Consortium of one Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 No doubt Ashley has plowed a lot of his own money into the club and I give him credit for that. I'll even applaud him for trying to be fiscally responsible because I think in the long run it suits the best interests of the club. However, my big issue with him is the football related decisions he makes. He needs to remove Liambas and get a real footballing person in that position. Some one with practical experience who would reign Ashley in from some of the God awful, knee jerk decisions he is prone to make. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Curls Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Big screen would be an awful idea. £1.2 million cost, restricted view for 5,000 fans according to Simon Bird. I thought it was at the expense of 5,000 fans therefore replacing seats with a screen, either way it's a Redicularse idea Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 The club is also likely to launch its own television channel along the same lines as Liverpool TV, which will be part of the Freeview and Sky package and paid for through advertising Where's that quote from? If they show reserve matches on it that would be class! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
summerof69 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 The club is also likely to launch its own television channel along the same lines as Liverpool TV, which will be part of the Freeview and Sky package and paid for through advertising Where's that quote from? If they show reserve matches on it that would be class! I hope this happens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCW1983 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Big screen would be an awful idea. £1.2 million cost, restricted view for 5,000 fans according to Simon Bird. I thought it was at the expense of 5,000 fans therefore replacing seats with a screen, either way it's a Redicularse idea I know where it should go http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/ad223/Philly1983/e63dbc17.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 A scoreboard would be so frigging small-time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 It quite laughable that the Ashley haters are so focussed on laying the ills of our club at his feet. Yet not one of them can come up with a blueprint for success that does not involve spending money we dont have, and which then relies upon the club getting into Europe and staying there in order to service that debt. Laudable aims true, but quite quite unfeasible in the long run when the club is burdened with debt. Following the Ashley blueprint, means that if and when we do get into europe the money that comes in will be pure profit which WILL be reinvested in players, which will then take the club up to the next level both domestically and in terms of europe. If for some reason we fail to qualify for europe one season it will mean the top players will not have to be sold to service the debt, which is a scenario we see all too often these days. Take Liverpool for example, if they fail to qualify for europe this season and fail again next season, what are the odds that the likes of Carroll and Suarez are sold to cover their debts, or to enable them to bring in several players that they hope will get them back into europe. Instead of going on about not spending money we don't have you and others might like to ask yourself why we don't have the (any) money to spend without selling players to fund it. Why in 4 years we've more than doubled the club debt despite making £50m profit in transfers. It's quite amazing how Freddy Shepherd has been able to do exponentially more financial damage to the club since he left than he ever did while running it. The club turnover in Ashley's first year was £99m, that was up on the previous year due to an increase in the TV revenue. The club finished in the bottom half for the second year running, but still managed the 6th best turnover in the league. This is before Ashley had a chance to weave his financial magic, and was generated by the club being run in the way set out by the supposedly financially incompetent Shepherd. This is a benchmark for where the club was when he arrived and what it is possible to achieve at this club, it should by all accounts have been easy to better this benchmark. What actually happened though was, the following year revenue dropped to £86m. The completely unnecessary relegation meant revenue dropped again to £52m (and anyone who thinks losing £50m in revenue was in any way good for the club needs their head seeing to). This season, TV revenues went up again, so a financially incompetent owner should be able to generate £110m+ in revenues this year, but we are more likely to see revenues of closer to £90m. In 2 years Ashley cost this club at least £60m in lost revenue. This year will probably be another £20m lost. Up to now he has (had to) cover what could not be clawed back with players sales and cost cutting with loans to the club. For all the talk of Ashley subsidising the club, it is the supporters as a group who have subsidised the club the most by continuing to turn up and pay the same to watch the club in a lower league. If he now proceeds to pay his loans off with any profits we can make from a now greatly reduced annual turnover, it simply adds insult to injury. We will have to produce and sell an Andy Carroll every 2 years just to compensate for the lost revenue this bloke costs our club. You want me to applaud him because we have drastically cut the squad in quality and depth to be able to make a profit off the new lowered club revenues to pay back the debt he built up? If I write-off your Porsche and then lend you the money to buy a Punto will you thank me and buy me a drink as you pay me back? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 I've got by this long without knowing the score, I can manage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ7 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 No doubt Ashley has plowed a lot of his own money into the club and I give him credit for that. I'll even applaud him for trying to be fiscally responsible because I think in the long run it suits the best interests of the club. However, my big issue with him is the football related decisions he makes. He needs to remove Liambas and get a real footballing person in that position. Some one with practical experience who would reign Ashley in from some of the God awful, knee jerk decisions he is prone to make. Im sick of hearing about him 'saving the club after releagation'. We wouldnt have been relegated had he not made some ridiculous decisions! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_Taylor Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 I've got by this long without knowing the score, I can manage. This, the clocks are enough. If you're at the match and cant keep track of the score, you're obviously retarded Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 I've got by this long without knowing the score, I can manage. This, the clocks are enough. If you're at the match and cant keep track of the score, you're obviously retarded Income generator though. Think of all the adverts and sponsorship it will attract. I will by saddened if we go down the route of Stoke and advertise our substitutions... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 From Simon Bird's column: "That is why Newcastle are still talking to partners about naming rights for St James' Park - which is currently officially known as sportsdirect.com@St James' Park." Thoughts? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 From Simon Bird's column: "That is why Newcastle are still talking to partners about naming rights for St James' Park - which is currently officially known as sportsdirect.com@St James' Park." Thoughts? Despite the initial repulsion and outcry, it's had very little effect on how SJP is actually seen by people. Does the club programme even mention it? Probably means we would be able to exploit it's full economic potential and will end up with some third-rate business looking to hijack our soap-opera tendencies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 If I had to compile a list of grievances against Mike Ashley, "added some weird shit to the stadium name that nobody really cares about" would be somewhere around No. 78 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 It quite laughable that the Ashley haters are so focussed on laying the ills of our club at his feet. Yet not one of them can come up with a blueprint for success that does not involve spending money we dont have, and which then relies upon the club getting into Europe and staying there in order to service that debt. Laudable aims true, but quite quite unfeasible in the long run when the club is burdened with debt. Following the Ashley blueprint, means that if and when we do get into europe the money that comes in will be pure profit which WILL be reinvested in players, which will then take the club up to the next level both domestically and in terms of europe. If for some reason we fail to qualify for europe one season it will mean the top players will not have to be sold to service the debt, which is a scenario we see all too often these days. Take Liverpool for example, if they fail to qualify for europe this season and fail again next season, what are the odds that the likes of Carroll and Suarez are sold to cover their debts, or to enable them to bring in several players that they hope will get them back into europe. Instead of going on about not spending money we don't have you and others might like to ask yourself why we don't have the (any) money to spend without selling players to fund it. Why in 4 years we've more than doubled the club debt despite making £50m profit in transfers. It's quite amazing how Freddy Shepherd has been able to do exponentially more financial damage to the club since he left than he ever did while running it. The club turnover in Ashley's first year was £99m, that was up on the previous year due to an increase in the TV revenue. The club finished in the bottom half for the second year running, but still managed the 6th best turnover in the league. This is before Ashley had a chance to weave his financial magic, and was generated by the club being run in the way set out by the supposedly financially incompetent Shepherd. This is a benchmark for where the club was when he arrived and what it is possible to achieve at this club, it should by all accounts have been easy to better this benchmark. What actually happened though was, the following year revenue dropped to £86m. The completely unnecessary relegation meant revenue dropped again to £52m (and anyone who thinks losing £50m in revenue was in any way good for the club needs their head seeing to). This season, TV revenues went up again, so a financially incompetent owner should be able to generate £110m+ in revenues this year, but we are more likely to see revenues of closer to £90m. In 2 years Ashley cost this club at least £60m in lost revenue. This year will probably be another £20m lost. Up to now he has (had to) cover what could not be clawed back with players sales and cost cutting with loans to the club. For all the talk of Ashley subsidising the club, it is the supporters as a group who have subsidised the club the most by continuing to turn up and pay the same to watch the club in a lower league. If he now proceeds to pay his loans off with any profits we can make from a now greatly reduced annual turnover, it simply adds insult to injury. We will have to produce and sell an Andy Carroll every 2 years just to compensate for the lost revenue this bloke costs our club. You want me to applaud him because we have drastically cut the squad in quality and depth to be able to make a profit off the new lowered club revenues to pay back the debt he built up? If I write-off your Porsche and then lend you the money to buy a Punto will you thank me and buy me a drink as you pay me back? it is indeed a good question as to why we have no money to spend on new players. was it not simply that the club had been spending beyond it's means (and that includes taking on manageable debt) ? yes the club had the 6th highest turnover but as we all should know now turnover is only relative to outgoings and debts. ashley did help heap the debts on, giving huge wages to the likes of smith, barton and geremi (but isn't this what you want, an owner prepared to just doll out huge wages purely because the manager requests it no matter who the player or results arising from it until, well until there is none left ?) and his handling of the managemnet situation the season we went down was a major factor in the relegation. ashley cost us revenue from our relegation but the only choice was him or fred and the fred route,and i still have no reason to change my mind, was the leeds route, remember we had a 70mill debt and in ashleys first season lost a further 30mill (do you think we wouldn't have had the previous regime not been in charge ?). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Turnover is absolutely nothing in business... alarm bells should start ringing if a large turnover isn't leading to a sizeable profit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenham Mag Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Encouraging. I'm expecting some sort of deal for the stadium rights will be named at the end of the season. We should get a pretty packet off that. Wouldn't mind a well-renowned company's logo on top of gallowgate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Brown Ale would look good Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisMcQuillan Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Encouraging. I'm expecting some sort of deal for the stadium rights will be named at the end of the season. We should get a pretty packet off that. Wouldn't mind a well-renowned companies logo on top of gallowgate. The Puma logo would look infinitely better than Sports Direct.com. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 If we have the shitty pair of clapping hands that the mackems have on their scoreboard when the players are coming out then I will die of shame. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBG Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Netto Baked Beans@St James' Park Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Turnover is absolutely nothing in business... alarm bells should start ringing if a large turnover isn't leading to a sizeable profit. A football supporter who wants his club to make sizeable profits for it's owner Alarm bells should start ringing if a large turnover is reducing year on year in comparison to it's competitors. Maybe people with a vested interest in that company should think twice before praising the management for running the company well financially by cutting pay and selling off assets. If you don't think turnover is important, I guess you think it should be quite easy for us to get back into Europe, the top 4, and even compete for the title? We did it before with a poor chairman hamstrung by a high wage bill, so now we have the dream team of Ashley, Llambias, Pardew & a low wage bill, it should be pretty easy to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Turnover is absolutely nothing in business... alarm bells should start ringing if a large turnover isn't leading to a sizeable profit. A football supporter who wants his club to make sizeable profits for it's owner Alarm bells should start ringing if a large turnover is reducing year on year in comparison to it's competitors. Maybe people with a vested interest in that company should think twice before praising the management for running the company well financially by cutting pay and selling off assets. If you don't think turnover is important, I guess you think it should be quite easy for us to get back into Europe, the top 4, and even compete for the title? We did it before with a poor chairman hamstrung by a high wage bill, so now we have the dream team of Ashley, Llambias, Pardew & a low wage bill, it should be pretty easy to do. Man, I know you have an opinion and it will never change, but could you at least try to understand what he's trying to say before applying the usual straw man? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 I've got by this long without knowing the score, I can manage. This, the clocks are enough. If you're at the match and cant keep track of the score, you're obviously retarded Income generator though. Think of all the adverts and sponsorship it will attract. I will by saddened if we go down the route of Stoke and advertise our substitutions... why? money is money surely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 The club turnover in Ashley's first year was £99m, that was up on the previous year due to an increase in the TV revenue. The club finished in the bottom half for the second year running, but still managed the 6th best turnover in the league. This is before Ashley had a chance to weave his financial magic, and was generated by the club being run in the way set out by the supposedly financially incompetent Shepherd. This is a benchmark for where the club was when he arrived and what it is possible to achieve at this club, it should by all accounts have been easy to better this benchmark. What actually happened though was, the following year revenue dropped to £86m. The completely unnecessary relegation meant revenue dropped again to £52m (and anyone who thinks losing £50m in revenue was in any way good for the club needs their head seeing to). This season, TV revenues went up again, so a financially incompetent owner should be able to generate £110m+ in revenues this year, but we are more likely to see revenues of closer to £90m. In 2 years Ashley cost this club at least £60m in lost revenue. This year will probably be another £20m lost. Up to now he has (had to) cover what could not be clawed back with players sales and cost cutting with loans to the club. For all the talk of Ashley subsidising the club, it is the supporters as a group who have subsidised the club the most by continuing to turn up and pay the same to watch the club in a lower league. If he now proceeds to pay his loans off with any profits we can make from a now greatly reduced annual turnover, it simply adds insult to injury. We will have to produce and sell an Andy Carroll every 2 years just to compensate for the lost revenue this bloke costs our club. You want me to applaud him because we have drastically cut the squad in quality and depth to be able to make a profit off the new lowered club revenues to pay back the debt he built up? If I write-off your Porsche and then lend you the money to buy a Punto will you thank me and buy me a drink as you pay me back? You're always talking about revenue as if its the be all and end all, but in reality its only part of the picture and not something you can compare and make these kind of judgements on. You need to look at revenue AND costs together, sometimes to cut costs you need to cut revenue. For instance when we provided a catering/banqueting service. That was then contracted to an outside company for a fee. That lowered our revenue significantly (multi-millions no doubt), but we wouldn't have done it if it hadn't cut costs more then it cut revenue. 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