Mike Ashley

[Lotus]

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..?

 

The arguement is that our debt is now manageable.

 

What i'd be interested in knowing is what state we'd be in if our debt was still to banks/financial institutions. Has Mashley improved the financial running of the club to the extent that, comparing apples with apples, our balance sheet would we significantly improved.

 

Because, if all he's done is make the debt attributable to himself and therefore reduce the interest payments but has not in anyway improved our means of increasing revenues i'd say his financial management hasn't been as magnificent as prothletised. He's no Daniel Levy

[BottledDog]

Daniel Levy is the one true God.

[Hanshithispantz]

We've been relegated once, were inches away from being relegated again last season, and in failing to strengthen our squad we'll be in danger of it again should our luck with injuries continue the way it has been. Ashley's doing just fine.

[quayside]

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..?

 

The arguement is that our debt is now manageable.

 

What i'd be interested in knowing is what state we'd be in if our debt was still to banks/financial institutions. Has Mashley improved the financial running of the club to the extent that, comparing apples with apples, our balance sheet would we significantly improved.

 

Because, if all he's done is make the debt attributable to himself and therefore reduce the interest payments but has not in anyway improved our means of increasing revenues i'd say his financial management hasn't been as magnificent as prothletised. He's no Daniel Levy

 

Yes the point about the debt being manageable is partly it, and quite simply that it is owed to the owner of the club rather than a bank who could foreclose. The club lost £45 million in Shepherd's final two years so your question about what would have happened if the debt remained in the hands of a bank is an interesting one. Contrary to popular belief the bulk of the debt owed to the bank was not a mortgage on the stadium, it was secured on season ticket sales. The credit crunch was just around the corner, when banks got the sh*ts about lending money to any businesse, let alone one racking up huge losses.

 

I also believe the squad in 2007 contained too many overrpaid underperforming players (eg Duff, Luque, Owen, Butt). After allowing Allardyce (who is another thing Ashley inherited) to carry on pretty much the same way the player buying policy changed causing a lot of pain along the way. But, until the arrival of JFK, I think that the new policy had become more efficient. I can't pretend that I know what our policy on player buying is right now, if we have one. I think there was a will to bring players in this summer but JFK cocked it up. Not everyone will agree with that.

 

I am well aware of what Ashley has done wrong and continues to do wrong, I honestly don't think I have tried to defend that, and in fact I couldn't if I tried. This all sprang out of a fairly simple observation on here that if Ashley sells up there is no guarantee it would be to someone better. 

 

And you are correct Daniel Levy is streets ahead of our owner.

[hoppaz]

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?

 

Well considering most teams could do with an extra player or two I think we could be worse off. On paper I meant we could be a top 6 or 7 team which is realistic imo.

 

The manager has been tanked many times but also gave us the 4-4 Arsenal comeback, the Chelski drubbing and games where we played Man United off the park.

 

Back on the subject of Mike, the one thing I am grateful to him for was buying us when he did as we could have ended up like Rangers, Leeds or a Coventry otherwise.

[merlin]

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?

 

Well considering most teams could do with an extra player or two I think we could be worse off. On paper I meant we could be a top 6 or 7 team which is realistic imo.

 

The manager has been tanked many times but also gave us the 4-4 Arsenal comeback, the Chelski drubbing and games where we played Man United off the park.

 

Back on the subject of Mike, the one thing I am grateful to him for was buying us when he did as we could have ended up like Rangers, Leeds or a Coventry otherwise.

 

Pathetic - if most of the fans are like you, they deserve the crap set up they have now.

 

Grateful..!!! Grow a pair.

[Rosenrot]

Grateful? 

[hoppaz]

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?

 

Well considering most teams could do with an extra player or two I think we could be worse off. On paper I meant we could be a top 6 or 7 team which is realistic imo.

 

The manager has been tanked many times but also gave us the 4-4 Arsenal comeback, the Chelski drubbing and games where we played Man United off the park.

 

Back on the subject of Mike, the one thing I am grateful to him for was buying us when he did as we could have ended up like Rangers, Leeds or a Coventry otherwise.

 

Pathetic - if most of the fans are like you, they deserve the crap set up they have now.

 

Grateful..!!! Grow a pair.

 

Why not? Would you like to be a fan of Leeds, Rangers or Coventry at the moment?

[Lotus]

Quayside.

 

I haven't said you are defending Ashley's idiocy. Ozzie quoting your posts to defend it though so it was directed at him.

 

Things got out of shape under the Halls.

 

Things are not going well under Ashley.

 

I'd like to revisit a question i raised. I assume most clubs have their debt held by banks/financial insitutions (clearly not Chelsea and Mancity). If our debt was placed similarly to those other clubs. Would we be in good shape financially? Would we be in profit as we are now? Because, if not then the obvious conclusion is that Ashley is not running the club optimally. Or even close to it. All he would have done would be to shield the club from that kind of exposure but not set any means in place whereby it could operate free of him.

[TRon]

I think it's pretty clear we have an owner that isn't really committed to making Newcastle United the club it should be by rights and is effectively running it on a skeleton crew. But when comparing other club owners favourably, please don't mention Gillett and Hicks of Liverpool. They were mis-managed so badly they were effectively up shit creek without a paddle with a mounting debt racked up against Liverpool FC rather than the owners themselves. Their fans were protesting and they only got out of that because the club was sold over their heads by the bank to another buyer. If there hadn't been another buyer what then?

 

 

[Lotus]

Mashley has zero footballing ambition for NUFC. Which is clearly good enough for some. We should be grateful tbh.

[TRon]

Mashley has zero footballing ambition for NUFC. Which is clearly good enough for some. We should be grateful tbh.

 

I think most would like another owner, but we need an alternative.

[hoppaz]

The glazers used private equity companies to fund their buying of Man U. Those terms are negotiated once already with the second due in 2 to 3 years. They are reducing this debt as well as paying the interest.

 

I doubt Nufc would get 110m from any bank and an equity firm would look for maybe 8 or 9 % interest pa return on any loan as we dont have the revenues of Man U and would be an obvious risk.

 

That debt would cost 8 or 9m per year without any reducion to the debt so over 6 years that is a lot of money to fund debt.

[Unbelievable]

Mashley has zero footballing ambition for NUFC. Which is clearly good enough for some. We should be grateful tbh.

 

I think most would like another owner, but we need an alternative.

 

Well of course, but in the meantime to suggest Ashley's tenure has been anything other than an unmitigated disaster is laughable in my humble opinion.

[Unbelievable]

The glazers used private equity companies to fund their buying of Man U. Those terms are negotiated once already with the second due in 2 to 3 years. They are reducing this debt as well as paying the interest.

 

I doubt Nufc would get 110m from any bank and an equity firm would look for maybe 8 or 9 % interest pa return on any loan as we dont have the revenues of Man U and would be an obvious risk.

 

That debt would cost 8 or 9m per year without any reducion to the debt so over 6 years that is a lot of money to fund debt.

 

If our commercial revenue had grown on a par with other Premiership clubs during those 7 years since Ashley took over we would be 40 million per season better for it. Enough to fund the interest and then some. As it is, the not charging of interest is more than offset by the free SD advertising.

[Wullie]

Mashley has zero footballing ambition for NUFC. Which is clearly good enough for some. We should be grateful tbh.

 

I think most would like another owner, but we need an alternative.

 

Well of course, but in the meantime to suggest Ashley's tenure has been anything other than an unmitigated disaster is laughable in my humble opinion.

 

Literally the only positive from the way he has run the club is that he has the money to fund the massive losses his mismanagement caused. That does not equate to being well run.

 

It's akin to a rich man claiming he'd had a successful night at the casino having lost a million pounds.

 

"How was that successful?"

 

"Because I can afford it"

[hoppaz]

We were relegated so no way would that be the case.

[Hanshithispantz]

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?

 

Well considering most teams could do with an extra player or two I think we could be worse off. On paper I meant we could be a top 6 or 7 team which is realistic imo.

 

The manager has been tanked many times but also gave us the 4-4 Arsenal comeback, the Chelski drubbing and games where we played Man United off the park.

 

Back on the subject of Mike, the one thing I am grateful to him for was buying us when he did as we could have ended up like Rangers, Leeds or a Coventry otherwise.

 

Pathetic - if most of the fans are like you, they deserve the crap set up they have now.

 

Grateful..!!! Grow a pair.

 

Why not? Would you like to be a fan of Leeds, Rangers or Coventry at the moment?

No, I also wouldn't like to be blind. I'm struggling to see what your point is here?

[biggs]

[hoppaz]

Its a well known fact we were in dire straights before Ashley came along and bought us. Those teams I mentioned were unlucky enough not to have been bought by someone who sorted their debt.

 

I suppose my point is whilst I am not a fan of Mike I guess we would be following a different path now and it would be a lot worse imo.

[Hanshithispantz]

Was it certain that we were fucked to such an extent at the time? I have no idea tbh, but even if Ashley did save us that one time he's done more than his fair share to fuck us over since, including actually relegating us.

 

He clearly has no intention of running us as anything more than a fairly sustainable Premiership club and for that any positives he has ever done for the club are completely negated, we're a chore to support at the moment and we have been for a while; if it wasn't for Ben Arfa I'd probably slice my fucking wrists.

[Wullie]

Rangers were slapped with a vast bill after it was discovered they'd been fiddling their taxes for years, and Coventry didn't own their own ground, and so had to rent it at an extortionate rate.

 

Are these two clubs the new Portsmouth in that they'll be used to defend Ashley under any circumstances despite being nothing like us?

[quayside]

Quayside.

 

I haven't said you are defending Ashley's idiocy. Ozzie quoting your posts to defend it though so it was directed at him.

 

Things got out of shape under the Halls.

 

Things are not going well under Ashley.

 

I'd like to revisit a question i raised. I assume most clubs have their debt held by banks/financial insitutions (clearly not Chelsea and Mancity). If our debt was placed similarly to those other clubs. Would we be in good shape financially? Would we be in profit as we are now? Because, if not then the obvious conclusion is that Ashley is not running the club optimally. Or even close to it. All he would have done would be to shield the club from that kind of exposure but not set any means in place whereby it could operate free of him.

 

Without doing a study on other clubs I cannot really comment on their finances or the level of their debt. You mention Man City and Chelsea as being owner financed. The last time I looked Villa and Fulham were as well. I don't know to what extent John Henry has put his hand in his pocket at Liverpool. I did have a look at Spurs who have been run brilliantly by Levy. They have £85 million of bank loans in place that seem to be secured on White Hart Lane. Financially they always make an operating profit (before player trading and amortisation) and have a strong balance sheet. They do have an overdraft facility but at the last count (2012) they had £16 million in the bank.

 

Your question about how we would get on with bank funding is obviously difficult to answer, because I don't think we would be able to borrow £111 million as we don't have enough assets to secure it. It is also a larger sum than our annual turnover. Thats my opinion and I'd be interested if someone can offer another view. There is an issue with borrowing using St James Park as security because I believe the land on which SJP stands is not owned by the club. So season ticket sales would be the biggest security we could offer, and I can't see anyone lending hugely using that. The club seems to be able to make operating profits now (before player trading and amortisation), you would need to knock off interest payments on any funding we did get. So yes the clubs financial performance has improved. But its not really possible to answer the question because of the fundamental issue of funding. Your point about Ashley shielding us from loan exposure is spot on.

[Lotus]

To me he doesn't appear to restructured the way we're run for us to able to manage without him. Commercial revenue has decreased. There's nothing on the pitch worth a hike in season ticket pricing.

 

Does this make us an attractive option to buy?

[Wullie]

Financial performance has “improved” because we refuse to invest properly in players, which was Shepherd’s main outgoing. Using the word ‘improvement’ in that context is a misnomer imo, because we’re a football club.

 

Might as well say “my personal financial situation has improved dramatically since I stopped paying for electricity, gas and food. Now I sit in the dark with a blanket and some stale bread and I consider myself much better off”