80 Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 He's an ambitious lad and when the chance came two years later to join a more promising club in Man City, he requested a move similarly. Regarding this, hopefully Brummie can come in and add more/corroborate, but I understand the issue at Villa was a falling out with Martin O'Neill which meant he was on his way out long before other factors like Manchester City came along. (Regarding the falling out, MO'N was thought to be in the wrong... another instance of his 'moods' bringing on an argument and disharmony. Another one of the events that weakened his popularity among Villa supporters) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 Reading this thread, I have to say that the "Ashley can't ever be in the right because he's a fat Cockney cunt and I hate him" crowd really ought to investigate the principle of Occam's Razor. The usual reason players hand in transfer requests is because they wish to request a transfer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 You seem to have missed (or ignored) my post in the other thread, so I'll ask again. If it's the case that all the good players we've sold simply wanted to leave, are you implying that's a positive? Also, do you have any thoughts on tomorrow's game? Or any of them, for that matter. Just wondering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted April 2, 2011 Share Posted April 2, 2011 Reading this thread, I have to say that the "Ashley can't ever be in the right because he's a fat Cockney cunt and I hate him" crowd really ought to investigate the principle of Occam's Razor. The usual reason players hand in transfer requests is because they wish to request a transfer. Damn you, you clever bastard, you've picked up on the one motive for our feeble questioning of the saviour of our club. There's no rhyme or reason to any argument, just pure cockney hatred. I hate those infernal cockneys!!!!!!! PS I have to laugh at someone defending Ashley bringing up Occam's razor when the most obvious conclusion to draw from the way he has run the club without making any assumptions about intent is that he's an incompetent fuckwit who hasn't a clue about what he's doing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 2, 2011 Share Posted April 2, 2011 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted April 2, 2011 Share Posted April 2, 2011 You seem to have missed (or ignored) my post in the other thread, so I'll ask again. If it's the case that all the good players we've sold simply wanted to leave, are you implying that's a positive? Also, do you have any thoughts on tomorrow's game? Or any of them, for that matter. Just wondering. Stephen Spence to start out wide. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted April 2, 2011 Share Posted April 2, 2011 Reading this thread, I have to say that the "Ashley can't ever be in the right because he's a fat Cockney cunt and I hate him" crowd really ought to investigate the principle of Occam's Razor. The usual reason players hand in transfer requests is because they wish to request a transfer. Damn you, you clever bastard, you've picked up on the one motive for our feeble questioning of the saviour of our club. There's no rhyme or reason to any argument, just pure cockney hatred. I hate those infernal cockneys!!!!!!! Yeah, especially Chris Hughton, ugh. *spit* Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted April 2, 2011 Share Posted April 2, 2011 Also, do you have any thoughts on tomorrow's game? Or any of them, for that matter. Just wondering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EthiGeordie Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Interesting facts. http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2011/05/18/sportscribddoc.pdf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Interesting facts. http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2011/05/18/sportscribddoc.pdf Thats still going by the Championship season though, so our wage to turnover ration should be far less and our turnover should be far higher. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderson Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Club's financial outlook is definitely beginning to look healthy which can only be a good thing. Interesting to see even with Short Sunderland have £66m debt. All my mackem mates are constantly telling me they're debt free and thus in a very good financial position, obviously choosing to ignore the massive losses they're making every year. Seemingly they're wrong on both counts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Club's financial outlook is definitely beginning to look healthy which can only be a good thing. Interesting to see even with Short Sunderland have £66m debt. All my mackem mates are constantly telling me they're debt free and thus in a very good financial position, obviously choosing to ignore the massive losses they're making every year. Seemingly they're wrong on both counts. Even after only a couple on months ago Sunderland said the exact same thing and that if it continues then the owner will just walk away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Interesting to see our wage bill is now so low...similar to Stoke, Everton, Fulham. Hopefully with the turnover restored to full Premier League levels we should be able to loosen the purse strings and bag some of the players we need. Also very low interest repayments because the loans are mostly from Ashley - thanks Mike! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 be interested in hearing more about the plan to start an NUFC TV channel. would definitley subscribe if they showed live reserve matches, youth cup games and even some academy highlights etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 The difference in income from TV and broadcasting is scary like - Man City earned £54m in the Premier League and we only earned £16m in the Championship! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 That Guardian piece is a bit pointless if they start classing all shareholder loans at 100% owned clubs as 'debt'. "Mike Ashley has today demanded that Mike Ashley pays back all that money he owes himself, or else" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 be interested in hearing more about the plan to start an NUFC TV channel. would definitley subscribe if they showed live reserve matches, youth cup games and even some academy highlights etc. A no-goer apparently. The demand just isn't there. The cost of setting up and running a channel would outweigh viewer figures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ObiChrisKenobi Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 be interested in hearing more about the plan to start an NUFC TV channel. would definitley subscribe if they showed live reserve matches, youth cup games and even some academy highlights etc. A no-goer apparently. The demand just isn't there. The cost of setting up and running a channel would outweigh viewer figures. I'd still subscribe to the web based NUFCTV if they hadn't upped the subscription to stupid levels. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 The online service is fine for what they offer and the viewer levels, which is why they've never gone any further. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Interesting facts. http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2011/05/18/sportscribddoc.pdf Our gate receipts are pretty impressive considering we are in Championship. Turnover for the coming year could be close to 90m excluding Carroll's money. And seems like Liverpool would be in deep deep trouble for the coming year's figures. 121m wages are terrible for a club with only Europa places this year and no Euro competitions next year. They may have to sell before buy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Spurs' figures are unbelievable, btw. The best in Premiership I would say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 A win at the weekend should secure a top 10 place Lets hope Ashley doesnt think that means we already have a top ten side. We've done well this year, but we've nee strikers leek. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 That Guardian piece is a bit pointless if they start classing all shareholder loans at 100% owned clubs as 'debt'. "Mike Ashley has today demanded that Mike Ashley pays back all that money he owes himself, or else" the thing is; it is debt, its just ashley rather than looking for it back out of the clubs coin (thus far anyway) he'll wait and try and get it in the sale price when he sells the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 the thing is; it is debt, its just ashley rather than looking for it back out of the clubs coin (thus far anyway) he'll wait and try and get it in the sale price when he sells the club. He won't get the debt back specifically. He'll sell for a price which could be more or less or the same as the debt outstanding, it doesn't really matter. Putting in money as loans rather than buying new shares is simply the most tax-efficient way of doing it. Ashley owns NUFC lock, stock and barrel. Him loaning NUFC is like saying your left pocket owes your right pocket £20 when you move a note from one to the other. Same for Chelsea. It's daft to say they have £700m of debt. It's simply useful for tax and for insolvency purposes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Spurs' figures are unbelievable, btw. The best in Premiership I would say. Yes they are very well run. People on here have used them as an example of a club pursuing their ambition by throwing money about. That's a myth - they invest what they can afford. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now