Kevo Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Tbh even I would shop there for certain items of sporting equipment if required. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Tbh even I would shop there for certain items of sporting equipment if required. A lot of us dont/wont but we all know its the biggest around for a reason Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppe Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 The latest True-faith pod cast, they aren't impressed with the AshleyOut campaign :lol: From aboput 50 minutes onwards. https://soundcloud.com/tfweeklypod/it-just-doesnt-have-to-be-like-this-mike I just dont get people. They bash people saying "these internet gimmicks won't work" (or however they phrased it) but they have no other suggestions of what to do instead. It's easy to sit there criticising others but at least they are doing something. Also the "What do they mean Ashley Out? He can't get out, he owns the club". That's just deliberately being stupid, they know full well what that means (unless they're fucking thick). Not impressed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToonTastic Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Is that the ridiculous podcast where they slate it but then say they haven't even looked at it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Ive listened to a few of these pod casts. The lads running it are fucking embarrassing. Not nufc fans. Little ashley lick spittles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Is that the ridiculous podcast where they slate it but then say they haven't even looked at it? Yup. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnonel Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Im so sick and tired of everyone debating the merits of x approach vs y approach. Why not just back your fellow supporter instead of sitting on your ass. Next weekend its the boycott and protest. Support it. If you have a better idea, rally supporters behind you and we can do that in the following weeks. Dont just sit there and moan. That is all. Carry on.... </Rant> Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
morla84 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I notice ashleyout.com have a hint of red and blue in one of their logos. I hope they aren't gonna base the protest banners, etc on the sd logo again. We need to get the red and blue out of sjp and turn it black and white again Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Gives sports direct bad press, therefore it's a good idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shush Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 http://s28.postimg.org/v1wlv8ual/image.png Anyone see this on AshleyOut.com comments bit? Maybe a load of rubbish, but just curious to what it was getting at? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppe Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 http://s28.postimg.org/v1wlv8ual/image.png Anyone see this on AshleyOut.com comments bit? Maybe a load of rubbish, but just curious to what it was getting at? That's greek to me, what does it mean? That he has borrowed money from...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoot Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Got me baffled as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
morla84 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Gives sports direct bad press, therefore it's a good idea. Thing is it's giving sports direct any press exposure. Do you think Ashley expected good press by changing the stadium name to contain sports direct? No, he knew it would create a stir and get sports direct all over the papers. Boycott? Yes. Protest? Yes. Just don't give Ashley what he wants by using the SD colours and font to get his company more profit. He uses our club enough for that, don't help him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brendan_Rice Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 http://s28.postimg.org/v1wlv8ual/image.png Anyone see this on AshleyOut.com comments bit? Maybe a load of rubbish, but just curious to what it was getting at? That's greek to me, what does it mean? That he has borrowed money from...? The gist of it is a statement from the bank that is saying that it is entitled to anything from "Central Funds" as guarantee from the agreed amount loaned. Not sure what Central Funds means, I am assuming it is the bank account for profits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
morla84 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Probably to pay for the new training facilities http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/newcastle-uniteds-new-training-ground-7896286 New TV screens were around that time too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 http://s28.postimg.org/v1wlv8ual/image.png Anyone see this on AshleyOut.com comments bit? Maybe a load of rubbish, but just curious to what it was getting at? That's greek to me, what does it mean? That he has borrowed money from...? He has borrowed money from Barclays and used the Premier League Money as Security (a guarantee of the money existing). Could have been done for a number of reasons. I.e. he wants money to spend now but it will be paid in installments over the course of a 3 year period under the premier league contract. Seem to remember Shepherd being slaughtered for doing that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 http://s28.postimg.org/v1wlv8ual/image.png Anyone see this on AshleyOut.com comments bit? Maybe a load of rubbish, but just curious to what it was getting at? That's greek to me, what does it mean? That he has borrowed money from...? He has borrowed money from Barclays and used the Premier League Money as Security (a guarantee of the money existing). Could have been done for a number of reasons. I.e. he wants money to spend now but it will be paid in installments over the course of a 3 year period under the premier league contract. Seem to remember Shepherd being slaughtered for doing that. Shepherd made the mistake of allowing fans to have hope and ambitions though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToonTastic Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Probably to pay for the new training facilities http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/newcastle-uniteds-new-training-ground-7896286 New TV screens were around that time too Didn't that come from a Rugby fund? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I don't understand why the club would need to lend money for the training ground. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
magpie1892 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I don't understand why the club would need to lend money for the training ground. It certainly is a mystery, with the profits the club is generating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I don't understand why the club would need to lend money for the training ground. Likely to just be a simple cashflow thing. The club may be making a lot of money but it may take time to get it. If you want serious cash quickly Banks are the places to go. It's more an issue of why he's doing it than the Practice of doing it. can you explain that more? we seem to 'know' that he's cooked the books to hide the profit from last year so why wouldn't he just be using that 'profit' to pay for what he's loaning? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I've got an idea on how we can sort out this fickle bullshit: Why don't we f***ing ask the posters on here who supports other clubs whether they think the SackPardew.com made us look fickle or not. I'm pretty sure Neil (an Everton fan) has already said he thought it was a good campaign. Can we have the opinions of brummie (Aston Villa), LEFE (Spurs), Village Idiot (Barcelona), Stray Mackem, hithere (Sunderland), 1878(Everton), George Constanza and wacko (both Liverpool) please? Sorry, late to the party. I don't think it made you look fickle at all. And that's coming from a supporter of a club whose under-pressure manager once called their fans fickle. This after a cup defeat against Doncaster Rovers. What fickleness, expecting not to get limply dumped from cups like that, eh? Which says it all about the f-word for me. Whenever I hear it, I tend to turn off, because 99 times out of 100 it is being used as a way of waving a shitty stick at a group of people (in this case fans), who are accused of not matching with the opinions of another group of people (usually journalists), who have absolutely zero idea of being what a fan is. Journalists will look at your club and use the same well-worn yardstick that other journalists use, they'll fish out the same bunch of cliches, because they're playing to an audience, and that is what they usually tell that audience. In my mind, the biggest change in the dynamics of football since the Premier League inception has been between clubs and their fans. It used to be "club" and "fan" (who, rather charmingly, often use to think of it as "his" club in a sense beyond just turning up to matches). Now, it is far more about "product" and "consumers". The product is a massive, global industry and the locals who were buying it for years count less and less. The thing journalists and clubs don't seem to get is that, it wasn't the fans who made it this way, it was the clubs. They now treat us like "customers" to be "marketed" at, like some Ford trying to flog you a Fiesta or something. The dynamic between them and us has changed, and they - and the press who support them - have no right whatsoever to moan about it. If they think that ultimately they can treat fans as "customers", part of the relationship being that they can continue to up prices as high as they like, then they also have to accept the flip side of it, which is that supporters are going to demand in return better quality, better football, competitiveness. What the likes of Ashley, Lerner and every other half-arsed unambitious chairman in the top flight want is to have it both ways. They want to continue to stick the prices up, to continue to rake in more and more money from far eastern television rights, to have matches moved to stupid times and dates without thinking about supporters in the ground, they want all of this, but at the same time, they want you to just shut the fuck up and suck it up. That's the bit that makes me angry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Incidentally, it's not just you. Slight tangent, this, but it says a lot about football. A couple of months ago, the Villa Supporters Trust organised a roundtable thing, at which members could come and talk to Tom Fox, our (recently appointed) CEO. Fox is the bloke who was chief commercial officer at Arsenal previously, American bloke who got them their mega shirt deal and what not. I was looking through the minutes of the meeting, and at the end, someone asked him if Villa could commit to paying *all* their staff the living wage, rather than the minimum wage. There was much umming and aahing, which ultimately came down to "we aren't planning to do that, and don't think we would". I believe the PL have since said all clubs are going to have to do it, but the fact was that we had a football club happy to throw 50k a week at utterly mediocre footballers pleading costs when it came to paying non-football employees that extra quid or so an hour. That just says it all about football, and the people who run it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I don't understand why the club would need to lend money for the training ground. Likely to just be a simple cashflow thing. The club may be making a lot of money but it may take time to get it. If you want serious cash quickly Banks are the places to go. It's more an issue of why he's doing it than the Practice of doing it. can you explain that more? we seem to 'know' that he's cooked the books to hide the profit from last year so why wouldn't he just be using that 'profit' to pay for what he's loaning? Because the profit might not be readily available. It's difficult to comment too much on why anything like this is done unless we are told explicitly. He isn't necessarily loaning anything he is just getting access to money quicker. So say the PL is going to give him £60m in £20m annual installments for the TV money. During that time he can only use that money once it's been paid to him. If he goes to the bank and says lend us £60m the bank will have the funds in place to do that. They know they are getting £60m back because it's secured against the TV deal. The bank gets it's money back and Ashley gets the cash tomorrow. That's a very crude example but it's the sort of thing that's common place in business as you need a cash injection to finance something and banks generally are the only places that have cash available quickly. Why Ashley wants money up front is anyone's guess but he will feel it can be put to better use now than waiting for it to come in installments. Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Incidentally, it's not just you. Slight tangent, this, but it says a lot about football. A couple of months ago, the Villa Supporters Trust organised a roundtable thing, at which members could come and talk to Tom Fox, our (recently appointed) CEO. Fox is the bloke who was chief commercial officer at Arsenal previously, American bloke who got them their mega shirt deal and what not. I was looking through the minutes of the meeting, and at the end, someone asked him if Villa could commit to paying *all* their staff the living wage, rather than the minimum wage. There was much umming and aahing, which ultimately came down to "we aren't planning to do that, and don't think we would". I believe the PL have since said all clubs are going to have to do it, but the fact was that we had a football club happy to throw 50k a week at utterly mediocre footballers pleading costs when it came to paying non-football employees that extra quid or so an hour. That just says it all about football, and the people who run it. I'd say it shows football needs some serious regulation in terms of ownership etc as it can't be trusted to regulate itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now