Guest chopey Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Ashley doesn't want to make friends, he only wants to make money Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewJerseyMag Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 "I have to advise that Mike Ashley must politely decline your invitation, and I would kindly ask that all future correspondence be directed to me here." Aye, blunt as f*** that from Charnley. Bordering on verbal gbh. What a ridiculous story. Wonder if she's happy her email is now fully in the public domain It already was, what with her being an MP and that. Never looked for an MP's "work" email, wasn't sure if it was easily available or not. Jesus wept. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest snoopythewriter Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Racist fucker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Just proves again what cunts we have that own us / run the club imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exiled in Texas Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Pathetic as usual from 'our' club. Pfft. Still see bot all wrong with the reply. The only part of this that is pathetic is the Chronicle and anyone else making hay out of it. Wondering that myself (sensationalism to one side) it is simply the head employee of the club saying that if you want to talk about the club then please contact them directly. Mike is the owner of NUFC but not the Chairman. It's also well known that Mike doesn't do interviews, and this seemed to be a request for a one-on-one meeting rather than a business meeting which was, not unexpectedly, declined. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Can't hurt that it makes the MP look good in the eyes of the public either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Yes, nothing wrong here tbh. Nothing wrong with asking for a meeting, nothing wrong with Ashley refusing it or the way the club handled it. The Chronicle coming out of this looking a bit silly really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 MP in attention-seeking gesture shock. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanj Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I for one love a good slagging of Mike Ashley for whatever reason, stretched or not. Slander him and be sued for libel for all I care. I'm all for libel, slander, and all that other nonsense to that utter fucking prick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Jesus christ man http://www.themag.co.uk/the-mag-articles/mike-ashley-mash-holdings-includes-newcastle-united-see-latest-profits-double-256m/ The Profits at Mike Ashley MASH Holdings have seen profits double within a year, going up from a very healthy £130.6m to a whopping £256.4m. The Mike Ashley MASH Holdings saw continued growth by Sports Direct International and right across his ever expanding range of brands. Newcastle United is part of MASH Holdings and the part it plays in helping to create those huge £256m profits can’t be underestimated, via the free marketing and profile that the football club gives the Mike Ashley empire. mike ashley mash holdingsMASH Holdings is owned 100 per cent by Mike Ashley and the group profits before tax for the year up to April 2013 were £256.4m, with turnover also going up 18 per cent. The accounts which have recently been filed, also show that MASH Holdings’ net assets rose by 68 per cent to £581.5m. Things get even better for the Newcastle United owner as in the period since these accounts cover, the share price of Sports Direct has gone up by 75 per cent and so Ashley’s 62 per cent share of SD (owned via MASH Holdings) is on its own valued at £2.9bn on Wednesday’s closing share price. You may have wondered about the reference to ‘group structure’ in answer to a question asked at the most recent Fans Forum; Question: If Mike Ashley is committed to owning the club, why doesn’t he just write the debt off? Answer: The board explained that it would be an option that some clubs would consider, but from the perspective of our group structure there is a requirement to have debt within the structure. When ‘Group Structure’ is talked about by Ashley and his employees at Newcastle United, it is this ‘MASH Holdings’ that they are referring to, where the Newcastle United owner has grouped together the football club and his brands/shareholdings. The reason for having that debt inside Newcastle United is because for business reasons it suits Mike Ashley, not any kind of goodness of his heart towards our club or the fans. The following explanation on ownership appears on the Newcastle United official website; Newcastle United Limited is the company which owns Newcastle United Football Club. The ultimate parent company of Newcastle United is MASH Holdings Limited and the ultimate controlling party of MASH Holdings Limited is Mike Ashley. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 We are advertising space forever. Nothing more than retaining a place in the premier league. Enjoy folks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattoon Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Am I right in assuming that having negative equity in Newcastle United would absorb some of the taxes owed by MASH and by writing off the debt by absorbing it into MASH would cause him more losses in the long run? That would make sense as to why it's interest free and he's not looking to recoup any time soon? If he just adds it to the value of the club he can continue to use it as a sort of tax haven and ultimately not lose a penny if/when he sells up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Am I right in assuming that having negative equity in Newcastle United would absorb some of the taxes owed by MASH and by writing off the debt by absorbing it into MASH would cause him more losses in the long run? That would make sense as to why it's interest free and he's not looking to recoup any time soon? If he just adds it to the value of the club he can continue to use it as a sort of tax haven and ultimately not lose a penny if/when he sells up. The only time he will sell up, if ever. Is when Newcastle United is no longer giving SD the exposure it wants. I cant see this changing for a long time. Sadly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggs Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 think i will cry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest snoopythewriter Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 MASH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JS Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 So, for the older members on here, how does Ashleys era compare with direction and ownership in the 70's, 80's etc? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 So, for the older members on here, how does Ashleys era compare with direction and ownership in the 70's, 80's etc? Good question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 So, for the older members on here, how does Ashleys era compare with direction and ownership in the 70's, 80's etc? Good question. It was a football club back then with ambitions. Regardless of its position. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 So, for the older members on here, how does Ashleys era compare with direction and ownership in the 70's, 80's etc? Good question. It was a football club back then with ambitions. Regardless of its position. Do you remember? I wasn't having a dig, I genuinely want to know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loki679 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 So, for the older members on here, how does Ashleys era compare with direction and ownership in the 70's, 80's etc? Good question. It was a football club back then with ambitions. Regardless of its position. Do you remember? I wasn't having a dig, I genuinely want to know. You're very passive aggressive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 So, for the older members on here, how does Ashleys era compare with direction and ownership in the 70's, 80's etc? Good question. It was a football club back then with ambitions. Regardless of its position. Do you remember? I wasn't having a dig, I genuinely want to know. You're very passive aggressive. Eh? I was being anything but, I was honestly asking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
danswan Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Was pretty similar back in the 80's as I remember it, but there wasn't this feeling that we were being actively exploited, just that they powers that be were generally incompetent and unconcerned about the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 So, for the older members on here, how does Ashleys era compare with direction and ownership in the 70's, 80's etc? Good question. It was a football club back then with ambitions. Regardless of its position. Do you remember? I wasn't having a dig, I genuinely want to know. I was first taken to the match in 1982, whilst not attending all the time i still followed the club mainly through CP40 and our old man. You couldn't escape Newcastle Unitedin our house. I rememeber the promotion with KK and Beardsley etc. It seemed fantastic and the buzz of promption seemed magical to a kid. I dont recal much grumbling about the board then... I remember things getting a bit sour with Jack Charlton in charge and the club selling Waddle, Beardsley and Gazza.. Not suprised with Jack Charlton as manager... but I still think we were one of the highest spenders one season, under Willie McFall, and were then relegated. I think a couple of failed promotions and money getting tight started with the McKeags...and fans wanted real change. But after all that it still felt like a football club, it still felt like it could be turned around. The dream of ambition and wanting to improve was always there , the previous boards did try but didn't have any money. But I dont think they were as sinister as Ashley's vision for NUFC. For me now, the club feels empty, devoid of anything, sterile, its just an advertising space for its parent company. Its not going to change anytime soon. Yeah, we are hovering around, lurking about he premiership...but to what end??? Its totally emotionless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belfast Mags Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JS Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 So, for the older members on here, how does Ashleys era compare with direction and ownership in the 70's, 80's etc? Good question. It was a football club back then with ambitions. Regardless of its position. Do you remember? I wasn't having a dig, I genuinely want to know. I was first taken to the match in 1982, whilst not attending all the time i still followed the club mainly through CP40 and our old man. You couldn't escape Newcastle Unitedin our house. I rememeber the promotion with KK and Beardsley etc. It seemed fantastic and the buzz of promption seemed magical to a kid. I dont recal much grumbling about the board then... I remember things getting a bit sour with Jack Charlton in charge and the club selling Waddle, Beardsley and Gazza.. Not suprised with Jack Charlton as manager... but I still think we were one of the highest spenders one season, under Willie McFall, and were then relegated. I think a couple of failed promotions and money getting tight started with the McKeags...and fans wanted real change. But after all that it still felt like a football club, it still felt like it could be turned around. The dream of ambition and wanting to improve was always there , the previous boards did try but didn't have any money. But I dont think they were as sinister as Ashley's vision for NUFC. For me now, the club feels empty, devoid of anything, sterile, its just an advertising space for its parent company. Its not going to change anytime soon. Yeah, we are hovering around, lurking about he premiership...but to what end??? Its totally emotionless. That's what my curiosity was regarding. Right now, it really does feel absolutely pointless, and yet to anybody else but MA so obvious in how it can be improved; Actually spending money the club makes and having a real plan in place for some (any) form of progression. I'm in agreement about the purpose of the club being to advertise SD and to simply remain in the league. This is probably why the question of 'what would it take to get rid of MA' and relegation coming into the same subject for some people. We aren't going anywhere, are we? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts