nevermind where the money came from...."

 

that was a 30 second google search - 2 articles out of 3 with quotes from shepherd hall has them tooting their horn about how much they've "spent" on the club.  they made their money long ago, and have been diverting operational profit and spending money in NUFC's name at no personal risk almost from the start.  this year's losses are being funded by debt, not by the halls or shepherds.

 

there's constant spin that's aimed at getting the public to confuse the club's finances with the shepherd\hall finances, with the buried argument being that they should be accountable to nobody for the financial or competitive state of the club, and every dollar spent is a favor to the fans, so if we don't like it, piss off

[Kitman]

Even more tripe highlighted for you in bold. As I said, there has never been any suggestion that Fred funds the club from his own pocket. None at all.  You're clearly not in a position to be aware of that fact, christ knows where you're getting this load of shite from.

 

Maybe this load of shite came from Shepherd himself?

 

"I can only do my best here with the tools I've got, which in my opinion are more than enough to get this football club into Europe every season and something we now expect.

 

Yes, there are always going to be setbacks. But if there is somebody out there who can do better than me and who would be willing to invest millions into the club, then fine.

 

Every penny I have had from this club I have reinvested back into the club. I have never sold a single share since I came to the club and the money I have had has been reinvested in the way of buying shares.

 

When people say that I have taken money out of the club, all I have done is to put the money back in by buying shares. Nobody can accuse me of taking money out of this football club and not reinvesting it."

 

Source:  http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcastleunited/news/tm_headline=freddy-shepherd--q-a---part-2%26method=full%26objectid=15508740%26page=2%26siteid=50081-name_page.html

[macbeth]

but you shouldn't belive everything you read in the Chronicle

[NE5]

Same message to Macbeth, people may be disenchanted with Fred due to his errors, but try telling some long standing supporters that the current Board is no better than the Board of the 60's, 70 and 80's.........a type of Board we could easily return to if the current one moved out.

 

I have NEVER said that the board from the 60s, 70s or 80s was good. I wouldn't try and play the "I was there" card the way NE5 does, but I was nonetheless. (Although no that much in the 60s, I'm not THAT old  :winking:)

 

In that case, why do you insist they are "the same as the current board"

 

Thank you for admitting you know jack shit and have been arguing that you do.

 

]

[NE5]

the relative success & ambition of the board can be debated endlessly, as the standards change wildly  from era to era or fan to fan....

 

but the point of this thread is that some (including oliver, the halls, and the fat man himself) seem to propogate this idea that FFS is putting money into the club:

a) out of his own pocket, rather than out of the clubs income\retained earnings

b) out of the kindness of his heart, rather than to keep the money machine going and nominally fulfilling his fiduciary obligation to the fans.

 

I don't see anyone saying that, and anyone who thinks such rubbish is an idiot.

 

 

 

[NE5]

wow. thanks a lot for that response macbeth.  much appreciated.

 

I hope you are taking the piss...and it would be deservedly so, if you are, for a complete load of crap from someone who understands nothing about football..

 

 

[NE5]

 

Blah blah blah

 

 

You spend far more time working on financial posts than football related posts. 

 

You really reckon something like £2m per season on players would make a difference, do you?

 

In any case, there's no limits to the misrepresentation you come up with in response to your frankly pathetic jealousy of people who are more successful than you are.  You're a sad bloke. You really have a chip about people who are better off than you are, don't you mate?

 

Sorry I will argue this one always, in the saddest and pettiest way.

 

The club giving away £35m is wrong. How can do you justify that figure. Board run the business to lose £23m and then give away £35m. The first figure is form incompetence, the second from pure greed.

 

I have no issue with those better off than myself. I will admit to being bitter and twisted that my football team has been bled dry by its owners. If it was Douglas Hall or Mother Theresa doing ti I woudl be equally annoyed.

 

The £2m per season that you mention is actually £4m. It only seems a small amount cos you have divided the £35m by 9. If the money had not been given away where woudl it be. It may have been spent on the way along, or it may all be sitting in the bank, ready to give £20 to Roeder in January, or maybe it could have been used to pay off the debt on the ground? Again, I fail to see how anyone can say it has benefit NUFC to take none of those options and instead just give it away.

 

 

4m ?

 

Do you think a PLC give no dividends ?

