relámpago blanco Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 He won#t change manager if its on the market unless we are looking like going down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 To think Sheik Mansour nearly bought us but this greedy pig priced him out I don't believe a word of that. As far as I know we were actually approached by the corrupt bloke who ended up owning Portsmouth for a few months. He was working for Mansour right up until and slightly after buying Man City, he spat his dummy out when he didn't become Man City chairman. According to him, perhaps. Either way I don't believe an offer was made from Mansour and Ashley rejected it. was that not around the same time he was looking for 400m or whatever for the club though? mansour got citeh for 80m or something didn't he? not beyond the realms of possibility He paid about £210m for City as the deal included 'buying' the debts of about £170m Yeah that's right, but I'm sure Ashley was looking for much more than that at the same time. Oh no doubt Ashley would have tried to push for as much as possible, i know the media spoke of £400m but the latest articles show how little they truly know. Fact is back then he would have been gone if the £250m ish he spent was offered Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 He won#t change manager if its on the market unless we are looking like going down. Its no more on the market now than before we went down and every day since. Pardew is manager number 6 or something in that time....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 To think Sheik Mansour nearly bought us but this greedy pig priced him out I don't believe a word of that. As far as I know we were actually approached by the corrupt bloke who ended up owning Portsmouth for a few months. He was working for Mansour right up until and slightly after buying Man City, he spat his dummy out when he didn't become Man City chairman. According to him, perhaps. Either way I don't believe an offer was made from Mansour and Ashley rejected it. was that not around the same time he was looking for 400m or whatever for the club though? mansour got citeh for 80m or something didn't he? not beyond the realms of possibility He paid about £210m for City as the deal included 'buying' the debts of about £170m Yeah that's right, but I'm sure Ashley was looking for much more than that at the same time. Oh no doubt Ashley would have tried to push for as much as possible, i know the media spoke of £400m but the latest articles show how little they truly know. Fact is back then he would have been gone if the £250m ish he spent was offered i'm not convinced, this was before all the cost-cutting and making the club into a giant advert for cheap tat - ashley seemed to genuinely believe he had an asset on his hands back then and he could demand what he wanted for it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 I honestly dont think we are for sale, this was reeled out last time when the pressure was on after KK and relegation. Everyone calms down so not to unsettle things, then everyone waits to see what happens...Eventually nothing happens, Ashley and his pet gibbon are left alone, everythig back to normal. Guess who wins again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 I honestly dont think we are for sale, this was reeled out last time when the pressure was on after KK and relegation. Everyone calms down so not to unsettle things, then everyone waits to see what happens...Eventually nothing happens, Ashley and his pet gibbon are left alone, everythig back to normal. Guess who wins again. yeah but they're talking to americans this time gimp, have some faith, they wouldn't just lie to us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 I honestly dont think we are for sale, this was reeled out last time when the pressure was on after KK and relegation. Everyone calms down so not to unsettle things, then everyone waits to see what happens...Eventually nothing happens, Ashley and his pet gibbon are left alone, everythig back to normal. Guess who wins again. yeah but they're talking to americans this time gimp, have some faith, they wouldn't just lie to us What americans? Mike, B-More and the other yanks on here? :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varadi Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 This is a really good read: https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/jim-white/newcastle-majority-see-big-picture-about-ashley-and-pardew-093250140.html? Especially liked: Ashley has not stripped the club entirely of its assets or prominence. What he has done is slowly, miserably and cynically, reduced its sense of pride, purpose and tradition. Newcastle has a hold on its local community like no other club in the country. What it does matters locally, what it does infects the morale of the entire city. And Ashley has done nothing but squander that hard-won connection. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Is it just me who finds the whole debt issue a load of bollocks?! He bought the club without doing due diligence so it was HIS fault that he was apparently unaware of debts totaling around £67m. Then, through HIS various fuck-ups (mainly four managers in one season which led to relegation), the debt has spiraled to £130m. He initially had to cover it because HIS investment would have gone down the pan so why should that fat wanker be entitled to claw it back?! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Is it just me who finds the whole debt issue a load of bollocks?! He bought the club without doing due diligence so it was HIS fault that he was apparently unaware of debts totaling around £67m. Then, through HIS various fuck-ups (mainly four managers in one season which led to relegation), the debt has spiraled to £130m. He initially had to cover it because HIS investment would have gone down the pan so why should that fat wanker be entitled to claw it back?! It doesn't really matter whose fault it is, he's a business man and will want the right price to sell. Pointless to worry about whether he's entitled or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 This is a really good read: https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/jim-white/newcastle-majority-see-big-picture-about-ashley-and-pardew-093250140.html? Especially liked: Ashley has not stripped the club entirely of its assets or prominence. What he has done is slowly, miserably and cynically, reduced its sense of pride, purpose and tradition. Newcastle has a hold on its local community like no other club in the country. What it does matters locally, what it does infects the morale of the entire city. And Ashley has done nothing but squander that hard-won connection. Finally! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Is it just me who finds the whole debt issue a load of bollocks?! He bought the club without doing due diligence so it was HIS fault that he was apparently unaware of debts totaling around £67m. Then, through HIS various fuck-ups (mainly four managers in one season which led to relegation), the debt has spiraled to £130m. He initially had to cover it because HIS investment would have gone down the pan so why should that fat wanker be entitled to claw it back?! It doesn't really matter whose fault it is, he's a business man and will want the right price to sell. Pointless to worry about whether he's entitled or not. He knew there was £67m, just not the fact he would be forced to deal with it immediately didnt he? Agree the rest is his own failings mind but like you say Ian its up to him what he asks for it in the end of the day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 yeah think it was the 30 day payment (?) that was the surprise aye was it only 67m when he took over? so he's close to doubled the debt then? don't follow those finacial posts on here that closely Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 yeah think it was the 30 day payment (?) that was the surprise aye was it only 67m when he took over? so he's close to doubled the debt then? don't follow those finacial posts on here that closely Was that not the orginal figure when he took over...Then the club was relegated by his own stupidty which he then had to support out of his own pocket. I'm sure I read Barclays advised they wouldn't allow the club to have such a big overdraft in the Championship. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 i thought the relegation & overdraft payoff cost us an extra 30m from his own pocket or thereabouts debt is 130m or something so how did it from 67m to 100m prior to the relegation? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 yeah think it was the 30 day payment (?) that was the surprise aye was it only 67m when he took over? so he's close to doubled the debt then? don't follow those finacial posts on here that closely Well the mortgage or whatever it was came to that. There was also about £20m outstanding on transfers i think, sure they were complaining about that early on. Edit: That may have been part of the £67m though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 roughly 63m added to the debt seems a lot like if purchase debt was 67m, sure one of the lads will be along to explain it at some stage Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickthemagpie Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Am i the only one who, when he sees a picture of Mike Ashley, wants the next one to be of him with a hole the size of the bullet from a Barrett sniper rifle firmly in the centre of his forehead? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Am i the only one who, when he sees a picture of Mike Ashley, wants the next one to be of him with a hole the size of the bullet from a Barrett sniper rifle firmly in the centre of his forehead? Nope. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/sep/12/newcastle-united-mike-ashley-shares-rangers The Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley has said he will not buy any more shares to help fund Rangers, a statement likely to dampen speculation that he could take over the former Scottish champions. Ashley has a stake of more than 4.5% in Rangers who are trying to raise around £4m from the sale of new shares to investors as the club seeks financial stability. “I will not be participating in the open offer which closes at 11am today,” Ashley said in a one-line statement, referring to the fund-raising by Rangers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sempuki Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/sep/12/newcastle-united-mike-ashley-shares-rangers The Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley has said he will not buy any more shares to help fund Rangers, a statement likely to dampen speculation that he could take over the former Scottish champions. Ashley has a stake of more than 4.5% in Rangers who are trying to raise around £4m from the sale of new shares to investors as the club seeks financial stability. “I will not be participating in the open offer which closes at 11am today,” Ashley said in a one-line statement, referring to the fund-raising by Rangers. Shit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 roughly 63m added to the debt seems a lot like if purchase debt was 67m, sure one of the lads will be along to explain it at some stage £39m was added in the following two years as short term loans to keep us going(£28m in relegation season), the debt he bought was £70m(according to Swiss Ramble) plus his Allardyce spending and it wouldnt be too far off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Jerusalem Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 yeah think it was the 30 day payment (?) that was the surprise aye was it only 67m when he took over? so he's close to doubled the debt then? don't follow those finacial posts on here that closely Well the mortgage or whatever it was came to that. There was also about £20m outstanding on transfers i think, sure they were complaining about that early on. Edit: That may have been part of the £67m though I think you're right about some of the extra debt being owed from transfers, which was leaked just before the first January transfer window he was here and used as the excuse why we brought nobody in then. The fact that this is how just about every club bought players and paid the fees in stages over the player's contract (and still do) and he is just about the only club owner that pays 100% up front eluded him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 yeah think it was the 30 day payment (?) that was the surprise aye was it only 67m when he took over? so he's close to doubled the debt then? don't follow those finacial posts on here that closely Well the mortgage or whatever it was came to that. There was also about £20m outstanding on transfers i think, sure they were complaining about that early on. Edit: That may have been part of the £67m though I think you're right about some of the extra debt being owed from transfers, which was leaked just before the first January transfer window and used as the excuse why we brought nobody in then. The fact that this is how just about every club bought players and paid the fees in stages over the player's contract (and still do) and he is just about the only club owner that pays 100% up front eluded him. Definitely remember them whinging about something to do with fees owed. Like you say its standard footballing practice, one of the many things he didnt understand buying when us on a whim with no knowledgable person alongside him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 yeah think it was the 30 day payment (?) that was the surprise aye was it only 67m when he took over? so he's close to doubled the debt then? don't follow those finacial posts on here that closely Well the mortgage or whatever it was came to that. There was also about £20m outstanding on transfers i think, sure they were complaining about that early on. Edit: That may have been part of the £67m though I think you're right about some of the extra debt being owed from transfers, which was leaked just before the first January transfer window and used as the excuse why we brought nobody in then. The fact that this is how just about every club bought players and paid the fees in stages over the player's contract (and still do) and he is just about the only club owner that pays 100% up front eluded him. Definitely remember them whinging about something to do with fees owed. Like you say its standard footballing practice, one of the many things he didnt understand buying when us on a whim with no knowledgable person alongside him. The main whinge was about the Owen deal, which was apparently paid for with up-front sponsorship money from Northern Rock. Meaning we basically had no main sponsor income until the deal ran out, but it wasn't debt as such. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts