Dinho lad Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Problem is it effects us and our ability to finally get rid of him. 'Serves him right' just seems a daft thing to say when it's us who suffers. What are you talking about? Where did I imply that?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Or the club could spend its own money instead of being used to repay the debt. hold on, are you saying ashley should let his 100m+ just ride like? It's his own company we're talking about here, not two separate entities. NUFC can't run off with his cash. There's absolutely no way it's acceptable for us to spend £0 in transfer fees so that he can get his money back (does he have a big leccy bill or something?) How much is ok for him to take out in your view then? Just what we would have spent in transfers or can we go ahead and take the lot and bankrupt the club? This attitude amongst our fans of "he's the owner, he can do what he wants" is disgusting tbh. Ronaldo's right about the pathetic specimens we have become. The Yank cunts tried this with Liverpool and were ran out of town, it didn't matter how much money they had, the fans made their position untenable. We just carry right on licking Ashley's ring. fuck off wullie man, alls i'm saying is noone can expect anyone to just write off 100m in an ideal world he'd be smart and realise success is the way to money but we don't live in an ideal world He's not writing it off though. It's still there, in his own company, and will continue to be there and when he sells up, he'll get it back. Why does a bloke with a billion quid need that back right now, other than sheer greed and spite? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Yes in revenue, in debt, in anything you care to use to measure it. We're the 20th richest club in world football and the 6th richest in England in terms of revenue. We are also guaranteed at least 25 million pounds extra tv revenue in the next twelve months which will propel us up that world table. Yes, but we have over £100m in debt and up until a couple of years ago were losing £30m+ a year. That's a fact isn't it? So either we need affordable debt sources or Ashley needs to use his own money. Or the club could spend its own money instead of being used to repay the debt. You said yesterday it was unacceptable for him to be withdrawing his debt, now you're saying it's fine. I think it's acceptable for him to take some debt repayments out... repaying debt is part of a company's operations. It's pretty hard to argue about specific amounts though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Problem is it effects us and our ability to finally get rid of him. 'Serves him right' just seems a daft thing to say when it's us who suffers. What are you talking about? Where did I imply that?? You didn't, that's the problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Or the club could spend its own money instead of being used to repay the debt. hold on, are you saying ashley should let his 100m+ just ride like? Probably not, but serves the cunt right for not doing the due diligence when he bought us. Fat cunt. nonsense No it's not. He didn't do due diligence, only absolute idiots would spend 125M on a business and not actual see any of the books. in actual fact i think you'll find gambles are made in business every day of the week, what tends not to happen is when a gamble is lost temporarily the billionaire in question just says "aye well, 150m down already, suppose another 100m isn't that much to miss" there's no fucking reason why he shouldn't want his money back, as objectionable as he is So when we get £63m+ from the Premier League this season, it's ok for him to take the lot in your view? absolutely not, when have i ever said that? i'm the person arguing against "certain people" that we should expect to spend that money now because it's guaranteed however as the owner is 100m down i'd expect there to be a % involved...don't see what's controversial Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Ashley will be still the owner of the club while fans keep going to SJP and we are in the PL. As long the fans keep going, he'll be able to take the piss out of them for his own personal satisfaction while taking money out of the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 He's not writing it off though. It's still there, in his own company, and will continue to be there and when he sells up, he'll get it back. Why does a bloke with a billion quid need that back right now, other than sheer greed and spite? becasue perhaps as a businessman who has essentially destroyed his competition ruthlessly over the last 10 years he would rather have the 100m back, i don't know, it's irrelevant...he's due it, the issue is how he goes about getting it back Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Yes in revenue, in debt, in anything you care to use to measure it. We're the 20th richest club in world football and the 6th richest in England in terms of revenue. We are also guaranteed at least 25 million pounds extra tv revenue in the next twelve months which will propel us up that world table. Yes, but we have over £100m in debt and up until a couple of years ago were losing £30m+ a year. That's a fact isn't it? So either we need affordable debt sources or Ashley needs to use his own money. Or the club could spend its own money instead of being used to repay the debt. You said yesterday it was unacceptable for him to be withdrawing his debt, now you're saying it's fine. I think it's acceptable for him to take some debt repayments out... repaying debt is part of a company's operations.It's pretty hard to argue about specific amounts though. To their own owner? Just saying "we've got masses of debt" is a misrepresentation. It's like me taking £1000 out of my savings and putting it in my current account, and claiming I have debt problems. I don't. I'm not going to send the heavies round, or come and confiscate my own telly. We have more than enough revenue to spend on players without adding a penny to Mike Ashley's debt. The only reason he needs that money back is greed, and to piss us off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Or the club could spend its own money instead of being used to repay the debt. hold on, are you saying ashley should let his 100m+ just ride like? Probably not, but serves the cunt right for not doing the due diligence when he bought us. Fat cunt. nonsense No it's not. He didn't do due diligence, only absolute idiots would spend 125M on a business and not actual see any of the books. in actual fact i think you'll find gambles are made in business every day of the week, what tends not to happen is when a gamble is lost temporarily the billionaire in question just says "aye well, 150m down already, suppose another 100m isn't that much to miss" there's no fucking reason why he shouldn't want his money back, as objectionable as he is So when we get £63m+ from the Premier League this season, it's ok for him to take the lot in your view? absolutely not, when have i ever said that? i'm the person arguing against "certain people" that we should expect to spend that money now because it's guaranteed however as the owner is 100m down i'd expect there to be a % involved...don't see what's controversial The owner got the club cheaper because of that debt. So it really doesn't make a difference about the debt or not, if we didn't have the debt he'd be taking money from the club imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 greed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Cant get his asking price...clear the debt, sell it at a lower price??! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Or the club could spend its own money instead of being used to repay the debt. hold on, are you saying ashley should let his 100m+ just ride like? Probably not, but serves the cunt right for not doing the due diligence when he bought us. Fat cunt. nonsense No it's not. He didn't do due diligence, only absolute idiots would spend 125M on a business and not actual see any of the books. in actual fact i think you'll find gambles are made in business every day of the week, what tends not to happen is when a gamble is lost temporarily the billionaire in question just says "aye well, 150m down already, suppose another 100m isn't that much to miss" there's no fucking reason why he shouldn't want his money back, as objectionable as he is So when we get £63m+ from the Premier League this season, it's ok for him to take the lot in your view? absolutely not, when have i ever said that? i'm the person arguing against "certain people" that we should expect to spend that money now because it's guaranteed however as the owner is 100m down i'd expect there to be a % involved...don't see what's controversial What's controversial is that it appears to be 100%, or at least that 0% is going to be spent on players, or a new manager. You don't think we should spend some of that money now? Why on Earth not? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Cant get his asking price...clear the debt, sell it at a lower price??! Sell the club with the debt and charge any new owner for interest on it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Cant get his asking price...clear the debt, sell it at a lower price??! He'd get his asking price without the debt. No one will pay the asking price and the debt. Until the debt goes he's here to stay. If he's taking money out of the club to pay off that debt then great, he's close to leaving. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Yes in revenue, in debt, in anything you care to use to measure it. We're the 20th richest club in world football and the 6th richest in England in terms of revenue. We are also guaranteed at least 25 million pounds extra tv revenue in the next twelve months which will propel us up that world table. Yes, but we have over £100m in debt and up until a couple of years ago were losing £30m+ a year. That's a fact isn't it? So either we need affordable debt sources or Ashley needs to use his own money. Or the club could spend its own money instead of being used to repay the debt. You said yesterday it was unacceptable for him to be withdrawing his debt, now you're saying it's fine. Going down your route of borrowing as a display of ambition, we'd be spending similar amounts just paying interest on bank loans. If we don't get in another striker then it means fuck all, but at least this way our debt is shrinking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 He's not writing it off though. It's still there, in his own company, and will continue to be there and when he sells up, he'll get it back. Why does a bloke with a billion quid need that back right now, other than sheer greed and spite? becasue perhaps as a businessman who has essentially destroyed his competition ruthlessly over the last 10 years he would rather have the 100m back, i don't know, it's irrelevant...he's due it, the issue is how he goes about getting it back How is he due it from his own company? He's entitled certainly, due implies we have some reason to pay it back other than him being a total cunt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Cant get his asking price...clear the debt, sell it at a lower price??! Sell the club with the debt and charge any new owner for interest on it? Sounds like an epic deal for a potential buyer, can't believe we haven't got them queuing up for that one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Or the club could spend its own money instead of being used to repay the debt. hold on, are you saying ashley should let his 100m+ just ride like? Probably not, but serves the cunt right for not doing the due diligence when he bought us. Fat cunt. nonsense No it's not. He didn't do due diligence, only absolute idiots would spend 125M on a business and not actual see any of the books. in actual fact i think you'll find gambles are made in business every day of the week, what tends not to happen is when a gamble is lost temporarily the billionaire in question just says "aye well, 150m down already, suppose another 100m isn't that much to miss" there's no fucking reason why he shouldn't want his money back, as objectionable as he is So when we get £63m+ from the Premier League this season, it's ok for him to take the lot in your view? absolutely not, when have i ever said that? i'm the person arguing against "certain people" that we should expect to spend that money now because it's guaranteed however as the owner is 100m down i'd expect there to be a % involved...don't see what's controversial What's controversial is that it appears to be 100%, or at least that 0% is going to be spent on players, or a new manager. You don't think we should spend some of that money now? Why on Earth not? i don't know how many times i can say it in english, i believe that being 100m in debt he has the right to want to recover it somehow, i don't agree that he should be recovering it at 100% of club income to the detriment of what goes on on the pitch clear enough? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Yes in revenue, in debt, in anything you care to use to measure it. We're the 20th richest club in world football and the 6th richest in England in terms of revenue. We are also guaranteed at least 25 million pounds extra tv revenue in the next twelve months which will propel us up that world table. Yes, but we have over £100m in debt and up until a couple of years ago were losing £30m+ a year. That's a fact isn't it? So either we need affordable debt sources or Ashley needs to use his own money. Or the club could spend its own money instead of being used to repay the debt. You said yesterday it was unacceptable for him to be withdrawing his debt, now you're saying it's fine. I think it's acceptable for him to take some debt repayments out... repaying debt is part of a company's operations.It's pretty hard to argue about specific amounts though. To their own owner? Just saying "we've got masses of debt" is a misrepresentation. It's like me taking £1000 out of my savings and putting it in my current account, and claiming I have debt problems. I don't. I'm not going to send the heavies round, or come and confiscate my own telly. We have more than enough revenue to spend on players without adding a penny to Mike Ashley's debt. The only reason he needs that money back is greed, and to piss us off. It's not the same at all. Mike Ashley is the owner, sole shareholder or whatever, but he isn't the same entity as NUFC. Yes, companies can be in debt to their owner and pay them back for loans. I don't think it's greed for someone who has turned an expensive bank loan into interest-free debt to take back some repayments. I admit it's hard to say exactly how much is acceptable though, and obviously the long-term health of the business can't be risked. If we have more than enough revenue to sign players then let's do it. But as far as I know we have only posted two small profits in our recent history, so our spending has been outstripping our income for years. Before it was adding to the debt we owed to Barclays (IIRC), now it would be up to Ashley to finance it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 How is he due it from his own company? He's entitled certainly, due implies we have some reason to pay it back other than him being a total cunt. wullie the club is a company as much as you might not like to hear it, freddy mortgaged our future and now we're paying for it that's the simple fact...it'd be great if fat mike was benevolent enough to forget the 100m he spent wiping out freddy buying owen and luque but apparently he's not Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 How is he due it from his own company? He's entitled certainly, due implies we have some reason to pay it back other than him being a total cunt. wullie the club is a company as much as you might not like to hear it, freddy mortgaged our future and now we're paying for it that's the simple fact...it'd be great if fat mike was benevolent enough to forget the 100m he spent wiping out freddy buying owen and luque but apparently he's not And as I've already said, I'm not asking him to forget it. It's still on the books and will remain there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I can slag off bimpy for a bit, if anyone would prefer that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 If we have more than enough revenue to sign players then let's do it. But as far as I know we have only posted two small profits in our recent history, so our spending has been outstripping our income for years. Before it was adding to the debt we owed to Barclays (IIRC), now it would be up to Ashley to finance it. Christ. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrettNUFC Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I can slag off bimpy for a bit, if anyone would prefer that? Would it involve finance? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 How come sbr never lost a league game after a champions league match? The Europa is tougher than the Champions League. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts