We always back our managers at Newcastle....

[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.

 

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

 

 

Err, aye?

[Taylor Swift]

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.

 

It's not extraordinary expenditure, it's normal expenditure ie. transfers.

[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

 

 

Err, aye?

 

Aye aye  bluewink.gif

[Taylor Swift]

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

 

 

Err, aye?

 

Aye aye  bluewink.gif

 

HTL in the familiar position of being owned.

[Howaythelads]

 

 

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.

 

Glad you finally acknowledge the manager is the key.

 

Thanks for producinig those figures of how much money has been made available to the managers over the years. Great stuff.

[James]

Thats it you pair of bores - perfectly typical of the pair of you, hiding from the real questions. What is the justification of the club selling a warehouse to Shepherd's brother and then paying an extortionate amount of rent to shepherds brother to use it?

 

You know there is no justification.

 

Shepherd is a bad chairman, end of.

[Howaythelads]

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.

 

So where is our divine right to be, then?

 

Also, tell me why there is more chance of replacing the Board with a better one than a worse one? Tell me why another Board will automatically be better than the current one, why they will automatically make available as much or even more cash to the manager and will automatically appoint the right manager?

 

Thanks

[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

 

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.

 

Edited it, although I don't know why given that the best response you had was to talk about "bullshit", not much different to my original comment about "gobshite". Doubt you'll understand that either.

[James]

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.

 

So where is our divine right to be, then?

 

Also, tell me why there is more chance of replacing the Board with a better one than a worse one? Tell me why another Board will automatically be better than the current one, why they will automatically make available as much or even more cash to the manager and will automatically appoint the right manager?

 

Thanks

 

Because those currently investing in football clubs aren't old dinosaurs solely concerned with massaging their own egos.

[Howaythelads]

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.

 

It's not extraordinary expenditure, it's normal expenditure ie. transfers.

 

Another fool who believes the club has to spend money on players such as Owen and the rest, rather than settle for a team full of Faye's and other average players at relatively small fees.

[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.

 

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

 

 

Err, aye?

 

Aye aye  bluewink.gif

 

HTL in the familiar position of being owned.

 

You're obviously too intelligent for me, mate. I haven't a clue what you're babbling about.

[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

 

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

 

Actually, it is you who does not understand what people are talking about. You just spout the same blind nonsense regardless of what good points others make. Obviously you are struggling to keep up. Keep posting though, as your lack of eyesight continues to amuse me.

[Howaythelads]

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.

 

So where is our divine right to be, then?

 

Also, tell me why there is more chance of replacing the Board with a better one than a worse one? Tell me why another Board will automatically be better than the current one, why they will automatically make available as much or even more cash to the manager and will automatically appoint the right manager?

 

Thanks

 

Because those currently investing in football clubs aren't old dinosaurs solely concerned with massaging their own egos.

 

OMG.

[James]

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.

 

So where is our divine right to be, then?

 

Also, tell me why there is more chance of replacing the Board with a better one than a worse one? Tell me why another Board will automatically be better than the current one, why they will automatically make available as much or even more cash to the manager and will automatically appoint the right manager?

 

Thanks

 

Because those currently investing in football clubs aren't old dinosaurs solely concerned with massaging their own egos.

 

OMG.

 

I love the way that you can coherently carry a debate along.

[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.

 

Actually, it is you who does not understand what people are talking about. You just spout the same blind nonsense regardless of what good points others make. Obviously you are struggling to keep up. Keep posting though, as your lack of eyesight continues to amuse me.

 

Your definition of a good point being one you agree with and blind nonsense being an opinion you don't agree with. That's the attitude of the very young and/or the very stupid.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

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.

 

So where is our divine right to be, then?

 

Also, tell me why there is more chance of replacing the Board with a better one than a worse one? Tell me why another Board will automatically be better than the current one, why they will automatically make available as much or even more cash to the manager and will automatically appoint the right manager?

 

Thanks

 

Because those currently investing in football clubs aren't old dinosaurs solely concerned with massaging their own egos.

 

OMG.

 

I love the way that you can coherently carry a debate along.

 

Thanks. Didn't realise you knew what a debate was though, perhaps that's a start for you.

[Guest TheDoctor]

Howaythelads, I dont think that some of your responses have been very appropriate, in fact, they have been quite childish.

 

Why cant you answer that lads question about the warehouse, you do seem to be conveniently ignoring it?

[Howaythelads]

Howaythelads, I dont think that some of your responses have been very appropriate, in fact, they have been quite childish.

 

Why cant you answer that lads question about the warehouse, you do seem to be conveniently ignoring it?

 

Inappropriate? Childish? That's rich, given what I'm replying to.

 

I'd say it sounds like you're one of those who takes the view something they don't agree with is "inappropriate". A common trait on this forum, it must be said.

 

What do you want me to say in response to the kids question that is totally unrelated to football? I couldn't give a toss about any warehouse, I couldn't give a toss about what Fred has said in a brothel. I don't care that Geordie women are dogs and whatever it is he said about Shearer. I couldn't give a toss about dividends as long as money is made available to the manager to strengthen the team, which is what this Board has consistently done and which may not happen under another Board. You can believe the opposite if you like.

 

That's my answer to the question.

 

Perhaps you and your chum can now answer some of mine? Like why do you think it's guaranteed another Board will appoint the right manager, will provide as much funding for players, etc etc. They're all there in the thread but have been *childishly* ignored so far.

[Guest Gemmill]

Howaythelads, I dont think that some of your responses have been very appropriate, in fact, they have been quite childish.

 

Why cant you answer that lads question about the warehouse, you do seem to be conveniently ignoring it?

 

  You fucking gimp!

[James]

Howaythelads, I dont think that some of your responses have been very appropriate, in fact, they have been quite childish.

 

Why cant you answer that lads question about the warehouse, you do seem to be conveniently ignoring it?

 

  You fucking gimp!

 

[James]

Howaythelads, I dont think that some of your responses have been very appropriate, in fact, they have been quite childish.

 

Why cant you answer that lads question about the warehouse, you do seem to be conveniently ignoring it?

 

Inappropriate? Childish? That's rich, given what I'm replying to.

 

I'd say it sounds like you're one of those who takes the view something they don't agree with is "inappropriate". A common trait on this forum, it must be said.

 

What do you want me to say in response to the kids question that is totally unrelated to football? I couldn't give a toss about any warehouse, I couldn't give a toss about what Fred has said in a brothel. I don't care that Geordie women are dogs and whatever it is he said about Shearer. I couldn't give a toss about dividends as long as money is made available to the manager to strengthen the team, which is what this Board has consistently done and which may not happen under another Board. You can believe the opposite if you like.

 

That's my answer to the question.

 

Perhaps you and your chum can now answer some of mine? Like why do you think it's guaranteed another Board will appoint the right manager, will provide as much funding for players, etc etc. They're all there in the thread but have been *childishly* ignored so far.

 

How can you not care about a chairman giving our own money to his other family business when we are paying for it to be spent on the team?

 

In response to your question - those that have taken over at other clubs haven't done badly have they? Fact is, only good businessmen can afford to take control of a Premiership club, and that can only be a good thing for the football club. Therefore, any replacement coming in is bound to be better.

[Taylor Swift]

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:  Dead long link

 

 

Err, aye?

 

Aye aye  bluewink.gif

 

HTL in the familiar position of being owned.

 

You're obviously too intelligent for me, mate. I haven't a clue what you're babbling about.

 

As usual bluebigrazz.gif

[Dave]

Just shortened the link there XVentura.

[Taylor Swift]

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.

 

It's not extraordinary expenditure, it's normal expenditure ie. transfers.

 

Another fool who believes the club has to spend money on players such as Owen and the rest, rather than settle for a team full of Faye's and other average players at relatively small fees.

 

When did I say we have to spend money on the Owens to succeed? I said we HAVE to spend money to succeed. Don't know where you got the Owen part from. At least next time try reading other people's posts before responding, it'll help your posts to have some sort of relevance to the thread and not just be pure bollocks like it usually is.

[Taylor Swift]

Just shortened the link there XVentura.

 

No problem mate.