 

If they gave half what they do, then the money "lost" to the club is between 1.5 and 2m quid on average. You think that will make the difference between us challenging Chelsea and Manu   :lol: What a load of bollocks you talk. Your agenda gets funnier all the time. All our managers have been bankrolled with more than enough money to have won the League Cup at least.

 

You haven't a clue about football. Not a clue.

 

as I have said, there are plenty of impressionable people that will believe your crap if you look for them, and join your crusade.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

There may be people out there with a better handle on how to run a typical business, but football is different. I don't think you understand that, mate.

 

You will not find many businessmen who won't try and claim their business is "unique". I do understand it is different. I think that you have been dazzled by the whole razzamatazz and see it as different when it isn't really. There is still, for example, a need to plan your business, to select key personnel, to make sure, over the long term, you spend what you earn.

 

Even if a new Board were prepared to back a manager as much as the current Board, it would still all rest on their ability to select the right manager. The fact some other group may not hand out dividends, may try to run the club more in line with your idea of how a business should operate does not mean they will have the ability to select the right manager.

 

But the current board have paid out huge dividends AND haven't selected the right manager. If the key decision is getting the right manager, and you view is that that is all hat matters, thean at all times they should be concentrating solely on having that key individual in place. Regardless of the merits of their appointments it could be argued that the timing and the recruitment process of these key individuals has been seriously flawed. It would seem on your key criteria that "they don't know what they're doing".

 

 

 

You can argue that the timing of changing managers has been flawed, but you'd be wrong. It's football and it IS different. I really don't think you understand it, hence your attempted point about changing managers. Other people use the same stick with which to beat the Board, highlighting the departure of Souness yet they never complain about Gullit leaving. Why is that, do you think?

[peasepud]

 

Blah blah blah

 

 

You spend far more time working on financial posts than football related posts. 

 

You really reckon something like £2m per season on players would make a difference, do you?

In any case, there's no limits to the misrepresentation you come up with in response to your frankly pathetic jealousy of people who are more successful than you are.  You're a sad bloke. You really have a chip about people who are better off than you are, don't you mate?

 

Sorry I will argue this one always, in the saddest and pettiest way.

 

The club giving away £35m is wrong. How can do you justify that figure. Board run the business to lose £23m and then give away £35m. The first figure is form incompetence, the second from pure greed.

 

I have no issue with those better off than myself. I will admit to being bitter and twisted that my football team has been bled dry by its owners. If it was Douglas Hall or Mother Theresa doing ti I woudl be equally annoyed.

 

The £2m per season that you mention is actually £4m. It only seems a small amount cos you have divided the £35m by 9. If the money had not been given away where woudl it be. It may have been spent on the way along, or it may all be sitting in the bank, ready to give £20 to Roeder in January, or maybe it could have been used to pay off the debt on the ground? Again, I fail to see how anyone can say it has benefit NUFC to take none of those options and instead just give it away.

 

 

4m ?

 

Do you think a PLC give no dividends ?

 

If they gave half what they do, then the money "lost" to the club is between 1.5 and 2m quid on average. You think that will make the difference between us challenging Chelsea and Manu   :lol: What a load of bollocks you talk. Your agenda gets funnier all the time. All our managers have been bankrolled with more than enough money to have won the League Cup at least.

 

You haven't a clue about football. Not a clue.

 

as I have said, there are plenty of impressionable people that will believe your crap if you look for them, and join your crusade.

 

 

 

Just once, maybe one little time it would be nice to see you come back with a "fair point guv" or "ok, I'll give you that but what about this?" however you never do, all people get from you is abuse and the same old bollocks. Tracking back through this thread and many like it you can see the same format ie go with a debate and once anyone says anything to overturn your side of things then move it along to "you know nowt about football" or "you're just a keegan gloryhunter".

 

Take digs at Macbeth because you reckon he knows nowt about the game and only posts financial stuff all you like at the end of the day, what he says makes sense. You attempt to override it and create a smokescreen by blindly backing everything this board have done and then resorting to the "at least they're better than the old lot" when things get a little hot.

 

What Macbeth is saying is simple really, it doesnt take any kind of genius to understand, most right thinking fans and people on the street would be questioning it if the information was made more public. To pay out dividends of 6% on a company thats making a loss is ludicrous, madness, mental and totally without any logic. For you to then defend that and say the £2million it equates to each year is nothing and wouldnt have helped in any way is, at best the ramblings of a madman.

 

£2million  per year off the debt would have put us in a far better position financially than the money going into Freds and Doggies pockets that much I do know. You've made this same point a hundred times in other threads, to be a chairman of a football club you dont need to know about football, you need a business head on you, one that makes sound financial decisions. We dont have that, you dont see it. You are blinded by the fact the current board are better than the old one. Well whooopeee doo, using that same logic no player will ever come to NUFC and be a success in the number 9 shirt because "hes not as good as that Shearer was" or for that matter anyone we put at RB must be the greatest thing ever and no matter what he does "hes not as shite as that Carr bloke" so lets stick with him.

 

And you can call me impressionable all you like for reading the facts available and siding with Macbeth but Id far rather be impressionable than blinded by some strange sense of loyalty to a bloke whos ripped the piss out of me for years.

 

Oh and if you want to equate that £2million per year and not spend it on players (after all that wouldnt help us compete with Chelski or ManUre would it?  :roll:) then it works out at  £40 per season ticket holder or maybe a free shirt each and every year, still it wouldnt have bought you a new car would it so who cares?

[macbeth]

Same message to Macbeth, people may be disenchanted with Fred due to his errors, but try telling some long standing supporters that the current Board is no better than the Board of the 60's, 70 and 80's.........a type of Board we could easily return to if the current one moved out.

 

I have NEVER said that the board from the 60s, 70s or 80s was good. I wouldn't try and play the "I was there" card the way NE5 does, but I was nonetheless. (Although no that much in the 60s, I'm not THAT old  :winking:)

 

In that case, why do you insist they are "the same as the current board"

 

Thank you for admitting you know jack shit and have been arguing that you do.

 

]

 

where do I insist they are the same as the current board. You may have made that one up and then converted into a FACT in you own head, but you will never find me defending the indefensible. I leave that to you

[macbeth]

 

Blah blah blah

 

 

You spend far more time working on financial posts than football related posts. 

 

You really reckon something like £2m per season on players would make a difference, do you?

 

In any case, there's no limits to the misrepresentation you come up with in response to your frankly pathetic jealousy of people who are more successful than you are.  You're a sad bloke. You really have a chip about people who are better off than you are, don't you mate?

 

Sorry I will argue this one always, in the saddest and pettiest way.

 

The club giving away £35m is wrong. How can do you justify that figure. Board run the business to lose £23m and then give away £35m. The first figure is form incompetence, the second from pure greed.

 

I have no issue with those better off than myself. I will admit to being bitter and twisted that my football team has been bled dry by its owners. If it was Douglas Hall or Mother Theresa doing ti I woudl be equally annoyed.

 

The £2m per season that you mention is actually £4m. It only seems a small amount cos you have divided the £35m by 9. If the money had not been given away where woudl it be. It may have been spent on the way along, or it may all be sitting in the bank, ready to give £20 to Roeder in January, or maybe it could have been used to pay off the debt on the ground? Again, I fail to see how anyone can say it has benefit NUFC to take none of those options and instead just give it away.

 

 

4m ?

 

Do you think a PLC give no dividends ?

 

If they gave half what they do, then the money "lost" to the club is between 1.5 and 2m quid on average. You think that will make the difference between us challenging Chelsea and Manu   :lol: What a load of bollocks you talk. Your agenda gets funnier all the time. All our managers have been bankrolled with more than enough money to have won the League Cup at least.

 

You haven't a clue about football. Not a clue.

 

as I have said, there are plenty of impressionable people that will believe your crap if you look for them, and join your crusade.

 

 

 

 

Why give a dividend at all?

 

If a business loses £23m why should there be any dividend. Dividends are a share of profits to investors, not a God given right. The loss-making business that is NUFC has given away £35m. You are happy that this is correct, many people feel it wrong.

 

 

Why do you think there has been no dividend at all this year ? And is it correct to have no dividned this time ?

[macbeth]

 

 

You can argue that the timing of changing managers has been flawed, but you'd be wrong. It's football and it IS different. I really don't think you understand it, hence your attempted point about changing managers. Other people use the same stick with which to beat the Board, highlighting the departure of Souness yet they never complain about Gullit leaving. Why is that, do you think?

 

I tried to avoid judging the managers.

 

The whole recruitment process, of the individual to be manager, your key appointment, has been flawed. Regardless of who has been appointed.

[Cronky]

The proper comparison to make isn't between the current situation and how things were pre-1992. It's between the current situation and where we ought to be if the club was run properly.

[James]

Where is the evidence from RIGHT NOW that the club is being run properly?

 

All I see is 17th place in the league.

 

How would you explain the Shepherd warehouse scam. Putting the fans money into his own family coffers there.

[UV]

Why give a dividend at all?

 

When people invest in stocks and shares it's a risk investment. They expect to get a higher rate of return on their money than sticking it in the bank where it would be safe. A football club is not like other businesses which can easily expand and diversify therefore the oportunity for share price growth is more limited. (Unless you want us to open a chain of hotels, casinos or supermarkets which would eventually become far more profitable than a football club and make the NUFC part of the business irrelevant). The dividends given out are at or below the rate of inflation (% of the club value).

 

If a business loses £23m why should there be any dividend. Dividends are a share of profits to investors, not a God given right. The loss-making business that is NUFC has given away £35m. You are happy that this is correct, many people feel it wrong.

 

The losses you refer to are directly due to the amount spent on transfer fees and wages in a period where we have made extraordinary expenditure in transfer fees due to the need to replace our main striker with a quality replacement and then to repair the team after the wastefulness and incompetence of the previous manager, and also having to cover for incredible bad luck with injuries to Owen. This is also in a year when we were not in European competition, sot the profits were hit there.

 

When losses are made it is because money is being reinvested back into the business. If a company acquires a smaller business it will affect its profits and may even make a loss for the financial year. As a shareholder would you expect to not receive a dividend because of this extraordinary expenditure?

 

So relating back to the original question, the board obviously does back its managers. Too much for your liking it would seem. Perhaps you would be happier if the board gave less money to the manager for transfers, say only £5m a year on average instead of £10m? That’s £50m over 10 years. You seem to think that the amount of transfer money spent doesn’t affect team performance, so the income would be the same and the profits would be healthy. The board could give even bigger dividends and you’d be happy because the club was making a profit.

 

 

 

NOONE believes the board are currently sinking their own money from outside the business into the club, and anyone who says others think this are being incredibly condescending towards their fellow supporters to say that they do.

[NE5]

 

Blah blah blah

 

 

You spend far more time working on financial posts than football related posts. 

 

You really reckon something like £2m per season on players would make a difference, do you?

In any case, there's no limits to the misrepresentation you come up with in response to your frankly pathetic jealousy of people who are more successful than you are.  You're a sad bloke. You really have a chip about people who are better off than you are, don't you mate?

 

Sorry I will argue this one always, in the saddest and pettiest way.

 

The club giving away £35m is wrong. How can do you justify that figure. Board run the business to lose £23m and then give away £35m. The first figure is form incompetence, the second from pure greed.

 

I have no issue with those better off than myself. I will admit to being bitter and twisted that my football team has been bled dry by its owners. If it was Douglas Hall or Mother Theresa doing ti I woudl be equally annoyed.

 

The £2m per season that you mention is actually £4m. It only seems a small amount cos you have divided the £35m by 9. If the money had not been given away where woudl it be. It may have been spent on the way along, or it may all be sitting in the bank, ready to give £20 to Roeder in January, or maybe it could have been used to pay off the debt on the ground? Again, I fail to see how anyone can say it has benefit NUFC to take none of those options and instead just give it away.

 

 

4m ?

 

Do you think a PLC give no dividends ?

 

If they gave half what they do, then the money "lost" to the club is between 1.5 and 2m quid on average. You think that will make the difference between us challenging Chelsea and Manu   :lol: What a load of bollocks you talk. Your agenda gets funnier all the time. All our managers have been bankrolled with more than enough money to have won the League Cup at least.

 

You haven't a clue about football. Not a clue.

 

as I have said, there are plenty of impressionable people that will believe your crap if you look for them, and join your crusade.

 

 

 

Just once, maybe one little time it would be nice to see you come back with a "fair point guv" or "ok, I'll give you that but what about this?" however you never do, all people get from you is abuse and the same old bollocks. Tracking back through this thread and many like it you can see the same format ie go with a debate and once anyone says anything to overturn your side of things then move it along to "you know nowt about football" or "you're just a keegan gloryhunter".

 

Take digs at Macbeth because you reckon he knows nowt about the game and only posts financial stuff all you like at the end of the day, what he says makes sense. You attempt to override it and create a smokescreen by blindly backing everything this board have done and then resorting to the "at least they're better than the old lot" when things get a little hot.

 

What Macbeth is saying is simple really, it doesnt take any kind of genius to understand, most right thinking fans and people on the street would be questioning it if the information was made more public. To pay out dividends of 6% on a company thats making a loss is ludicrous, madness, mental and totally without any logic. For you to then defend that and say the £2million it equates to each year is nothing and wouldnt have helped in any way is, at best the ramblings of a madman.

 

£2million  per year off the debt would have put us in a far better position financially than the money going into Freds and Doggies pockets that much I do know. You've made this same point a hundred times in other threads, to be a chairman of a football club you dont need to know about football, you need a business head on you, one that makes sound financial decisions. We dont have that, you dont see it. You are blinded by the fact the current board are better than the old one. Well whooopeee doo, using that same logic no player will ever come to NUFC and be a success in the number 9 shirt because "hes not as good as that Shearer was" or for that matter anyone we put at RB must be the greatest thing ever and no matter what he does "hes not as shite as that Carr bloke" so lets stick with him.

 

And you can call me impressionable all you like for reading the facts available and siding with Macbeth but Id far rather be impressionable than blinded by some strange sense of loyalty to a bloke whos ripped the piss out of me for years.

 

Oh and if you want to equate that £2million per year and not spend it on players (after all that wouldnt help us compete with Chelski or ManUre would it?  :roll:) then it works out at  £40 per season ticket holder or maybe a free shirt each and every year, still it wouldnt have bought you a new car would it so who cares?

 

I give credit where it is due. It isn't my fault there are so many misguided and deluded people around.

 

Macbeth only posts this financial stuff, he is not interested in the football side. If the club was stuck almost permantly in mid table, or lower, were happy with that, and took no risks ie had no ambition, and lost your own players because they had more ambition, he would be happy. This is how the club was run for over 30 years pre-1992. If you prefer that, fair enough. But it means you also totally lack a realistic view of how football success is obtained. This is the lessons of our own past, and other big clubs that we have overtaken since we adopted the approach we now have. Fact. But ignore it if you choose.

 

As for "digs"....macbeth takes digs at me, you should address him for the same, or are you like some of the others, its not a dig if you agree !!!!! Not that I give a toss, because I don't. If we are taken over by people who do not have the interests of the club at heart, sell players, and run the team the way he says - and you in your naivety agree with this - you will realise pretty sharpish that your view has been wrong, and believe me, with a board of directors of THAT mentality, you may as well give up. Look at the mackems if you want proof, if you are too young to remember NUFC when we were like them. In fact, you ARE old enough to remember that weren't you.......

 

In terms of success on the pitch, 2m quid is fook all. The board have given ALL their managers enough money to succeed on the pitch regardless. Therefore it is the players and manager who have let us down the most, and whats more, YOU agreed that very point elsewhere.

 

Like it or not, shareholders take dividends. And football is a different type of business. Not many people would complain about a business that was delivering a product among the best in the country over a time span of a decade. Whatever you do though, don't say its a business when it suits you and apply different football type rules when it suits you.

 

And for the last time, I do not and never have said our board is the best or anything like it, only that they have taken the club a long, long way forward since 1992 - so much so that finding better will be an extremely difficult task. It isn't my fault if fools think anyone else would automatically be better.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

NE5, and HTL why do yo always spout garbage? Are you saying that 17th in the league is good enough? - it is not, and there is only one person to blame - Shepherd. Any suggestion otherwise is bullshit.

 

gay.gif

 

Struggling to keep up, or even understand what people are talking about. You may as well not bother posting.

[Howaythelads]

 

Blah blah blah

 

 

You spend far more time working on financial posts than football related posts. 

 

You really reckon something like £2m per season on players would make a difference, do you?

 

In any case, there's no limits to the misrepresentation you come up with in response to your frankly pathetic jealousy of people who are more successful than you are.  You're a sad bloke. You really have a chip about people who are better off than you are, don't you mate?

 

Sorry I will argue this one always, in the saddest and pettiest way.

 

The club giving away £35m is wrong. How can do you justify that figure. Board run the business to lose £23m and then give away £35m. The first figure is form incompetence, the second from pure greed.

 

I have no issue with those better off than myself. I will admit to being bitter and twisted that my football team has been bled dry by its owners. If it was Douglas Hall or Mother Theresa doing ti I woudl be equally annoyed.

 

The £2m per season that you mention is actually £4m. It only seems a small amount cos you have divided the £35m by 9. If the money had not been given away where woudl it be. It may have been spent on the way along, or it may all be sitting in the bank, ready to give £20 to Roeder in January, or maybe it could have been used to pay off the debt on the ground? Again, I fail to see how anyone can say it has benefit NUFC to take none of those options and instead just give it away.

 

 

 

PLC's give dividends.

 

How much money has been made available to successive managers during the period the club has been giving dividends?

 

Thanks in advance

 

PLCs don't give dividends at the level NUFC have done. Paying out at ~6% when the likes of Tesco only pay 2% highlights that.

 

The amount of monay paid out on players has no connection to the amount paid in dividends. Why link the two ?

 

Instead link the amount paid out in divdiends to the amount paid in interest on the ground development. The club could be sitting with no debt on the ground, no interest to pay for the next 10 years. What a superb position to be in. No, instead we'll pay £4.5m per year in interest. You prefer the club to be in debt, and the shareholders to have the money. This woudl have made no difference at all to the amount paid out on players, but would have made the whole club more safe financially.

 

If disaster struck and we were relegated the first call on the club money is he mortgage. The board could have removed that threat, but instead invested the money in pension funds for Hall & Shepherd.

 

 

You said...

"PLCs don't give dividends at the level NUFC have done. Paying out at ~6% when the likes of Tesco only pay 2% highlights that."

A. You would moan regardless.

 

You said...

" The amount of monay paid out on players has no connection to the amount paid in dividends. Why link the two ? "

A. I thought you wouldn't get it, since it's football related. Nowt personal, but you ducked the relevant question there, which is no surprise.

[James]

NE5, and HTL why do yo always spout garbage? Are you saying that 17th in the league is good enough? - it is not, and there is only one person to blame - Shepherd. Any suggestion otherwise is bullshit.

 

gay.gif

 

What an idiotic gobshite you are.

 

Is that the best response you can come up with? See you have ignored my comments on the warehouse. Cant explain that can you? Can you? CAN YOU? No you can't you blind child.

[Howaythelads]

Even more tripe highlighted for you in bold. As I said, there has never been any suggestion that Fred funds the club from his own pocket. None at all.  You're clearly not in a position to be aware of that fact, christ knows where you're getting this load of shite from.

 

where am i getting it from? hmmm...

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,293-2440656,00.html

“I’ve made mistakes but so has everyone in football,” he said. “Probably the biggest criticism is that I’ve been too kind to managers with funds and too generous to players. But when you are in Newcastle, you are competing with Tottenham Hotspur, Chelsea, Manchester United and we are 300 miles from London.

 

“To get them (players) up here we have certain things against us. I’ve been accused of many things but I can’t be accused of not providing for the manager or giving players great wages. Yes, there have been mistakes, but regardless of what people say I have only ever dismissed two managers.

 

translation: "look at me, i'm such a nice guy, i've sacrificed so much for the club - if anything i'm too giving."

 

http://www.icnewcastle.co.uk/ (Oct 24, can't find article link)

This led Sir John to add: "Since the Halls and the Shepherds took over the club we have spent over £200m on players as well as making St James' Park into one of the best stadia in Europe, so none of our managers can say that we have not backed them.

 

translation - "look at us, we're such nice guys, we've sacrificed so much for the club - nevermind where the money came from...."

 

that was a 30 second google search - 2 articles out of 3 with quotes from shepherd hall has them tooting their horn about how much they've "spent" on the club.  they made their money long ago, and have been diverting operational profit and spending money in NUFC's name at no personal risk almost from the start.  this year's losses are being funded by debt, not by the halls or shepherds.

 

there's constant spin that's aimed at getting the public to confuse the club's finances with the shepherd\hall finances, with the buried argument being that they should be accountable to nobody for the financial or competitive state of the club, and every dollar spent is a favor to the fans, so if we don't like it, piss off

 

What a laugh. You have the nerve to mention 'spin'. Talk about massive misinterpretation, but then what a surprise, eh.