Guest Roger Kint Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Without bothering with most of that well overdone discussion ie Commercial theres some rank stupidity in there. 'What has happened to the money? With Mike Ashley owning Newcastle United in its entirety, he presents his accounts as he sees fit, with only the basics available for us to see via the published club accounts and then set out by such things as the Deloitte reports.' He actually publishes the FULL accounts, unless this bloke is asking for every bastard receipt he wont see more in any club. Baffling statement there I hope Ashley doesnt read that article either, if The Mag think matchday revenue isnt high enough am sure theres a way for Mike to charge fans more. After all affordable tickets arent worth shit to the clubs profits Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spinner99 Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 He is killing the club. Slowly. It's in the hands of the fans - if nobody went to the game for a few weeks how long would he last? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 He is killing the club. Slowly. It's in the hands of the fans - if nobody went to the game for a few weeks how long would he last? The same amount of time as he would if people still went obviously. Unless you think he will refund every unused season ticket for those weeks? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spinner99 Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 I think the massive (negative) publicity would drive him out or at least piss him off enough to go. The alternative is apathy and resignation that this is how it must be..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 I think the massive (negative) publicity would drive him out or at least piss him off enough to go. The alternative is apathy and resignation that this is how it must be..... People have already paid for their season tickets, only way that fans can force him is if they dont buy them on a longer term than that ie at renewal time. One or two no shows are as unlikely to work as they are unlikely to happen. Do you own a ticket? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 I just think we're operating under a massive delusion if we think it's possible for enough fans to stay away for long enough to force a change of ownership. How many would it take? 20k crowds for a whole season? It's just never going to happen. And more than that, I don't blame anyone who wants to continue to enjoy match day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 I just think we're operating under a massive delusion if we think it's possible for enough fans to stay away for long enough to force a change of ownership. How many would it take? 20k crowds for a whole season? It's just never going to happen. And more than that, I don't blame anyone who wants to continue to enjoy match day. This. Even if 25000 stayed away til May he has that money, doesnt gain for catering matchdays and ultimately wont lose enough to decide to give away the club for a price where he loses £100m or whatever. Only course of action ticket wise would be to not renew in Feb. Even then financially i see many fans not doing that as like you say people still enjoy going and will use it to save on full price tickets. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanSkÃrare Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 So how much is down to SD not paying here? From £27,6m to £13,8m is staggering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 So how much is down to SD not paying here? From £27,6m to £13,8m is staggering. We dont know, that figure is merchandise, catering, sponsorship etc. Not a case of SD in isolation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Catering, for example, is outsourced so comparisons based on revenue are difficult. NUFC's revenue is their concession fee, which will be only a fraction of the amount that would be classed as revenue if the club carried it out themselves. Of course the club would then also bear the associated costs. If NUFC have outsourced all merchendising to SD then the revenue from this will similarly be much smaller than if the activity was carried out by NUFC. A lot of this is missed in the Deloitte rich list, which for some reason is obsessed with revenue but ignores costs in their headline numbers. It's hard to draw conclusions on these areas. What isn't in doubt though is that we used to have paying sponsors where SD signs now enjoy a free ride. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 We also choose to focus on revenue when debating finances as well to a large extent, while ignoring profit and loss. Always found that really strange. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 We also choose to focus on revenue when debating finances as well to a large extent, while ignoring profit and loss. Always found that really strange. Turnover = Vanity. Profit = Sanity. Never truer than in that strangely slanted article. That said a PL team and a stadium like SJP is a very good fit with his core business interests at present. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 So how much is down to SD not paying here? From £27,6m to £13,8m is staggering. The staggering thing is that most of the posts after The Mag article are either sticking up for Ashley or having a go at the article. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny Green Balls Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 It amazes me how anyone can still stick up for that prick. They actually exist beyond the straw man's world? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny Green Balls Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 as much as an odious tit NE5 could be, fair play to him for warning everybody, like a bitchy Cassandra on her period. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 It amazes me how anyone can still stick up for that prick. They actually exist beyond the straw man's world? Not one single post since that article sticking up for Ashley but lets not allow facts to stop you posting shit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 He would have said the same about anyone that wasn't Shepherd tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny Green Balls Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 It amazes me how anyone can still stick up for that prick. They actually exist beyond the straw man's world? Not one single post since that article sticking up for Ashley but lets not allow facts to stop you posting shit. I was referring to what Mick said, thank you Mr Observant. He claimed that some were sticking up for him, and I said that "it", ready?..."amazes me how anyone can stick up for that prick. They exist beyond a straw man's world?" The key phrase here is straw man's world. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 It amazes me how anyone can still stick up for that prick. They actually exist beyond the straw man's world? Not one single post since that article sticking up for Ashley but lets not allow facts to stop you posting shit. I was referring to what Mick said, thank you Mr Observant. He claimed that some were sticking up for him, and I said that "it", ready?..."amazes me if anyone sticks up for that prick beyond a straw man's world." The key phrase here is straw man's world. Well good for you for only being half wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny Green Balls Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 [Edit: Yeah, less of that.] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Catering, for example, is outsourced so comparisons based on revenue are difficult. NUFC's revenue is their concession fee, which will be only a fraction of the amount that would be classed as revenue if the club carried it out themselves. Of course the club would then also bear the associated costs. If NUFC have outsourced all merchendising to SD then the revenue from this will similarly be much smaller than if the activity was carried out by NUFC. A lot of this is missed in the Deloitte rich list, which for some reason is obsessed with revenue but ignores costs in their headline numbers. It's hard to draw conclusions on these areas. What isn't in doubt though is that we used to have paying sponsors where SD signs now enjoy a free ride. Catering is outsourced, it wasn't at the time of those figures in The Mag article. The figures used are up to our relegation season as our finishing position is shown as 20th. Numbers were released at the end of that season claiming XXX number of people had been made redundant due to relegation. The club counter-claimed that only 30 were made redundant due to relegation, the others were due to outsourcing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Well good for you for only being half wrong. He's not wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Catering is outsourced, it wasn't at the time of those figures in The Mag article. The figures used are up to our relegation season as our finishing position is shown as 20th. Numbers were released at the end of that season claiming XXX number of people had been made redundant due to relegation. The club counter-claimed that only 30 were made redundant due to relegation, the others were due to outsourcing. My only point was the difficulty in comparing like for like with other clubs when all you do is look at revenue. Other clubs will do various things in house or outsourced. The key point on the merchendising side is that Ashley is on both sides of the fence and can decide where the profit actually falls (while the club pleads poverty because none of the real profits ever hit the club itself). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Catering is outsourced, it wasn't at the time of those figures in The Mag article. The figures used are up to our relegation season as our finishing position is shown as 20th. Numbers were released at the end of that season claiming XXX number of people had been made redundant due to relegation. The club counter-claimed that only 30 were made redundant due to relegation, the others were due to outsourcing. My only point was the difficulty in comparing like for like with other clubs when all you do is look at revenue. Other clubs will do various things in house or outsourced. The key point on the merchendising side is that Ashley is on both sides of the fence and can decide where the profit actually falls (while the club pleads poverty because none of the real profits ever hit the club itself). I was wrong actually so I have to apologise for that, I was reading it on my phone and the columns didn't line up correctly. The drop in commercial income was £6 million during the first season in which it was omitted/outsourced. The 20th was where we were placed in the world ranking so our commercial drop will have been partially down due to outsourcing catering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny Green Balls Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 He would have said the same about anyone that wasn't Shepherd tbh. This is true. He just happened to be right on this one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts