Loïc Remy

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

And this is arguably in the wrong thread but since we are focusing on Ashley etc

 

We paid to cancel Nile Ranger's contract, we paid to cancel Xisco's contract. If we had an owner who paid a bit more attention (gave a s***) and appointed better people maybe this sort of s**** would'nt happen. Maybe then we could grease the wheels with Gomis.

 

And not be an injury away from Gutierrez/Ameobi

 

The expertise point is definitely valid, Kinnear and (to a lesser extent) Pardew are bad appointments.

 

Saying that, I'm not sure the point about finance is that good, because if we speculated in the market more we might end up with more players on long contracts that we can't get rid of.

 

Somewhat of a leap of faith, where have I said speculate in the market more, unless you mean buying more players?

 

What has the length of contract got to do with anything. Surely that's contingent on other things.

 

I wasn't arguing with you, I was just exploring the point about a different kind of owner.

 

Reminded me of this

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/nn2_4768_M4/mqdefault.jpg

 

"I'm not having a go at anyone, I'm having a pop at the undead"

[BottledDog]

Because they need to?

 

Plenty of clubs that finished above us have invested significantly. If they needed to, why don't we?

 

Because the policy now is to only spend what we generate?

 

Does that make it acceptable, because it's our policy?

 

It is what it is. We are unlikely to see Ashley ploughing extra money in to facilitate a signing so we don't have much choice, but if that meant we had no money and couldn't compete then of course it wouldn't be acceptable for us as supporters.

 

But that's by the by, we should be generating money, and we do have a budget. What it may mean though is that we have to use what money we have fairly carefully and might struggle to increase an offer for Gomis without affecting our chances of getting the right left winger in. This is possibly why Kinnear made the point that they needed to get the striker situation sorted before moving on to other areas.

 

If we come out of this window with just Monsieur Remy mind, the whole fkn lot of them need pelting with shit.

[Wullie]

And this is arguably in the wrong thread but since we are focusing on Ashley etc

 

We paid to cancel Nile Ranger's contract, we paid to cancel Xisco's contract. If we had an owner who paid a bit more attention (gave a s***) and appointed better people maybe this sort of s**** would'nt happen. Maybe then we could grease the wheels with Gomis.

 

And not be an injury away from Gutierrez/Ameobi

 

The expertise point is definitely valid, Kinnear and (to a lesser extent) Pardew are bad appointments.

 

Saying that, I'm not sure the point about finance is that good, because if we speculated in the market more we might end up with more players on long contracts that we can't get rid of.

 

If that's the case then the transfer policy is clearly flawed surely? I thought Graham Carr was too good for that to ever happen?

 

He needs dismissing if the club don't trust him enough to invest significantly in the players he recommends, no?

[Dr Venkman]

The finances bollocks comes up as a desperate final attempt to justify the lack of ambition and investment the club displays on a regular basis. No fan should need to give a flying f*** about it unless we're in serious danger of going under, which we're not.

 

go back to the Bobby Robson quote about the club. Nobody made Ashley buy us. Nobody said don't do due diligence or it won't be a good investment. But he can get to fuck if he thinks owning something that thousands of people are emotionally attached, and invested in does not bring with it a level of responsibility.

 

He may be the owner but its more akin to an invasion. We shouldn't toe his line just because he had the money to purchase our club.

 

I do agree with this to a certain extent, he has a responsibility to the club and the city. But how far that stretches in terms of practical things like player purchases is quite hard to say.

 

As for Dave's post, nobody will be surprised I disagree with that. I don't see how you can possibly analyse the club's position and the players we can or can't buy unless you have an interest in the financial side. Otherwise you'd just be clamouring for us to sign everyone and wondering why we aren't competing with Man City. It's just part of modern football sadly.

 

Why are you sad about it? You've already said you take pleasure in us making shrewd signings.

[Unbelievable]

Because they need to?

 

Plenty of clubs that finished above us have invested significantly. If they needed to, why don't we?

 

Because the policy now is to only spend what we generate?

 

Does that make it acceptable, because it's our policy?

 

It is what it is. We are unlikely to see Ashley ploughing extra money in to facilitate a signing so we don't have much choice, but if that meant we had no money and couldn't compete then of course it wouldn't be acceptable for us as supporters.

 

But that's by the by, we should be generating money, and we do have a budget. What it may mean though is that we have to use what money we have fairly carefully and might struggle to increase an offer for Gomis without affecting our chances of getting the right left winger in. This is possibly why Kinnear made the point that they needed to get the striker situation sorted before moving on to other areas.

 

IF?!

[AyeDubbleYoo]

 

I do agree with this to a certain extent, he has a responsibility to the club and the city. But how far that stretches in terms of practical things like player purchases is quite hard to say.

 

As for Dave's post, nobody will be surprised I disagree with that. I don't see how you can possibly analyse the club's position and the players we can or can't buy unless you have an interest in the financial side. Otherwise you'd just be clamouring for us to sign everyone and wondering why we aren't competing with Man City. It's just part of modern football sadly.

 

Why are you sad about it? You've already said you take pleasure in us making shrewd signings.

 

I just mean it's a shame that spending is so important for competing at the top of the league. And that the amount available depends totally on the owner. I do think we can make progress with our approach, but not quickly.

 

I do take pleasure in shrewd signings, I don't see how any fan wouldn't. I would take pleasure in signing Bale for £85m as well like, if it was possible.

[colinmk]

Venkman said it all really, we are a premiership club being run on a league one budget. Tells you everything you need to know.

[Unbelievable]

 

I do agree with this to a certain extent, he has a responsibility to the club and the city. But how far that stretches in terms of practical things like player purchases is quite hard to say.

 

As for Dave's post, nobody will be surprised I disagree with that. I don't see how you can possibly analyse the club's position and the players we can or can't buy unless you have an interest in the financial side. Otherwise you'd just be clamouring for us to sign everyone and wondering why we aren't competing with Man City. It's just part of modern football sadly.

 

Why are you sad about it? You've already said you take pleasure in us making shrewd signings.

 

I just mean it's a shame that spending is so important for competing at the top of the league. And that the amount available depends totally on the owner. I do think we can make progress with our approach, but not quickly.

 

I do take pleasure in shrewd signings, I don't see how any fan wouldn't. I would take pleasure in signing Bale for £85m as well like, if it was possible.

 

If we are making any progress at all (have we since Ashley took over? I wouldn't say so), you could only classify it as "absolute" progress (if such a thing exists), not relative, because other, smaller clubs are overtaking us left, right and center.

[BottledDog]

Because they need to?

 

Plenty of clubs that finished above us have invested significantly. If they needed to, why don't we?

 

Because the policy now is to only spend what we generate?

 

Does that make it acceptable, because it's our policy?

 

It is what it is. We are unlikely to see Ashley ploughing extra money in to facilitate a signing so we don't have much choice, but if that meant we had no money and couldn't compete then of course it wouldn't be acceptable for us as supporters.

 

But that's by the by, we should be generating money, and we do have a budget. What it may mean though is that we have to use what money we have fairly carefully and might struggle to increase an offer for Gomis without affecting our chances of getting the right left winger in. This is possibly why Kinnear made the point that they needed to get the striker situation sorted before moving on to other areas.

 

If we come out of this window with just Monsieur Remy mind, the whole fkn lot of them need pelting with shit.

 

IF?!

 

Yeah, if. I don't see it myself as it seems pretty reasonable to suggest that we have a fair to middling chunk of money allocated for this window.

 

We're just having a 'mare trying to get the players we want for the prices we feel comfortable with. Sodding tiresome, but not only limited to ourselves.

[Wullie]

 

I do agree with this to a certain extent, he has a responsibility to the club and the city. But how far that stretches in terms of practical things like player purchases is quite hard to say.

 

As for Dave's post, nobody will be surprised I disagree with that. I don't see how you can possibly analyse the club's position and the players we can or can't buy unless you have an interest in the financial side. Otherwise you'd just be clamouring for us to sign everyone and wondering why we aren't competing with Man City. It's just part of modern football sadly.

 

Why are you sad about it? You've already said you take pleasure in us making shrewd signings.

 

I just mean it's a shame that spending is so important for competing at the top of the league. And that the amount available depends totally on the owner. I do think we can make progress with our approach, but not quickly.

 

I do take pleasure in shrewd signings, I don't see how any fan wouldn't. I would take pleasure in signing Bale for £85m as well like, if it was possible.

 

Depends what you mean by spending - Arsenal and Spurs, particularly the former, have proved that you don't need anyone at all putting their hand in their pocket to compete for and attain Champions League qualification, you just need to be sensibly run (which we are not, despite utter nonsense spouted to the contrary) and appoint good managers.

 

The two operate in very different ways but neither of them are anything like us.

[Guest]

Venkman said it all really, we are a premiership club being run on a league one budget. Tells you everything you need to know.

 

A budget which has bought a team full of Dutch, French, Italian, Argentinian & Senegalese internationals.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

If we are making any progress at all (have we since Ashley took over? I wouldn't say so), you could only classify it as "absolute" progress (if such a thing exists), not relative, because other, smaller clubs are overtaking us left, right and center.

 

That's probably fair, although I do think we exaggerate the progress of other clubs sometimes. Hopefully success that is based on short term thinking or unsustainable spending will be short-lived. Also, financial fair play is meant to reign in the clubs that rely too much on the personal wealth of the owner, although it remains to be seen whether that will work.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Depends what you mean by spending - Arsenal and Spurs, particularly the former, have proved that you don't need anyone at all putting their hand in their pocket to compete for and attain Champions League qualification, you just need to be sensibly run (which we are not, despite utter nonsense spouted to the contrary) and appoint good managers.

 

The two operate in very different ways but neither of them are anything like us.

 

Totally true, I would love us to be run as well as those two.

[Dr Venkman]

Venkman said it all really, we are a premiership club being run on a league one budget. Tells you everything you need to know.

 

A budget which has bought a team full of Dutch, French, Italian, Argentinian & Senegalese internationals.

 

Managed by a cheap manager, and every single one of them brought in because we thought we were getting them cheap, regardless of the needs of the squad.

[Guest]

No doubt about it, the manager is the weakness. A competent manager would have that squad at 7th at least imo.

[Unbelievable]

Because they need to?

 

Plenty of clubs that finished above us have invested significantly. If they needed to, why don't we?

 

Because the policy now is to only spend what we generate?

 

Does that make it acceptable, because it's our policy?

 

It is what it is. We are unlikely to see Ashley ploughing extra money in to facilitate a signing so we don't have much choice, but if that meant we had no money and couldn't compete then of course it wouldn't be acceptable for us as supporters.

 

But that's by the by, we should be generating money, and we do have a budget. What it may mean though is that we have to use what money we have fairly carefully and might struggle to increase an offer for Gomis without affecting our chances of getting the right left winger in. This is possibly why Kinnear made the point that they needed to get the striker situation sorted before moving on to other areas.

 

If we come out of this window with just Monsieur Remy mind, the whole fkn lot of them need pelting with s***.

 

IF?!

 

Yeah, if. I don't see it myself as I think it's pretty reasonable to suggest that we have a fair of money allocated for this window.

 

We're just having a 'mare trying to get the players we want for the prices we feel comfortable with.

 

 

It's like going to Saville Row with 100 GBP (a "fair amount of money" some would say) and not being able to get yourself a bespoke suit. We undervalue other club's players (and constantly say it would take a king's randsom to buy one of our own), and indeed actually target players that we believe we can get under market value. It's not really surprising that other clubs often won't play ball, or that we are not seen as an ambitious club heading in the right direction by some of the players we target, because we're not and we're trying to take other clubs for a ride by targetting players with contractual issues etc. On the one hand this is clever, but not so much when it's the only policy you know, regardless of the needs of the squad or the manager.

[Wullie]

Depends what you mean by spending - Arsenal and Spurs, particularly the former, have proved that you don't need anyone at all putting their hand in their pocket to compete for and attain Champions League qualification, you just need to be sensibly run (which we are not, despite utter nonsense spouted to the contrary) and appoint good managers.

 

The two operate in very different ways but neither of them are anything like us.

 

Totally true, I would love us to be run as well as those two.

 

Eh? That runs completely contrary to everything else you post Ian.

 

Arsenal scoured the globe for a manager who ticked every box and found one of the greats - you're on record as saying you're content to keep Alan Pardew who we salvaged from a landfill after a League One club had binned him.

 

Spurs have spent around £60m this summer, purely from money generated by the football club - you're on record as saying you don't want us to spend money in those quantities in case they flop.

 

I made this point earlier about something else - you can't have it both ways! You want a good manager and sensible investment based on the massive income generated by the Premier League but when anyone says "sack Pardew and sign some players" you're first to jump up and shout them down.

[Wullie]

Because they need to?

 

Plenty of clubs that finished above us have invested significantly. If they needed to, why don't we?

 

Because the policy now is to only spend what we generate?

 

Does that make it acceptable, because it's our policy?

 

It is what it is. We are unlikely to see Ashley ploughing extra money in to facilitate a signing so we don't have much choice, but if that meant we had no money and couldn't compete then of course it wouldn't be acceptable for us as supporters.

 

But that's by the by, we should be generating money, and we do have a budget. What it may mean though is that we have to use what money we have fairly carefully and might struggle to increase an offer for Gomis without affecting our chances of getting the right left winger in. This is possibly why Kinnear made the point that they needed to get the striker situation sorted before moving on to other areas.

 

If we come out of this window with just Monsieur Remy mind, the whole fkn lot of them need pelting with s***.

 

IF?!

 

Yeah, if. I don't see it myself as I think it's pretty reasonable to suggest that we have a fair of money allocated for this window.

 

We're just having a 'mare trying to get the players we want for the prices we feel comfortable with.

 

 

It's like going to Saville Row with 100 GBP (a "fair amount of money" some would say) and not being able to get yourself a bespoke suit. We undervalue other club's players (and constantly say it would take a king's randsom to buy one of our own), and indeed actually target players that we believe we can get under market value. It's not really surprising that other clubs often won't play ball, or that we are not seen as an ambitious club heading in the right direction by some of the players we target, because we're not and we're trying to take other clubs for a ride by targetting players with contractual issues etc. On the one hand this is clever, but not so much when it's the only policy you know, regardless of the needs of the squad or the manager.

 

Great point this.

 

"It'll take £20m for Tiote to go anywhere, btw can we have Debuchy for £4m please?"

[Unbelievable]

If we are making any progress at all (have we since Ashley took over? I wouldn't say so), you could only classify it as "absolute" progress (if such a thing exists), not relative, because other, smaller clubs are overtaking us left, right and center.

 

That's probably fair, although I do think we exaggerate the progress of other clubs sometimes. Hopefully success that is based on short term thinking or unsustainable spending will be short-lived. Also, financial fair play is meant to reign in the clubs that rely too much on the personal wealth of the owner, although it remains to be seen whether that will work.

 

It's hard to underestimate the progress of clubs like Swansea and Southampton during the 6 years Ashley has been in charge of us, looking at our own "progress". They're on the up, yet both spent a significant amount despite having excellent seasons, while we're on the slide. It's all good and well looking at our squad of players and saying they're all internationals (the absolute progress) and should see us comfortably above these clubs, but they're also chock full of internationals. The average level in the Premiership has gone up much more than our own imho (the relative lack of progress).

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Depends what you mean by spending - Arsenal and Spurs, particularly the former, have proved that you don't need anyone at all putting their hand in their pocket to compete for and attain Champions League qualification, you just need to be sensibly run (which we are not, despite utter nonsense spouted to the contrary) and appoint good managers.

 

The two operate in very different ways but neither of them are anything like us.

 

Totally true, I would love us to be run as well as those two.

 

Eh? That runs completely contrary to everything else you post Ian.

 

Arsenal scoured the globe for a manager who ticked every box and found one of the greats - you're on record as saying you're content to keep Alan Pardew.

 

Spurs have spent around £60m this summer, purely from money generated by the football club - you're on record as saying you don't want us to spend money in those quantities in case they flop.

 

I made this point earlier about something else - you can't have it both ways! You want a good manager and sensible investment based on the massive income generated by the Premier League but when anyone says "sack Pardew and sign some players" you're first to jump up and shout them down.

 

I think you're misunderstanding.

 

I would love us to appoint a better manager than Pardew, kind of obvious. But he's here, Ashley is unlikely to appoint someone brilliant, and I think the 5th place earned him a bit of leeway. And as with anyone associated with NUFC, I would love to see them succeed.

 

The thing about flops is just not my argument at all. If we could afford to take risks in the market and suffer some expensive flops then I wouldn't object. The problem was that under the previous regime we were increasing our debt significantly every year, and credit was getting more expensive and hard to get. Under this regime, we can't afford it unless Ashley subsidises us, which he won't do. The biggest profit we've ever posted is £10m.

 

I try not to shout anyone down, and I've always said that I admire everyone's ambition for the club. I don't think there's any contradiction in my position.

[SEMTEX]

Because they need to?

 

Plenty of clubs that finished above us have invested significantly. If they needed to, why don't we?

 

Because the policy now is to only spend what we generate?

 

Does that make it acceptable, because it's our policy?

 

It is what it is. We are unlikely to see Ashley ploughing extra money in to facilitate a signing so we don't have much choice, but if that meant we had no money and couldn't compete then of course it wouldn't be acceptable for us as supporters.

 

But that's by the by, we should be generating money, and we do have a budget. What it may mean though is that we have to use what money we have fairly carefully and might struggle to increase an offer for Gomis without affecting our chances of getting the right left winger in. This is possibly why Kinnear made the point that they needed to get the striker situation sorted before moving on to other areas.

 

If we come out of this window with just Monsieur Remy mind, the whole fkn lot of them need pelting with s***.

 

IF?!

 

Yeah, if. I don't see it myself as I think it's pretty reasonable to suggest that we have a fair of money allocated for this window.

 

We're just having a 'mare trying to get the players we want for the prices we feel comfortable with.

 

 

It's like going to Saville Row with 100 GBP (a "fair amount of money" some would say) and not being able to get yourself a bespoke suit. We undervalue other club's players (and constantly say it would take a king's randsom to buy one of our own), and indeed actually target players that we believe we can get under market value. It's not really surprising that other clubs often won't play ball, or that we are not seen as an ambitious club heading in the right direction by some of the players we target, because we're not and we're trying to take other clubs for a ride by targetting players with contractual issues etc. On the one hand this is clever, but not so much when it's the only policy you know, regardless of the needs of the squad or the manager.

 

Great point this.

 

"It'll take £20m for Tiote to go anywhere, btw can we have Debuchy for £4m please?"

 

Analogy needs fleshing out.

 

Needs to mention that the shops are only open for 8 hours

Needs to mention you've got a massive interview tomorrow morning

Needs to mention you spent 6 hours sat in one place begging the assistant to sell you a £200 suit for £50

Needs to mention the £200 suit is marked down from £1000 already

Needs to mention  "begging" really means you sat there playing candy crush for 5 and a half hours and then quietly asked the shop keep if you could have the suit on the cheap. and he couldn't hear you because you whispered it so quietly

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Needs to mention that business is all about getting a better deal for yourself than you give to your suppliers.

[Wullie]

Why do you keep mentioning profits as posted by the accounts as a reason for us not to spend? You've already had it explained to you how accounts work but you don't seem to be grasping it at all.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Why do you keep mentioning profit as a reason for us not to spend? You've already had it explained to you how accounts work but you don't seem to be grasping it at all.

 

How do you mean? It's not about assets v liabilities on the balance sheet - if we keep spending more than we bring in then our debt continues to increase. So either we have to borrow the money or Ashley has to provide it.

 

Is that not the case?

[Unbelievable]

Needs to mention that business is all about getting a better deal for yourself than you give to your suppliers.

 

So you end up butt naked at your interview?