Guest Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 They're also not spending £200k a week on players they need shifting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanj Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Or they could have other cash means like loans or something to help get deals done early. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Do they get the TV money at the start of the season, unlike us? Obviously not, but they are spending money they don't currently have. Ashley's policy is to never do that, which is why we are where we are. Excellent from a business sense, complete s*** from a footballing sense. It's not excellent from a business sense when it puts the club's future in the Premier League and the retention of one of its key assets in jeopardy and in a transfer market where prices are only going one way from one window to the next. You'd be better of spending 70m now on the right players than having 75m to spend in twelve months time. Alas, these simple economics are beyond Ashley's comprehension and have been for a decade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 They're also not spending £200k a week on players they need shifting. I really doubt that makes a difference, it's just an excuse. We'll hear the same crap next summer imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Do they get the TV money at the start of the season, unlike us? Obviously not, but they are spending money they don't currently have. Ashley's policy is to never do that, which is why we are where we are. Excellent from a business sense, complete s*** from a footballing sense. It's not excellent from a business sense when it puts the club's future in the Premier League in jeopardy and in a transfer market where prices are only going one way from one window to the next. It is for Ashley, as I posted the other day - his investment in NUFC is safe as prices in football continue to rise astronomically. He can continue to invest nothing, spend nothing and gain from free advertisements for his tat shop whilst knowing he could sell us at any stage for the same (if not more) than he has put in. The difference of us finishing 5th - 17th means fuck all to Ashley and he'll continue to try and run us as a club that does the bare minimum to survive. It's no surprise that the only time he has ever put his hand in his pocket is to get us back into the TV gravy train of the PL. He'll also be confident that even if we do go down, we'll always come straight back up. Also indicates why in January, when he thought we were comfortably back up - he refused to sign anyone else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Course it makes a difference man. You think many newly promoted teams spend huge, have a 25 man squad, then continue to pay £10-15m a season on players not even registered? Have a word man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 They're also not spending £200k a week on players they need shifting. I really doubt that makes a difference, it's just an excuse. We'll hear the same crap next summer imo. Exactly. Buy cheap players based on the hope their value increases to sell them for a profit and for every Cabaye there will be a handful of duds on long term deals. So what do we end up with? A squad containing a few good players put in the shop window and dozens of dead wood. Apart from a very short period under Pardew it hasn't worked, and it's really not hard to see why. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
louistoon Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. I don't really buy the wages excuse, our wages to turnover ratio when we went down was good in comparison to other PL teams, and since then we've lost Anita, Taylor, Colo, Wijnaldum, Sissoko, Thauvin, Tiote and Gouffran. I doubt anyone we signed last year is on wages comparable to those lot, with the possible exception of Ritchie and Diame. If we gave long expensive contracts out to hanley and the like then that's stupid decisions on our part because they wern't worth that. It is a very difficult window for clubs like us, but pissing around with someone like Perez, for £13.4 mill in this market shouldn't be happening. I'll judge it at the end of the window, but we need to step up our game. I'm not in the Ashley is a complete scrote and won't spend anything ever cause all he wants is 17th camp either. I am still hopeful that this is just trying to get our money to go as far as possible, as I cant fathom why anyone, even Ashley, would led Steve McClaren spend 75 million and then give fuck all to Benitez. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Course it makes a difference man. You think many newly promoted teams spend huge, have a 25 man squad, then continue to pay £10-15m a season on players not even registered? Have a word man. Mike Ashley is the owner, just don't be surprised if we are complaining about the same shit next summer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Do they get the TV money at the start of the season, unlike us? Obviously not, but they are spending money they don't currently have. Ashley's policy is to never do that, which is why we are where we are. Excellent from a business sense, complete s*** from a footballing sense. It's not excellent from a business sense when it puts the club's future in the Premier League in jeopardy and in a transfer market where prices are only going one way from one window to the next. It is for Ashley, as I posted the other day - his investment in NUFC is safe as prices in football continue to rise astronomically. He can continue to invest nothing, spend nothing and gain from free advertisements for his tat shop whilst knowing he could sell us at any stage for the same (if not more) than he has put in. The difference of us finishing 5th - 17th means f*** all to Ashley and he'll continue to try and run us as a club that does the bare minimum to survive. It's not surprise that the only time he has ever put his hand in his pocket is to get us back into the TV gravy train of the PL. He'll also be confident that even if we do go down, we'll always come straight back up. Also indicates why in January, when he thought we were comfortably back up - he refused to sign anyone else. This is sadly true. However with a bit of sensible investment his asset could be worth much, much more. If he'd spend 20m a year of his own money over the past decade he arguably would have recouped it in TV revenue and could have been sitting on a club like Spurs rather than one like West Brom or Stoke in terms of profile and value. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Someone said it right though. Huddersfield have spent a good chunk of money on buying what they already had (loans deals turning into full transfers), and Brighton haven't set the works alight with their signings. Us on the other hand spent last summer buying a few Premier League players, and kept a decent squad when we went down. Brighton and Huddersfield have a lot of catching up to do to be Premier League ready. Did we though? Who are the decent squad players we kept when we went down? Mitro, Perez, Dummett, Chancel? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Do they get the TV money at the start of the season, unlike us? Obviously not, but they are spending money they don't currently have. Ashley's policy is to never do that, which is why we are where we are. Excellent from a business sense, complete s*** from a footballing sense. It's not excellent from a business sense when it puts the club's future in the Premier League in jeopardy and in a transfer market where prices are only going one way from one window to the next. It is for Ashley, as I posted the other day - his investment in NUFC is safe as prices in football continue to rise astronomically. He can continue to invest nothing, spend nothing and gain from free advertisements for his tat shop whilst knowing he could sell us at any stage for the same (if not more) than he has put in. The difference of us finishing 5th - 17th means f*** all to Ashley and he'll continue to try and run us as a club that does the bare minimum to survive. It's not surprise that the only time he has ever put his hand in his pocket is to get us back into the TV gravy train of the PL. He'll also be confident that even if we do go down, we'll always come straight back up. Also indicates why in January, when he thought we were comfortably back up - he refused to sign anyone else. This is sadly true. However with a bit of sensible investment his asset could be worth much, much more. If he'd spend 20m a year of his own money over the past decade he arguably would have recouped it in TV revenue and could have been sitting on a club like Spurs rather than one like West Brom or Stoke in terms of profile and value. But then he'd be risking his own money. This way he never loses and only gains. If we go down the losses are always going to go against the club, not him personally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliottman Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 They're also not spending £200k a week on players they need shifting. I really doubt that makes a difference, it's just an excuse. We'll hear the same crap next summer imo. An excuse? Its nearly £10million quid a year Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 You can choose to believe the excuses of Mike Ashley if you want, i choose to believe he's full of shit and the same thing will happen next summer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 You can choose to believe the excuses of Mike Ashley if you want, i choose to believe he's full of shit and the same thing will happen next summer. Correct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 You'd be hard pressed to find a football club who isn't paying wages to players they no longer need. What matters in relation to others for the purpose of determining if the excuse is valid is a) if it happens more here than average and b) if it impacts our wages to turnover to such an extent that it prevents us from doing the incoming business we need. I can't be bothered to find out if a) is true, but b) shouldn't as we've had a relatively healthy w/t ratio for years and haven't gone mad with wages recently, whilst our turnover will increase dramatically in the next few years providing we stay up and do well (for which we need the investment). Even if a) is true, it's a natural result of our transfer policy and shouldn't come as a surprise or hinder our progress. Buy loads of cheap players with the aim of making massive transfer profits on individual players and you're bound to end up with loads of players who aren't good enough and hard to shift. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 But then he'd be risking his own money. This way he never loses and only gains. If we go down the losses are always going to go against the club, not him personally. I never follow this line of Ashley vs 'the club'. All of it is his own money. If NUFC loses money, Ashley loses money. The whole lot is his and his alone. And he's lost repeatedly. Even now there is no guarantee that he would get back every penny he's put in, never mind a decent return over 10 years- all very well big TV deals pumping money in, but if it all goes out on players then you are no further forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 But then he'd be risking his own money. This way he never loses and only gains. If we go down the losses are always going to go against the club, not him personally. I never follow this line of Ashley vs 'the club'. All of it is his own money. If NUFC loses money, Ashley loses money. The whole lot is his and his alone. And he's lost repeatedly. Even now there is no guarantee that he would get back every penny he's put in, never mind a decent return over 10 years- all very well big TV deals pumping money in, but if it all goes out on players then you are no further forward. Ashley's net spend per season here is £4.4m before this window I believe. Have a think how much TV money we've had in that 10yrs. The club is in more debt than it was when he took over. How does that work out? When you've done the math for me please let me know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufc4eva Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 You can choose to believe the excuses of Mike Ashley if you want, i choose to believe he's full of s*** and the same thing will happen next summer. Correct. If we have a good season and invest a bit, then some of our players could be getting touted about for 30-40 million. Surely Ashley sees that a good season ( mid table / top 10) would see the value of his assets rise significantly, although obviously we wouldn't want to lose our best players, that money could then be reinvested to even the squad as a whole. Mind I accept it's a lot of wastage on players each month, however, Rafa should be given 50-70 million net minimum to ensure we stay in the division / push on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 I think it's the "invest a bit" part that people are most skeptical of. We improbably finished 5th under pardew and the only investment the following summer was Anita. They'll never want to push on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohmelads Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 But then he'd be risking his own money. This way he never loses and only gains. If we go down the losses are always going to go against the club, not him personally. I never follow this line of Ashley vs 'the club'. All of it is his own money. If NUFC loses money, Ashley loses money. The whole lot is his and his alone. And he's lost repeatedly. Even now there is no guarantee that he would get back every penny he's put in, never mind a decent return over 10 years- all very well big TV deals pumping money in, but if it all goes out on players then you are no further forward. You're forgetting the free advertising of Sports Direct, which after all is his main interest and what made him a billionaire. Our stadium is absolutely covered in Sports Direct advertising beamed out to global audiences. Companies pay enormous amounts for that - he pays nothing. To Ashley, 17th place every season would be success because he can break even on the club and expose his brand to global audiences. He runs the club accordingly; it's no coincidence we always have a squad deemed just about good enough to survive. In spite of two relegations, nothing has changed. To him, it isn't worth spending the money required to come 10th or even 5th - yes he could speculate to accumulate (as we wish he would), but why do that when you're breaking even and getting free advertising worth a fortune? Of course he can't come out and say this, but it's pretty obvious by the way the club is run. Our goal is to survive in the Premier League - not consolidate and strengthen but survive. If we find bargains and build a good team, they'll be sold. Some saw the hiring of Rafa as a change in direction, but it's looking more like he sees him as someone who will keep a cheap squad up. The best we can hope for is that Rafa can make us hard to beat and somehow establish us as a solid Prem side until an investor comes in. It'll take a very good offer for Ashley to sell up though. There's a reason he's stayed despite all the sh*t. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chopey Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 The team Rafa is putting together reminds my of Sir Bobby's in a way, Young, Quick, energetic and so long as they are well coached we should have a good season Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanj Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Just missing Shearer, Robert, Bellamy, Solano and Speed. But pretty much the same sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaydnNUFC Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Just missing Shearer, Robert, Bellamy, Solano and Speed. But pretty much the same sure. And Shay... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts