Mike Ashley

[Wullie]

Wow people seem upset. Myself I hate Ashley but I balance it with with a range of facts. We are 3 quality players away from being a good side on paper aside from the manager.

 

We need three quality players and a new manager to be a good side on paper? And that's a good thing?

[Interpolic]

That is a strange thing to say when we've just had 3 months to buy 3 players and change manager, and didn't.

[Wullie]

I don't necessarily like Ashley's way of handling some things. Hiring Kinnear as a fall guy. Deliberately being deceptive with the fans, etc.

 

But in general, broad terms, I like that we're trying to sign young, hungry players. I like that we're stocking our youth ranks, I like that we're making sure we squeeze every penny out of transfer deals, I like that we're hanging on to our best players unless we receive silly money, and I like the appointment of Pardew - what he lacks in football terms he more than makes up for with harmonizing the club from players to board.

 

This is just a bizarre paragraph. You like that we've got a crap manager because he "makes up for it with harmonizing the club"?

 

Are we a football team or a fucking old folk's home?

 

I've missed all these young, hungry players too - we sign players because they're cheap.

[Guest]

I don't necessarily like Ashley's way of handling some things. Hiring Kinnear as a fall guy. Deliberately being deceptive with the fans, etc.

 

But in general, broad terms, I like that we're trying to sign young, hungry players. I like that we're stocking our youth ranks, I like that we're making sure we squeeze every penny out of transfer deals, I like that we're hanging on to our best players unless we receive silly money, and I like the appointment of Pardew - what he lacks in football terms he more than makes up for with harmonizing the club from players to board.

 

This is just a bizarre paragraph. You like that we've got a crap manager because he "makes up for it with harmonizing the club"?

 

Are we a football team or a f***ing old folk's home?

 

I've missed all these young, hungry players too - we sign players because they're cheap.

 

To an extent, but our back four cost approx £30m, I doubt there's many outside the usual suspects who've spent that. Two of them bought in their prime, two of them signed with great potential.

[LucaAltieri]

I don't necessarily like Ashley's way of handling some things. Hiring Kinnear as a fall guy. Deliberately being deceptive with the fans, etc.

 

But in general, broad terms, I like that we're trying to sign young, hungry players. I like that we're stocking our youth ranks, I like that we're making sure we squeeze every penny out of transfer deals, I like that we're hanging on to our best players unless we receive silly money, and I like the appointment of Pardew - what he lacks in football terms he more than makes up for with harmonizing the club from players to board.

 

This is just a bizarre paragraph. You like that we've got a crap manager because he "makes up for it with harmonizing the club"?

 

Are we a football team or a fucking old folk's home?

 

I've missed all these young, hungry players too - we sign players because they're cheap.

 

We sign young players (or players with something to prove) in general because they're cheap. That's the reason behind the approach. But we try to pick up promising players with the intention of getting them into the first team. Simpson, Bassong, Bigi, Ranger, Perch, Tiote... signed because they showed promise. No one we have signed was signed exclusively because they were cheap.

 

Pardew isn't a crap manager, in my opinion. He's middle of the road in terms of football, but he's a very good man manager. However brilliant some other managers might be, if they want a giant transfer budget, or aren't happy with leaving the signing of players up to the scouts and the board, then we'll have the instability that goes with it. Pardew is a great fit for our recruitment system. Having someone who is better at the football side but doesn't like the way the club operates is only great until they walk out, then we're fucked. Padrew isn't fucking off anywhere. He knew the deal when he signed up and he's perfectly capable of delivering within our expectations.

 

I'd rather have issues with the manger's use of subs than seeing our own players fight in the middle of the pitch or any of the other soap opera shite we're used to.

[Ronaldo]

People still taking Luca seriously?

 

 

[UV]

It should be fairly easy to get facts about how much debt to Mike Ashley we have.

 

It is - but only up to 30th June 2012.

 

Well that's all we can go on really, what is in the accounts. If he pockets all the new TV money than that's a different matter.

 

In the accounts there is £111 million of loan that is long term - i.e due after more than one year.  That has now been there for several years. As at June 2012 he had loaned the club an additional £29 million during 2011 and 2012 to buy players and meet short term cash commitments. This additional amount was short term, repayable within one year.. The accounts show he had already received £11 million back, and we can probably assume he's had the remaining £18 million back by now. He's not going to get his loan back anytime soon if that pattern continues 

 

The additional £29m from Ashley came in the 09-10 Championship season and was required because the bank wouldn't allow the club to continue to have a £36m overdraft outside the Prem. Player sales on relegation (and income from previous player sales) covered the revenue fall in the Championship season so there was practically no increase in the net debt, it merely transferred from the bank to Ashley. He certainly didn't put in any money during 2011 and 2012 to buy players.

 

The entire debt to Ashley is in the accounts (and was pre-relegation too) as payable within one year. Whether Ashley regards the £29m as special and will stop using profits to pay off the loan once this is recouped is speculation.

 

Unfortunately for Ashley, I think the unanticipated, forced January spend will have put paid to any plans to pay off any significant amount of the loan last year. You're certainly right though that the way he is running the club, he is going to be unable to pay off much debt anytime soon unless very little of the additional TV revenue gets spent on fees & wages for the foreseeable future, or we pull quite a few more Milners & Carrolls out of the hat. I'm not sure that qualifies for a smiley though.

 

For reference:

 

	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Ashley Loan	0	0	100000	111000	139800	140000	129000
Overdraft	5528	10863	987	35781	10389	0	343
Stadium Loan	47441	45089	0	0	0	0	0
Other Loans	17248	23036	6067	3236	196	0	0
Cash at bank and in hand	9309	9309	0	0	0	9515	0
Net debt	60908	69679	107054	150017	150385	130485	129343
Debt increase/decrease		8771	37375	42963	368	-19900	-1142

 

	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Overdraft	5528	10863	987	35781	10389	0	343
Repayable within one year	10867	61675	2939	114056	123496	140000	129000
Repayable in the first to second years	7753	3127	103052	196	16500	0	0
Repayable in the second to fifth years	17410	3323	196	0	0	0	0
Repayable after five years	28659	0	0	0	0	0	0

 

BTW Some people have said that finding out the loans were repayable on change of ownership meant Ashley had to rethink his plans and changed how he was going to run the club. Only the Stadium loan was repayable on change of ownership, which was around £45m. Ashley chose to repay the other loans, and he also chose to move to a system of paying up front for players brought in while receiving payments in instalments for players we sold (part of the reason the net debt rocketed in the first couple of years). He had the money to take on the debt, and it benefited both him and the club. It's pretty obvious he would have paid off the stadium loan regardless of any clause.

 

What accounts are you looking at? As I type this I have in front of me the 2012 accounts of Newcastle United Limited (company number 2529667) and the disclosure of Ashley's debt is exactly as I have described it. £111 million is long term (more than one year)  and £18 million is short term (less than one year). It makes me wonder about the veracity of some of the other stuff in your posts but I can't be ars*d to go into it tbh. I've spent too much time arguing about numbers on here over the years.

 

I was going by this:

 

http://i44.tinypic.com/256e9sy.png

 

It does however appear that this is contradicted in section 12.

 

http://i40.tinypic.com/2gsefq1.png

 

That's the first year since the 2009 accounts where it is not stated that the bulk of the loan is to be repaid within 1 year or on demand. As you've been looking at the 2012 accounts above you can see that it was the case for 2011.

 

I'll edit the table so that it's accurate for future reference.

[LucaAltieri]

People still taking Luca seriously?

 

I should hope so. N-O can use the opinion of someone who isn't a delusional manic depressive.

[Ronaldo]

So why bother, then?

[Wullie]

Pardew's a fucking awful man-manager. Good man-managers get their players brimming with confidence, not negativity and fear. I agree the players seem to like him as a person - that's not really a virtue as a football manager, in the slightest. My favourite managers have been the ones that let me get away with the most.

 

As for him being a great fit for our recruitment policy, words fail me. We buy players totally unsuited to how he wants to play.

[Chris_R]

He knew the deal when he signed up and he's perfectly capable of delivering within our expectations.

 

 

I'll tell you now, he's not capable of delivering within my expectations. Ashley's, perhaps, but not mine.

 

And Wullie is spot on about Pardew. He's not a good man manager at all. Keegan was, he'd have players running through walls for him but if they crossed him they'd be out. He got the best from everyone, made them feel 10 feet tall going onto the pitch. We believed we could beat anyone, and because of that we often did.

 

Padew's a coward, he often has us beaten before the game even kicks off. Sure the players like him, but that's because there's no pressure on them and no expectations. I'd much rather we had a good manager the players feared than a weak and cowardly one that they liked.

[LucaAltieri]

He knew the deal when he signed up and he's perfectly capable of delivering within our expectations.

 

 

I'll tell you now, he's not capable of delivering within my expectations. Ashley's, perhaps, but not mine.

 

And Wullie is spot on about Pardew. He's not a good man manager at all. Keegan was, he'd have players running through walls for him but if they crossed him they'd be out. He got the best from everyone, made them feel 10 feet tall going onto the pitch. We believed we could beat anyone, and because of that we often did.

 

Padew's a coward, he often has us beaten before the game even kicks off. Sure the players like him, but that's because there's no pressure on them and no expectations. I'd much rather we had a good manager the players feared than a weak and cowardly one that they liked.

 

Complete conjecture.

 

But if we're looking at the mood of the players. Whether they're performing above or below their potential. We can say that they are definitely lacking in confidence right now - Cisse in particular - and they're not playing as well as they should be. But there have been periods where they have excellent under Pardew and played out of their skins. How much of that is down to the manager (either way) is open to debate.

 

If the players like him and want to play for him... and he likes the board and wants to work with them... can we really ask for more?

 

Here's the question... if Pardew is so bad and holding us back, let's say we sack him tomorrow, who do you want to replace him with and where do you think their Newcastle side would finish?

[Spudil]

You just like stand out by arguing against what you perceive to be the majority opinion, don't you LucaAltieri?

 

You are a special snowflake. You don't need to go through all this trouble to show everyone.

[LucaAltieri]

You just like stand out by arguing against what you perceive to be the majority opinion, don't you LucaAltieri?

 

You are a special snowflake. You don't need to go through all this trouble to show everyone.

 

I argue what I believe to be correct, whether popular or not.

 

If you fancy it you can take a crack at some of the actual points I made too, you know?

[OzzieMandias]

Unless you're a fan of finances, specifically who we owe money to (quite a bit more bothered about football myself) then I can't see how we're any better off. We're far less ambitious, far less prestigious, no more stable and suffer almost constant embarrassment including the ultimate shame of relegation. We were something, now we're nothing.

 

100% this. Our average league position in Ashley's tenure is lower than in the period before he took over. To suggest it isn't debatable if we have made progress is quite frankly laughable. Unfortunately our resident balance sheet fan has given up on trying to explain with arguments his opinions presented as fact.

 

Am interested in who you are referring to and why you say that.

 

Are you for real? I hardly ever see you post about anything other than finances. I like you as a poster, and I certainly value your contribution on those finance topics, as you are obviously knowledgeable about accounting/finance, but passing off some very subjective statements about Ashley as facts that cannot be debated has got my back up a bit. I apologise if an opinion that doesn't tally with your "objective" view of the world offends you.

 

Am for real. Thanks for the stuff about my financial posts, but I am at the end of the day a NUFC football fan believe it or not. This is a forum for opinions and I freely admit I have punted one or two out there tonight. But no one has really knocked back anything I have said. There have been worse Premiership owners than Ashley, our previous regime had reached a point where the 2006 intake of players can hardly be described as ambitious etc. Not offended btw.

 

I think you will find not many people agree with you on those statements, especially the second one. Look, the one thing that Ashley seems to gave sorted is not wasting huge sums of money on players without resale value, and even then, from a footballing perspective financial frugality only benefits us as supporters directly if these savings are invested more wisely in the playing squad, which they currently aren't. Other than that, I struggle to see how we are far better off than before he took over (your words) by any measure. We are worse off in terms of (average) league position, club reputation, non-TV revenue (in absolute terms, but certainly relative to our competitors) and to top it off we have a management structure and personnel that would make many Championship club blush with shame.

 

Without doubt our current management structure is embarrassing, probably worse than that tbh. Your point about the average league position is statistically accurate. But imo we were f*cked in the summer of 2007, I have explained why elsewhere on this forum. And I have (I hope) explained my frustrations with what Ashley is doing and especially the utter rubbish that was the last transfer window. The trouble is if anyone puts anything up on here that doesn't conform to the "Ashley is Satan and anyone who doesn't agree is beyond belief " view you get trashed unfortunately. He is Satan but there are other factors.

 

 

You consistently talk good sense. Don't let the lynch mob grind you down.

[Wullie]

He knew the deal when he signed up and he's perfectly capable of delivering within our expectations.

 

 

I'll tell you now, he's not capable of delivering within my expectations. Ashley's, perhaps, but not mine.

 

And Wullie is spot on about Pardew. He's not a good man manager at all. Keegan was, he'd have players running through walls for him but if they crossed him they'd be out. He got the best from everyone, made them feel 10 feet tall going onto the pitch. We believed we could beat anyone, and because of that we often did.

 

Padew's a coward, he often has us beaten before the game even kicks off. Sure the players like him, but that's because there's no pressure on them and no expectations. I'd much rather we had a good manager the players feared than a weak and cowardly one that they liked.

 

Complete conjecture.

 

But if we're looking at the mood of the players. Whether they're performing above or below their potential. We can say that they are definitely lacking in confidence right now - Cisse in particular - and they're not playing as well as they should be. But there have been periods where they have excellent under Pardew and played out of their skins. How much of that is down to the manager (either way) is open to debate.

 

If the players like him and want to play for him... and he likes the board and wants to work with them... can we really ask for more?

 

Here's the question... if Pardew is so bad and holding us back, let's say we sack him tomorrow, who do you want to replace him with and where do you think their Newcastle side would finish?

 

When have they been "excellent under Pardew and played out of their skins"? When we finished fifth, other than half a dozen games in March/April, the football was fucking stinking.

[Wullie]

 

Ozzie and quayside, six years now living by the same mantra.

 

"Anyone will do, as long as it's not Shepherd"

[merlin]

We also need someone with £200m at the very very least who is just prepared to buy us.

 

I know you said £200m at the very least, but I honestly think it would need to be someone with many times more than that. Buying the club is one thing, you then have to be able to fund it to a higher level than it is now. Someone who can just about buy the club isn't what we need, it needs to be small change to them. An extreme example I know but I really shudder to think where we'd be if Ashley had sold out to Barry Moat - an enthusiastic owner no doubt but that "pieced together" finance package of his was so small time.

 

 

I've said this before but it remains the case - it took a man with millions to get rid of McKeag but it will take a

man with billions to get rid of Ashley.

People like that ARE out there, but they won't deal with Ashley until he is on a weaker wicket, i.e. the club starts struggling either at the turnstiles or on the field. One could follow the other..

Remember, Ashley went to Dubai and played Roulette instead of meeting Mansour...people interested in the club will not have forgotten about that.....

[Vinny Green Balls]

Yes, things could be worse.  That does not mean at all that they should be considered acceptable.  Don't use this stability nonsense either.  Maybe if the game was played on a fucking spreadsheet.  But here's a gentle reminder:

 

1) Hire Keegan, then undermine him with that poison dwarf

2) Replace him with Kinnear.  Yes.  Fucking Kinnear!

3) After that failure, give Shearer 8 games to turn it around.

4) Jettison Hughton unceremoniously.

5) Bring in Pardew.  Yes, you read it correctly.  Fucking Pardew.

6) Sports Direct Stadium, officially making a 120 year old club a vehicle for his business

7) Not bring in anybody after we finished 5th.  A wonderful opportunity blown.

8) Not jettison Pardew when he almost got this team relegated, and a pall seemed to be over everything associated with this club.

9) Bring in Joe Fucking Kinnear!  Again!

10) One loan signing.

 

This fails to really encapsulate the soul-destroying number he's put on this club during his stewardship.  Every time there is a bit of optimism, you know his next action is going to cancel it out.  How could anyone defend the indefensible?  One step removed from defending Alistair Crowley as a decent, misunderstood visionary.

 

The whole mantra "better the devil you know..." is utter bullshit imo.  It leaves no room for any type of growth.  Happy with Mubarak because you never know when a Pol Pot might come along.  Absurd.  Absurd, and let me stress, absurd.

[merlin]

There have been a FEW worse owners than Ashley but only Liverpool's duo of Hicks and Gillett bear real comparison because NUFC and Liverpool are similar clubs in their support, both actual and potential...perhaps Randy Lerner also, because Villa also have decent support potential.

 

In my view, neither Hicks/Gillett or Lerner have been anywhere NEAR as bad as Ashley at running a major football club ; you can punt Ashley's financial stats until you are blue in the face because despite their handling of Liverpool in that respect, they won things and Liverpool was snapped up by a consortium who are now seeing the benefits of their player investment strategy coupled with ambition. Lerner also has, in a lesser way, shown more ambition than Ashley and stuck by Lambert after giving MON enough rope to hang himself, unlike Ashley who bulleted Hughton when the club was mid-table in its first season back in the PL and appointed a manager with a proven record of failure at 3 other clubs.

 

A PL football club is NOT - repeat, NOT - about finances...sensible running of the club, yes(unlike Shepherd) but the product of a successful club is judged by its performances on the field ; in that respect, NUFC is LIGHT YEARS away from its standing in the game even 10 years ago and despite some of the decline being due to Shepherd's decisions, Ashley is the major culprit...

