Wallace Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 He does seem to enjoy taking on the authorities but maybe he is starting to push the boundaries on one too many fronts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/11388286/Mike-Ashley-is-treating-Rangers-like-a-branch-of-Sports-Direct-with-his-knockdown-loan-deals.html Mike Ashley is treating Rangers like a branch of Sports Direct with his knockdown loan deals Newcastle owner's decision to send five players over the border on short-term contracts raises yet more questions over his intentions for both clubs Mike Ashley is treating Rangers like a branch of Sports Direct with his knockdown loan deals By Paul Hayward, Chief Sports Writer A debt is owed to Mick Quinn for pointing out that Newcastle United are sponsored by Wonga and were therefore bound to make some hefty post-Christmas loans to the disadvantaged: in this case Glasgow Rangers. Quinn, the former Newcastle striker, even suggested that his old club should now be called Rangecastle United As the window closed in England, a door opened in Scotland for five Newcastle players sent across the frontier to help Mike Ashley’s ‘other’ club win promotion from the Scottish Championship to the Scottish Premiership. Gael Bigirimana, Shane Ferguson, Haris Vuckic, Kevin Mbabu and Remie Streete were dispatched from Tyneside to Glasgow like a Sports Direct consignment of workers not good enough for a Premier League first XI but capable of improving a team in Scotland’s second tier. Interestingly the mass market move came after Rangers failed to register a shot on target in their 2-0 defeat by Celtic in the Scottish League Cup semi-final: a return of the Old Firm game, but not as we know it. Like a boxer waiting in the ring for his opponent to stop messing about in the dressing room, Celtic await the restoration of a rivalry that turned stone cold when Rangers were liquidated and forced to start again in Division Three. Only two English Premier League clubs declined to sign a player in the January transfer window now closed: Liverpool and Newcastle United, who were lambasted by the partner of Davide Santon following his loan move to Inter Milan. In a tweet, Chloe Sanderson alleged: "Disgusted with how Davide has been treated, fully fit for a while now with no chance to play – a club whose only intentions are to make £££." In a recent Radio 5 interview, the former Newcastle chairman Freddy Shepherd suggested that John Carver would be made manager at least until the end of the season because he would not demand money from Ashley to make new signings. In other words, Carver, an honourable sort who knows the club well, would be so grateful to land the chance to prove himself that he would not challenge the Newcastle model of bargain-hunting-with-high-sales. Shepherd also theorised that Ashley was now lending money to Rangers to become their owner by other means: by positioning himself as the club’s "banker", a tactic that would prevent him running into difficulty with Uefa’s ban on owning two clubs in the same competition. Uncertainty: Rangers fans have lost faith in their club after years of financial struggle None of this is illegal, but it creates a stink at both ends. As the Newcastle five motored north on a mission to blow away Hibs, Queen of the South and Falkirk (Hearts have a seemingly unassailable 16-point lead at the top), Carver’s squad was stripped of five fringe players, as well as Santon, Hatem Ben Arfa (released) and Mapou Yanga-Mbiwa, who went to Roma. The CVs of the five players are important: Bigirimana, 21, has made 26 first-team appearances and is one of the stars of Peter Beardsley’s Under-21 side. Ferguson, 23, has 17 Northern Ireland caps but is returning from a knee injury. Mbabu is a Switzerland Under-19 international who has yet to make his first-team debut while Streete, 20, has made it as far as the Newcastle bench. Finally Vuckic, 22, has a Slovenia cap but has managed only 32 appearances for the first XI since joining in 2009. This quintet of nearly-men and players in development is bound to swing the odds in favour of Rangers as Ashley protects his recent £10 million loan to the blue half of Glasgow, which bought him control of the training ground, registered trademarks and "other properties" (though not Ibrox). The loans also entitled Ashley to nominate Derek Llambias and Barry Leach of Sports Direct to the Ibrox board. Meanwhile a Scottish FA judicial panel are examining Ashley’s stakes in Newcastle and Rangers after Scotland’s governing body stopped him increasing his Rangers stake to just under 30 per cent. Among the questions that need answering: are Rangers paying the Newcastle loanees from the money Ashley has lent them, i.e has he turned a wage cost at Newcastle into part of Rangers’ debt to him? And most importantly: what are his intentions for both clubs? Which does he want to own long-term, and would it be right for him to control Rangers while acting as their banker and at the same time use Newcastle as a glorified Sports Direct branch? Ashley knows the rules and he knows how to make them work to his advantage. But when those five players set off from Newcastle, for an assignment few of them, probably, would have chosen as their ideal career move, Ashley borrowed a move from the Pozzo family, who owned Watford, Udinese in Italy and Granada in Spain. Rangers were desperate. They turned to Ashley. Five possibly bewildered players took off their Wonga shirts and crossed the border, bearing loans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Hopefully he'll be dining on some polonium 210 soon. Shame he's not trying to expand in to the Soviet Union. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I don't get it. You've got more money than you could possibly spend, why try and screw people over to get more? His bank balance is just a number now, increasing it doesn't even benefit him anymore. Ashley sums up everything that's wrong with capitalism. Absolutely disgusting man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flartyblartclart Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I don't get it. You've got more money than you could possibly spend, why try and screw people over to get more? His bank balance is just a number now, increasing it doesn't even benefit him anymore. Ashley sums up everything that's wrong with capitalism. Absolutely disgusting man. It's all about power. Those with power crave more. It's typical of the man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 As much as some of us dislike or hate Rangers I can see some sort of alliance developing at this rate. I hope so...we might finally get to the cunt and get him out of football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Sadly, there is not a chance of that fat twat selling us with this kicking in next year! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2940298/Sky-face-battle-lion-s-share-Premier-League-TV-broadcasting-rights.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I don't get it. You've got more money than you could possibly spend, why try and screw people over to get more? His bank balance is just a number now, increasing it doesn't even benefit him anymore. Ashley sums up everything that's wrong with capitalism. Absolutely disgusting man. EDIT: as i said in the rangers thread though, there certainly seems to be an element of thumbing his nose at the establishment with ashley, if he's told he can't or shouldn't do something he'll dig in and see it to the end Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_69 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I had this discussion with a cov fan recently. 'What have you got to moan about?' Your stable in the top flight' it's all well and good talking about 80 odd other teams opinions when they are striving to get into the divisions but we are in the elite one and have been for some time and no one is asking to the win the thing either. Their opinion is irrelevant. The only club who operate in a similar vein to us are villa who have exactly the same quibbles big club with a large fan base whose hierarchy are happy to tread water; and rightly so. What their reasoning is I don't know but ours is patently to put done crass brand the primary interest over anything else and as far as I can see, no other club in the land is doing that, nor operating the same head coach or transfer policies we do simultaneously. So how can they have an informed opinion? There's a massive difference between the two clubs - ambition. Coventry may not be in the Premier League but they have a goal to get there and they will do everything in their power to achieve it. It's the same goal as all but a very small percentage of football clubs, from Sunday League upwards, and that's why supporters carry on supporting attending games week-in, week-out. We have no goal other than to exist and therefore, we as supporters of NUFC are being royally fucked over. We have the financial means, the supporter base, the stadium and the global pull to be a major force in the Premier League but that's not what the board are interested in. Coventry fans can complain about us moaning despite being in the Premier League but the truth is that they, as supporters, are in a much better place than we are. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I don't get it. You've got more money than you could possibly spend, why try and screw people over to get more? His bank balance is just a number now, increasing it doesn't even benefit him anymore. Ashley sums up everything that's wrong with capitalism. Absolutely disgusting man. EDIT: as i said in the rangers thread though, there certainly seems to be an element of thumbing his nose at the establishment with ashley, if he's told he can't or shouldn't do something he'll dig in and see it to the end A lot of entrepreneurs aren't motivated by money initially anyway, they have a drive to work and a drive to achieve whatever they perceive as success. They can't just switch that off when they get to a certain level of wealth. If they thought like that they would stop once they had a detached house and a Mercedes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 http://www.themag.co.uk/2015/02/mike-ashley-restructured-newcastle-united/ Some of the comments... Fuck. Me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fugazi Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 http://www.themag.co.uk/2015/02/mike-ashley-restructured-newcastle-united/ Some of the comments... Fuck. Me. Don't be so harsh on yourself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 http://www.themag.co.uk/2015/02/mike-ashley-restructured-newcastle-united/ Some of the comments... f***. Me. Don't be so harsh on yourself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sempuki Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Modern day dictator. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Crooks Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 I had this discussion with a cov fan recently. 'What have you got to moan about?' Your stable in the top flight' it's all well and good talking about 80 odd other teams opinions when they are striving to get into the divisions but we are in the elite one and have been for some time and no one is asking to the win the thing either. Their opinion is irrelevant. The only club who operate in a similar vein to us are villa who have exactly the same quibbles big club with a large fan base whose hierarchy are happy to tread water; and rightly so. What their reasoning is I don't know but ours is patently to put done crass brand the primary interest over anything else and as far as I can see, no other club in the land is doing that, nor operating the same head coach or transfer policies we do simultaneously. So how can they have an informed opinion? There's a massive difference between the two clubs - ambition. Coventry may not be in the Premier League but they have a goal to get there and they will do everything in their power to achieve it. It's the same goal as all but a very small percentage of football clubs, from Sunday League upwards, and that's why supporters carry on supporting attending games week-in, week-out. We have no goal other than to exist and therefore, we as supporters of NUFC are being royally fucked over. We have the financial means, the supporter base, the stadium and the global pull to be a major force in the Premier League but that's not what the board are interested in. Coventry fans can complain about us moaning despite being in the Premier League but the truth is that they, as supporters, are in a much better place than we are. Well they're not like but I agree with rest of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 What will Coventry do when they get in the PL though? It's easy to have ambition when there's a massive prize just within reach. (Doesn't excuse us not trying, but what I mean is that their ambition is achievable at reasonable cost, has a clear purpose and a massive financial reward) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shays Given Tim Flowers Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 They'll probably try and consolidate their league status and then push on from there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 Aye, but the thing is they're in a much more precarious position to be able to spend said amounts in terms of a business. What £5million might be to them is probably the financial equivalent to £50million for Ashley, one would assume. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_69 Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 Aye, but the thing is they're in a much more precarious position to be able to spend said amounts in terms of a business. What £5million might be to them is probably the financial equivalent to £50million for Ashley, one would assume. Swansea, Leicester, West Ham, Southampton, Hull, Palace, QPR all came up recently-ish and they have all shown more ambition than us. Once you come up and consolidate your PL status you then aim to kick on. That's what they have all done with varying degrees of success but at least they have all showed a willingness to improve and aim high. Given how successful our scouting network is, it would take relatively little money (nowhere near £50m) and a decent managerial appointment to have us battling with Spurs, Southampton etc for European places and domestic cups on a regular basis. To actively avoid doing either out of some ill-founded logic that it would increase our chances of relegation is football sacrilege and the complete opposite of what a sporting establishment exists for. If Coventry came up they would show more ambition than us because all that entails is aiming to be the best they can be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 Aye, but the thing is they're in a much more precarious position to be able to spend said amounts in terms of a business. What £5million might be to them is probably the financial equivalent to £50million for Ashley, one would assume. Swansea, Leicester, West Ham, Southampton, Hull, Palace, QPR all came up recently-ish and they have all shown more ambition than us. Once you come up and consolidate your PL status you then aim to kick on. That's what they have all done with varying degrees of success but at least they have all showed a willingness to improve and aim high. Given how successful our scouting network is, it would take relatively little money (nowhere near £50m) and a decent managerial appointment to have us battling with Spurs, Southampton etc for European places and domestic cups on a regular basis. To actively avoid doing either out of some ill-founded logic that it would increase our chances of relegation is football sacrilege and the complete opposite of what a sporting establishment exists for. If Coventry came up they would show more ambition than us because all that entails is aiming to be the best they can be. Totally agree to be fair. I was just trying to point out the financial capabilities of those two clubs to be honest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordiesteve710 Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 http://www.themag.co.uk/2015/02/mike-ashley-restructured-newcastle-united/ Some of the comments... f***. Me. Genuinely staggering that. If anyone ever doubts that the regime have a presence in social media, I'd point them in the direction of that. Even a mackem wouldn't bother with defending Ashley that passionately. The line about 'regularly getting to cup quarter-finals.' Like you said- fuck me man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 Aye, but the thing is they're in a much more precarious position to be able to spend said amounts in terms of a business. What £5million might be to them is probably the financial equivalent to £50million for Ashley, one would assume. Swansea, Leicester, West Ham, Southampton, Hull, Palace, QPR all came up recently-ish and they have all shown more ambition than us. Once you come up and consolidate your PL status you then aim to kick on. That's what they have all done with varying degrees of success but at least they have all showed a willingness to improve and aim high. Given how successful our scouting network is, it would take relatively little money (nowhere near £50m) and a decent managerial appointment to have us battling with Spurs, Southampton etc for European places and domestic cups on a regular basis. To actively avoid doing either out of some ill-founded logic that it would increase our chances of relegation is football sacrilege and the complete opposite of what a sporting establishment exists for. If Coventry came up they would show more ambition than us because all that entails is aiming to be the best they can be. The money is in the CL. That's too much risk and effort. Secondly, the money is in staying in the PL. For a club like us, that's fairly low risk. There's not much financial gain versus risk in battling between 5-13, that's the killer. Shooting for 17th is risky obviously. But the investment gap between consistently finishing 6th vs. 11th is huge. Spurs make it work with a great selling record and absolutely milking the brand and fanbase for everything. It's a lot of hard work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 If you don't care about sporting achievement, or you don't believe the jump is realistically possible, ticking along in the middle is far too attractive. That's what I mean about the fundamental structure of the game having gone wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_NUFC Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 Aye, but the thing is they're in a much more precarious position to be able to spend said amounts in terms of a business. What £5million might be to them is probably the financial equivalent to £50million for Ashley, one would assume. Swansea, Leicester, West Ham, Southampton, Hull, Palace, QPR all came up recently-ish and they have all shown more ambition than us. Once you come up and consolidate your PL status you then aim to kick on. That's what they have all done with varying degrees of success but at least they have all showed a willingness to improve and aim high. Given how successful our scouting network is, it would take relatively little money (nowhere near £50m) and a decent managerial appointment to have us battling with Spurs, Southampton etc for European places and domestic cups on a regular basis. To actively avoid doing either out of some ill-founded logic that it would increase our chances of relegation is football sacrilege and the complete opposite of what a sporting establishment exists for. If Coventry came up they would show more ambition than us because all that entails is aiming to be the best they can be. The money is in the CL. That's too much risk and effort. Secondly, the money is in staying in the PL. For a club like us, that's fairly low risk. There's not much financial gain versus risk in battling between 5-13, that's the killer. Shooting for 17th is risky obviously. But the investment gap between consistently finishing 6th vs. 11th is huge. Spurs make it work with a great selling record and absolutely milking the brand and fanbase for everything. It's a lot of hard work. Our fans are just as ready to be milked. I personally spent over a grand just this year visiting Newcastle for the first time and we bought freaking 5 tickets and 3 people in our crew bought the Wonga shirts from the stadium store. We're gullible, even more so than Spurs, and we would love an iota of ambition, the club will make the money back in no time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 Ashley doesn't know how to run such a model. You're talking about a premium service there. Create a compelling product then maximise revenue? Why do that when you can stack em high, sell em cheap? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts