Jump to content

Recommended Posts

To put it more eloquently.

 

 

You can easily assess Ashley's performance as owner of Newcastle United without assessing the clubs finances.

 

Finance is a parameter that Ashley has to work under. It's not an excuse for ineptitude, incompetence and indifference.

 

To be fair, the discussion turned to finance as this is Ashley's only redeeming factor according to some. Everybody seems in agreement pretty much everything else bar possibly scouting, is well below what we should aspire to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for the argument that we need an owner with deep pockets made earlier- no we don't. Why should we expect someone else to shovel their cash on the bonfire? This club- run properly- can wash its own face and the supporter base should be prepared to be right behind that. It's a poor excuse and just masks the fact that we're not as strong operationally than we were in the past.

 

You are right about the loan notes, they were structured. Given that the club lost £32 million in 2007 and was technically insolvent it must be possible that would have consituted a breach of covenant? Incidentally apart from the stadium loan notes the club also had a further chunk of about £25 million (from memory) of debt outstanding in the summer of 2007.

 

I have quoted your paragraph above, as I'm not so sure about it. Clearly Spurs have done something like that over the years but they are an exception rather than a rule. There is a bit of Everton about it. I'm not sure the supporter base would be too receptive to a new ownership regime creating another Everton. Maybe I'm wrong. It is a club that lives within its means but a lot of the fan base criticise the board for lacking ambition (ambition = money).

 

Haing ambition does not equal operating beyond your means. It means having the will and determination to improve and grow. Mix that with some ability and we have the potential to improve and grow in stature both on and off the field.

 

As there is a total lack of will or determination the talent that could help realise it will keep well away. Naturally. The able and the apathetic are not natural bedfellows.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for the argument that we need an owner with deep pockets made earlier- no we don't. Why should we expect someone else to shovel their cash on the bonfire? This club- run properly- can wash its own face and the supporter base should be prepared to be right behind that. It's a poor excuse and just masks the fact that we're not as strong operationally than we were in the past.

 

You are right about the loan notes, they were structured. Given that the club lost £32 million in 2007 and was technically insolvent it must be possible that would have consituted a breach of covenant? Incidentally apart from the stadium loan notes the club also had a further chunk of about £25 million (from memory) of debt outstanding in the summer of 2007.

 

 

Also, not just the question of repayment of existing debt, but the availability of new debt to finance our continued significant losses. Was it going to be easy to keep borrowing?

 

I don't think so, there was nothing left to offer as security.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for the argument that we need an owner with deep pockets made earlier- no we don't. Why should we expect someone else to shovel their cash on the bonfire? This club- run properly- can wash its own face and the supporter base should be prepared to be right behind that. It's a poor excuse and just masks the fact that we're not as strong operationally than we were in the past.

 

You are right about the loan notes, they were structured. Given that the club lost £32 million in 2007 and was technically insolvent it must be possible that would have consituted a breach of covenant? Incidentally apart from the stadium loan notes the club also had a further chunk of about £25 million (from memory) of debt outstanding in the summer of 2007.

 

I have quoted your paragraph above, as I'm not so sure about it. Clearly Spurs have done something like that over the years but they are an exception rather than a rule. There is a bit of Everton about it. I'm not sure the supporter base would be too receptive to a new ownership regime creating another Everton. Maybe I'm wrong. It is a club that lives within its means but a lot of the fan base criticise the board for lacking ambition (ambition = money).

 

Haing ambition does not equal operating beyond your means. It means having the will and determination to improve and grow. Mix that with some ability and we have the potential to improve and grow in stature both on and off the field.

 

As there is a total lack of will or determination the talent that could help realise it will keep well away. Naturally. The able and the apathetic are not natural bedfellows.

 

Fair enough. I think Everton is as ambitious as it can be given it's finances. They do their best to attract the best manager and players they can, and they never have the comedy show routines that we are adept at providing. But, despite that, there is still some supporter unrest as I understand it from a good mate of mine who is a lifelong Evertonian.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to overstate it, but I do think there is some truth in the view that spending is the biggest example of 'ambition' in the minds of fans. I'm not saying everyone thinks that, or that it's the only factor, but I would be interested to see how Ashley would be viewed if his financial approach was identical but his other decisions were slightly better.

 

(Possibly the wrong person to be asking this, as I would be quite happy)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, not just the question of repayment of existing debt, but the availability of new debt to finance our continued significant losses. Was it going to be easy to keep borrowing?

 

The club was maxed out. Ashley could hav bode his time and saved himself £100m. It's ironic he's so focused on cost control when you consider the reckless abandon with which he bought the club. I can't really get my head around it.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to overstate it, but I do think there is some truth in the view that spending is the biggest example of 'ambition' in the minds of fans. I'm not saying everyone thinks that, or that it's the only factor, but I would be interested to see how Ashley would be viewed if his financial approach was identical but his other decisions were slightly better.

 

(Possibly the wrong person to be asking this, as I would be quite happy)

 

In the end, it's not about spending, it's about results in football matches. Even the odd ridiculous decision would be forgiven if he had us challenging for the title. Unfortunately, we aren't, and there is a clear correlation between transfer and wage spending and success, so it's fairly logical that this is an area of focus, on top of the valid criticism of his many other mistakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to overstate it, but I do think there is some truth in the view that spending is the biggest example of 'ambition' in the minds of fans. I'm not saying everyone thinks that, or that it's the only factor, but I would be interested to see how Ashley would be viewed if his financial approach was identical but his other decisions were slightly better.

 

(Possibly the wrong person to be asking this, as I would be quite happy)

 

its definitely not ambitious to sell 1 and bring 1 in on loan when we just avoided relegation last season. Hiring Joe K. is the biggest sign that ashley doesnt give a fuk about where we finish as long as we dont go down.

 

Spending money is a sign of ambition...i like how we started scouting and signing "cheap" quality players with talent and the possibility of making good money on them. Problem is we dont buy what we need  - but who is the best deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, not just the question of repayment of existing debt, but the availability of new debt to finance our continued significant losses. Was it going to be easy to keep borrowing?

 

The club was maxed out. Ashley could hav bode his time and saved himself £100m. It's ironic he's so focused on cost control when you consider the reckless abandon with which he bought the club. I can't really get my head around it.

 

 

 

Did he not just see a window of opportunity to get what he wanted and acted quickly to avoid possible competition or Freddie being able to bend the Halls' ears ?  Freddie was on his sick bed at the time iirc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to point out that, if Ashley's ultimate aim is to sell the club, then the arguments of "milking out the money" "pay back the loan" actually do not hold, because these will only decrease the club's net assets value and in turn decrease the potential selling price.  So Ashley's best interest would be to maximize the club's value without any more personal inputs.

 

I agree that he is trying to take least risk in running the club.  But at the same time, I also wonder how "risky" that could be.  We were almost close to administration just because 1.  we missed out on CL and 2.  spending 15m on Owen and 10m on Luque.  Even taking into account the wages, the hit shouldn't be that critical.  So is that we over estimate our club's revenue generating power?  The likes of Liverpool and Spurs could afford to have a few 10m+ flops, but "seems" we can't. 

 

I didn't read the accounts in detail, just my general impression.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Got to be worrying having SD tills in the club shop and receipts with SD on them....Is the club shop now outsourced?

 

Is that true?

 

I cant confirm as i wont buy from the club shop...true-faith seem to think so.  Nufc could well be a departnent in SD now.  If so its no longer NUFC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...