Jump to content

Mike Ashley


Christmas Tree

Recommended Posts

Not arsed about his own wealth more arsed about getting some of nufc money spent on itself.  Even enough to replace someone like perch.

 

I thought it was insane to let Perch go at the time, but with hindsight I suppose they had earmarked Dummett as the new Perchinho.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not arsed about his own wealth more arsed about getting some of nufc money spent on itself.  Even enough to replace someone like perch.

 

Hate to bring this up, but hasn't NUFC almost always spent all of its own money or more, made a significant loss and needed subsidy from the owner or the bank?

Link to post
Share on other sites

mike ashley wont spend decent money unless it would guarantee champions league football, which he knows it won't.

 

otherwise i dont think he's bothered if we finish 5th or 17th - £20m is too much of a gamble for him to gain an extra couple of million from league positioning and not enough return anyways.

 

he wants to stay in the premier league for as little money as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not arsed about his own wealth more arsed about getting some of nufc money spent on itself.  Even enough to replace someone like perch.

 

Hate to bring this up, but hasn't NUFC almost always spent all of its own money or more, made a significant loss and needed subsidy from the owner or the bank?

 

all created by his own spiteful childish self

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not arsed about his own wealth more arsed about getting some of nufc money spent on itself.  Even enough to replace someone like perch.

 

Hate to bring this up, but hasn't NUFC almost always spent all of its own money or more, made a significant loss and needed subsidy from the owner or the bank?

 

all created by his own spiteful childish self

 

Well not all, because we were financially fucked before he arrived as well. But anyway, no point in going back through this whole debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has used the clubs position to his strength and although he may have 'spent' £250m (roughly) on us directly, he has had a lot more than that figure back out the club indirectly through free advertising for Sports Direct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not arsed about his own wealth more arsed about getting some of nufc money spent on itself.  Even enough to replace someone like perch.

 

Hate to bring this up, but hasn't NUFC almost always spent all of its own money or more, made a significant loss and needed subsidy from the owner or the bank?

 

all created by his own spiteful childish self

 

Well not all, because we were financially f***ed before he arrived as well. But anyway, no point in going back through this whole debate.

 

As per my post above, he is in profit by a long way through NUFC. To believe he has spent anything is naive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has used the clubs position to his strength and although he may have 'spent' £250m (roughly) on us directly, he has had a lot more than that figure back out the club indirectly through free advertising for Sports Direct.

 

No debate that he has taken free advertising for Sports Direct, but how do you arrive at a value for the advertising of more than £250 million?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're surely not suggesting that the club have to pay back it's own price of purchase before he can consider spending money on transfers?

 

Course not, no. Expenditure should be balanced between on-pitch success while safeguarding our financial future.

 

I was responding to the idea that NUFC should be 'allowed to spend its own money'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has used the clubs position to his strength and although he may have 'spent' £250m (roughly) on us directly, he has had a lot more than that figure back out the club indirectly through free advertising for Sports Direct.

 

No debate that he has taken free advertising for Sports Direct, but how do you arrive at a value for the advertising of more than £250 million?

 

It was some financial expert from Goldman Sachs that was on Talksport about 3-4 months ago talking about footballing finances. He was on about how well Ashley had done purely from a business point of view and how the growth of SD and his own current wealth was rising in a tough time for most other large businesses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has used the clubs position to his strength and although he may have 'spent' £250m (roughly) on us directly, he has had a lot more than that figure back out the club indirectly through free advertising for Sports Direct.

 

No debate that he has taken free advertising for Sports Direct, but how do you arrive at a value for the advertising of more than £250 million?

 

Even if our commercial revenue was more decent, say £25m, that's our entire commercial revenue for about 10 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has used the clubs position to his strength and although he may have 'spent' £250m (roughly) on us directly, he has had a lot more than that figure back out the club indirectly through free advertising for Sports Direct.

 

No debate that he has taken free advertising for Sports Direct, but how do you arrive at a value for the advertising of more than £250 million?

 

It was some financial expert from Goldman Sachs that was on Talksport about 3-4 months ago talking about footballing finances. He was on about how well Ashley had done purely from a business point of view and how the growth of SD and his own current wealth was rising in a tough time for most other large businesses.

 

Sure, SD is doing class and by extension so is Mike Ashley. But only a small amount of that is due to free advertising at St James Park.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has used the clubs position to his strength and although he may have 'spent' £250m (roughly) on us directly, he has had a lot more than that figure back out the club indirectly through free advertising for Sports Direct.

 

No debate that he has taken free advertising for Sports Direct, but how do you arrive at a value for the advertising of more than £250 million?

 

It was some financial expert from Goldman Sachs that was on Talksport about 3-4 months ago talking about footballing finances. He was on about how well Ashley had done purely from a business point of view and how the growth of SD and his own current wealth was rising in a tough time for most other large businesses.

 

All of that is true but is unrelated to the valuation of the advertising at SJP. Lets assume he's had the advertising up for 5 years (Im not sure it has been there that long but anyway) for the value to be more than £250 million that represents £50 million a year. So on that logic the club could earn an additional £50 million a year by letting paying advertisers use that space? Interesting....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they had included all the exposure and every time Newcastle were mentioned in the paper he was referred to as "Sports Direct Tycoon". It wasn't solely relating to the adverts at SJP. I don't know how accurate it is myself but I dont think it will be far off, he's been here quite a long time now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're surely not suggesting that the club have to pay back it's own price of purchase before he can consider spending money on transfers?

 

Course not, no. Expenditure should be balanced between on-pitch success while safeguarding our financial future.

 

I was responding to the idea that NUFC should be 'allowed to spend its own money'.

 

As we're in profit, what's wrong with that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're surely not suggesting that the club have to pay back it's own price of purchase before he can consider spending money on transfers?

 

Course not, no. Expenditure should be balanced between on-pitch success while safeguarding our financial future.

 

I was responding to the idea that NUFC should be 'allowed to spend its own money'.

 

As we're in profit, what's wrong with that?

 

Nothing, when we're in profit there's no argument, the money should be reinvested. I would allow us to reduce our debt to Ashley as well, the question is by how much each year.

 

What I mean is, the profit has been fairly small compared to previous losses and accumulated debt. So its effect on our spending power is still fairly small.

 

Unless you don't think Ashley should take any debt repayments at all, which is fair enough even though I disagree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you want us to give money to Mike Ashley that we could be spending on players?

 

I don't, ideally I would like us to reinvest all our profits like any football club should. I just think he is entitled to some level of debt repayment... overall the terms are pretty good compared to a commercial loan on the open market.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they had included all the exposure and every time Newcastle were mentioned in the paper he was referred to as "Sports Direct Tycoon". It wasn't solely relating to the adverts at SJP. I don't know how accurate it is myself but I dont think it will be far off, he's been here quite a long time now.

 

I actually think Ashley's involvement with NUFC has done very little to add anything to the Sports Direct brand. If anything it has a negative effect, most people you talk to about the club think he's a bit of a dick and that what he has done to our stadium is brainless. It seems unlikely that its led to more punters going to his shops. Clearly the advertising space at SJP has some monetary value but its limited imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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