 

Performances on the field - FAIL

Attractiveness of football - FAIL

Commercial performance - FAIL when compared to 15 years ago

Attractiveness of club to Top players - FAIL

Happiness of Fans - FAIL(far less people now interested in having STs)

Status of the club nationally - FAIL(we are a laughing stock)

 

I could go on, but this is the situation - how anyone can say that we shouldn't change owners because we might get a worse one is like saying you shouldn't re-marry after a bitter divorce because you might get a worse partner. Life is a lottery and for every BAD football club owner, there are several good ones ; Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal(yes, even them too)Spurs, Villa, Norwich, Southampton, Swansea etc etc...all have better owners than NUFC because they CARE about their clubs. Ashley doesn't give 2 stuffs and that alone makes him the worst owner in the PL. He may have run a tight ship, but even tight ships needed a dose of fruit to stop the sailors dying.....

 

For me, he's got to go because its no worse than a 50/50 chance we would get a worse owner and probably at least a 60/40 that we would get a better one.

 

Until anyone finally sticks the money down, though, Ashley and the fans are like a married couple who want to divorce but can't because they can't sell the house...mainly because they are asking too much for it..!

[ATB]

[Guest icemanblue]

When he put the £30m loan in after relegation, which went to help us keep the likes of Colo he has since took back £12m of that and left in £18m.

 

That came from Lee at tonights Fansunited meeting when he was answering the questions that were in tonights chronicle

 

Any other interesting bits from that meeting, mate? I'd have thought there would have been more take up from here, considering how many are wanting to 'take action' against Ashley. Anyone else go?

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Unless you're a fan of finances, specifically who we owe money to (quite a bit more bothered about football myself) then I can't see how we're any better off. We're far less ambitious, far less prestigious, no more stable and suffer almost constant embarrassment including the ultimate shame of relegation. We were something, now we're nothing.

 

100% this. Our average league position in Ashley's tenure is lower than in the period before he took over. To suggest it isn't debatable if we have made progress is quite frankly laughable. Unfortunately our resident balance sheet fan has given up on trying to explain with arguments his opinions presented as fact.

 

Am interested in who you are referring to and why you say that.

 

Are you for real? I hardly ever see you post about anything other than finances. I like you as a poster, and I certainly value your contribution on those finance topics, as you are obviously knowledgeable about accounting/finance, but passing off some very subjective statements about Ashley as facts that cannot be debated has got my back up a bit. I apologise if an opinion that doesn't tally with your "objective" view of the world offends you.

 

Am for real. Thanks for the stuff about my financial posts, but I am at the end of the day a NUFC football fan believe it or not. This is a forum for opinions and I freely admit I have punted one or two out there tonight. But no one has really knocked back anything I have said. There have been worse Premiership owners than Ashley, our previous regime had reached a point where the 2006 intake of players can hardly be described as ambitious etc. Not offended btw.

 

I think you will find not many people agree with you on those statements, especially the second one. Look, the one thing that Ashley seems to gave sorted is not wasting huge sums of money on players without resale value, and even then, from a footballing perspective financial frugality only benefits us as supporters directly if these savings are invested more wisely in the playing squad, which they currently aren't. Other than that, I struggle to see how we are far better off than before he took over (your words) by any measure. We are worse off in terms of (average) league position, club reputation, non-TV revenue (in absolute terms, but certainly relative to our competitors) and to top it off we have a management structure and personnel that would make many Championship club blush with shame.

 

Without doubt our current management structure is embarrassing, probably worse than that tbh. Your point about the average league position is statistically accurate. But imo we were f*cked in the summer of 2007, I have explained why elsewhere on this forum. And I have (I hope) explained my frustrations with what Ashley is doing and especially the utter rubbish that was the last transfer window. The trouble is if anyone puts anything up on here that doesn't conform to the "Ashley is Satan and anyone who doesn't agree is beyond belief " view you get trashed unfortunately. He is Satan but there are other factors.

 

 

You consistently talk good sense. Don't let the lynch mob grind you down.

 

[Lotus]

Not quite understanding the glorious point that Ozzie seems to think he's highlighting out of Quayside's analysis that we all seem to be missing.

 

We all know the finances looked unsustainable under the last regime towards the end. WE ALL KNOW THAT.

 

Quayside then goes on to say that our current management structure is worse than embarrassing and that, and this is ENTIRELY factual, we have a worse average league position under Ashley than the Halls.

 

 

[Unbelievable]

Lynch mob..

 

I'm genuinely intrigued what arguments quayside, Ozzie et al have for saying we are far better off since Ashley took over. They seem to be notably missing in the discussion..?