Happy Face Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Has anyone got that graph handy which shows the change in our three revenue streams since Ashley bought us? Cheers! http://i62.tinypic.com/r7mzvp.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 I like this one better at the moment though. Think it better begs the question what value Puma have been adding. Given that they signed a new deal when we had reached Europe and apparently it was no better than the one signed in the championship. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Has anyone got that graph handy which shows the change in our three revenue streams since Ashley bought us? Cheers! http://i62.tinypic.com/r7mzvp.jpg Fucking hell man. If you factor inflation happy what sort of % drop are we talking about? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 30% drop in matchday revenue (but isn't low prices good?) and slightly more than that for commercial. Isn't all of it insignificant compared to TV anyway though? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Matchday has dropped from 39% of income to 29%. That's why a boycott won't work iyam. People should go, and make their dissatisfaction heard. The frustration was when everyone was dispersed and he silenced the Leazes L7 corner by splitting them out. But now 50% of the Gallowgate end is available to like minded single ticket buyers who can sit together and sing all game, rather than sitting frustrated in the East stand alone. The more angry fans that get sat next to the strawberry corner and spread across the Gallowgate, the more the chanting would take hold. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Is it possible to chart the grown of other clubs in the league in commercial and match day revenue and provide an estimate on exactly how much Ashley has cost us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Love it when I hoy a graph on a forum and it's all ower my twitter timeline minutes later See, it's not just me, people LOVE graphs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Is it possible to chart the grown of other clubs in the league in commercial and match day revenue and provide an estimate on exactly how much Ashley has cost us I tend to Tweet all my pics, so lok through my media and you should find plenty to work you up https://twitter.com/MikeAshleyLies/media Matchday comparison with other clubs... https://twitter.com/MikeAshleyLies/status/454208206789554176 Commercial comparison with other clubs... https://twitter.com/MikeAshleyLies/status/454207436115558402 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Is it possible to chart the grown of other clubs in the league in commercial and match day revenue and provide an estimate on exactly how much Ashley has cost us I tend to Tweet all my pics, so lok through my media and you should find plenty to work you up https://twitter.com/MikeAshleyLies/media Matchday comparison with other clubs... https://twitter.com/MikeAshleyLies/status/454208206789554176 Commercial comparison with other clubs... https://twitter.com/MikeAshleyLies/status/454207436115558402 Too bad me and maths don't get on lol. Given the charts though it looks really grim and that's without calculating the lost revenue through the deal with sports direct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 People should really focus on the commercial revenue if they want to go after him. Matchday revenue decrease can be explained too easily by trying to keep the sport affordable for fans. It's not just that of course, but it is part of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/sport-opinion/mark-douglas-you-need-join-7716045 Six, five, six, six, five, six, ten. These are not the merit marks for Newcastle United’s outfield players during their disappointing draw for Crystal Palace – they are the lengths of contracts doled out by the Magpies during a summer of upheaval at St James’ Park. In the frenzy of claim and counter-claim that curdled into a fire sale of black and white outcasts, it almost escaped our notice: Newcastle have become Premier League pioneers. Few others in the top flight are signing off those kind of deals to all and sundry. Jack Colback and Ayoze Perez got five years; Daryl Janmaat, Remy Cabella, Siem de Jong and Emanuel Riviere were all tied down for six. Kit makers Puma – a close commercial ally of owner Mike Ashley – signed up for another decade. These are long-term and substantial deals for an ownership that is ready to batten down the hatches again if results begin to turn. In one way, it is a further show of faith in the judgement of the razor-sharp Graham Carr for Newcastle to be handing out these kind of deals and so it should be. Back in the summer of 2012, Carr and Derek Llambias struggled to persuade Ashley to break the policy of signing players over 24 when it came to negotiations for Mathieu Debuchy. But Debuchy moved on this summer at a substantial profit to confirm further proof that the model works. Ashley doesn’t even need convincing any more and the long-term deals are, in one sense, an acknowledgement that a player’s worth is just as much about the length of time remaining on his contract as it is about his value as a player. Look at Moussa Sissoko, whose representatives made noises about trying to move on after a flurry of decent performances during the World Cup. Thanks to the long, lucrative deal he signed after joining from Toulouse, he has another four years left at Newcastle. Buying clubs either needed to blow United out of the water or sit back down again. No-one bit. Another possible reason for these long deals? There has been idle chatter in the United boardroom about the oft-misunderstood Webster rule, which apparently states that players could buy out any contract three years after signing it. Despite some perform speculation it is yet to be tested in a court of law, but longer deals might undermine the case of any player agitating to move. Longer deals provide insurance and balance. But there is something else at play here that is worth noting. While transfers are fun, the most intriguing development of the entire summer was Ashley moving to consolidate his interest in Glasgow Rangers. Improbably, the fallen Glasgow giants seem close to financial meltdown again, just a few years after their original problems forced them out of the SPL. Cannily, Ashley is waiting in the wings, ready to increase his share in a club that has a global reach and a much easier route to the Champions League than Newcastle. He has, it seems, pledged money to support the Ibrox club. So does that mean a fast-track exit from St James’ Park? Hardly. These long deals, especially the commercial one, ensures that the Sports Direct flag is planted on Newcastle’s lawn for a few years yet. No new owner in the next six years can break these deals without hurdling financial hurdles. For those imploring Ashley to sell up and move on, it is worth considering these long contracts when they consider the likelihood of attracting potential buyers. The scope for making radical changes at St James’ Park is diminishing with every long-term deal that he signs off. Consider this: the scenario of a big, high-profile owner wanting out has already played out at another Premier League club this summer. In the Second City, there was plenty of business in and out of Villa Park over the close season but Randy Lerner’s post-season pledge to try and find a buiyer for Aston Villa amounted to very little. “I have come to know well that fates are fickle in the business of English football. And I feel that I have pushed mine well past the limit,” he wrote in a statement that confirmed he had instructed the Bank of America to find a new owner. Yet Villa remain in Lerner’s hands, trading as normal. Paul Lambert even signed Tom Cleverley, while making major changes to his coaching staff. The warning at the time of his announcement – that the new financial fair play rules would limit the interest of potential benefactors – is proving to be correct. Financial Fair Play is supposed to reduce the risk of another Leeds, Bradford or Portsmouth playing out. But the rules attach such stringent controls on club’s bottom lines that it means no new owner can realistically plough cash into their club like Manchester City’s owner did. It has firmed up the Premier League elite, and made it much less likely for a billionaire to take a look at a club with the potential of Newcastle or Villa and roll the dice. A major spending spree would probably bring financial penalties and points deductions. With Ashley making long-term plans, it reduces the changes a new man could make even more. Puma’s ten-year deal is good business for Ashley’s Newcastle but it has blocked off a commercial route that a new owner might look to go down while consolidating the owner’s own interests. Sometimes you need to join the dots to get the full picture. Newcastle’s new direction feels rather like more of the same. The bold is most likely bobbins: 1, Ashley can own both us and Rangers without any issue. The only issue would be if we both qualified for European competition and Ashley can quite easily prevent this by keeping us sub standard. 2, What does the Puma deal have to do with Sports direct? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Hurdling financial hurdles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 It's staggering the amount of people who think that a Champions League Rangers would even get close to NUFC financially, that's quite apart from the fact that Celtic were champions, given two bites at the cherry and still couldn't qualify. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 It's staggering the amount of people who think that a Champions League Rangers would even get close to NUFC financially, that's quite apart from the fact that Celtic were champions, given two bites at the cherry and still couldn't qualify. celtic "only" got 14m odd for last seasons group stage appearance compare that to 60m plus premier league deal. Suppose the theory centres around "oh champions league exposure for sports direct!" but iirc its only uefa approved (ie pay them a giant sack of money) sponsors are allowed to be displayed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest antz1uk Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 it's not about football finances, it's about exposure to a huge audience for his tacky shitty brand, he'll probably sponsor their shirts Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 it's not about football finances, it's about exposure to a huge audience for his tacky shitty brand, he'll probably sponsor their shirts maybe appearing in 6 champions league games which won't exactly be high profile (not unless they get real madrid, barcelona etc) compared to 19 games in a stadium with his companies name plastered all over the place in the highest profile league in the world? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest antz1uk Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 True, i just can't get my head around the appeal of rangers for him. but knowing him it will be something to do with that toxic brand Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sempuki Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 You would think a man who has excelled in one industry would want to do the same in another rather than just try to generate as much cash as he can which he will never spend. Surely it all becomes just a number when you are as rich as he is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest antz1uk Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 yep, worth billions but won't spend a penny. he could have been godlike up here ans still one of the richest men in the UK if he'd just given things a go. god we could be huge and generate a huge amount of our own income after an initial push. but i'm just going over old ground here Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 People should really focus on the commercial revenue if they want to go after him. Matchday revenue decrease can be explained too easily by trying to keep the sport affordable for fans. It's not just that of course, but it is part of it. The Notion that Ashley cares for fans is laughable. He's not keeping prices low for us. Season ticket prices and single ticket costs have increased. There's just 3 times as many kids going and we can't fill the stadium as regularly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 it's not about football finances, it's about exposure to a huge audience for his tacky shitty brand, he'll probably sponsor their shirts exactly why he doesn't need to own rangers outright Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/prospective-rangers-owner-mike-ashley-4161063 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 the man lives for a bargain eh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 A longer article about the fat twat http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/rangers-big-interview-keith-jackson-4161076 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_Taylor Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Mike Ashley. Shitting on the little guy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts