Wullie Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Wrong again. If we keep making a loss, and will keep making a loss in the future, he has to either keep taking the loss or has to sell for cheap and write some of the loss off. Like what Ellis Short did. He'll have no choice. If he asks unreasonable amounts for a club with debt, nobody will buy it off him and so it (and therefore he!) will keep making a loss. No failing business has ever had its owner keep the high business value and just tack the debt on and see a successful sale. History is replete with examples of businesses being sold for nominal sums like £1 because of how they're performing. Nothing you're saying makes sense. He's already asking for an unreasonable amount and the club is in over a 100m in debt... Debt to him. He's the only one it would cost money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelveys Hair Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Ignore the WUM An empty stadium full of Shite Direct adverts is bad for business.. an empty stadium every other week would get worldwide coverage and if the negativity starts to affect share prices by making SD an even more toxic brand, then shareholders would demand action from Ashley or start selling. We need as much negativity on Shite Direct as possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzgerald Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Yes! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzgerald Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Seyyyyyyyymourrrrrrrrrr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_NUFC Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Its less revenue, so he would be less happy obviously. But no I don't think that would make him sell the club, ticket revenue is a small percentage of his income. But if that "less revenue" is enough to mean the club makes him a loss rather than a profit, his whole reason for owning us disappears. It doesn't have to reduce his income to zero. Just enough to make us a millstone around his neck rather than a cash cow for him. Saying "but other revenue is more" is completely missing the point. Ticket revenue wouldn't be the difference between profit and loss How can you type that with a straight face? According to the latest released figures for 2017/18, we made an operating profit of £17.6m Ticket revenues were £24m So yes, on its own and without looking at anything else, ticket revenue absolutely is the difference between profit and loss for Mike Ashley. A further £28m was brought in through sponsorship, and trust me if you've got an empty stadium and nobody buying shirts then that takes a hit too. Add in further that if we go down, he looses the TV money and we'd all agree that a full stadium decreases the likelihood of relegation but to be honest to get shot of him it's a price I'd accept in a heartbeat to have my club back. In summary: Don't talk utter rot. I didn't look at the accounts Is that total profit of the club in the 2017-2018 season then? £17.6m? If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Seymour, surely you can see the gaps in your thinking here. If a business loses is value, regardless of the debt it has accrued, there will be no willing buyers paying the amount the seller is asking for with the cost of debt included within. For very recent evidence of this, see Sunderland: their owner had to basically give the club away to two idiots for almost nought, while having them give him the parachute money to pay back the debt he loaned to the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Mental gymnastics to avoid saying "I just want to go to the match" Yeah this is basically it. It's fair enough in a way, it's what fans are supposed to do and it's hard to give up. I mean, I went under Rafa when really I knew it was false hope. But it was enjoyable and Rafa allowed us to pretend for a bit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoreboard82 Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Dude is fighting to hold on to his life sentence Poor mad bastid. In a way, I genuinely wished I had as healthy a relationship with sports as Seymour, where you don't really care one way or another what you're served. You just support whatever is in front of you as long as it has the right colour shirt (although, even that might not be a red line for the truly persistent supporter). Thats what being a supporter is all about man you support through thick and thin. By doing so I've seen good times and bad times. Thick and thin. The rewards of being a fan are thin while some fans are thick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Its less revenue, so he would be less happy obviously. But no I don't think that would make him sell the club, ticket revenue is a small percentage of his income. But if that "less revenue" is enough to mean the club makes him a loss rather than a profit, his whole reason for owning us disappears. It doesn't have to reduce his income to zero. Just enough to make us a millstone around his neck rather than a cash cow for him. Saying "but other revenue is more" is completely missing the point. Ticket revenue wouldn't be the difference between profit and loss How can you type that with a straight face? According to the latest released figures for 2017/18, we made an operating profit of £17.6m Ticket revenues were £24m So yes, on its own and without looking at anything else, ticket revenue absolutely is the difference between profit and loss for Mike Ashley. A further £28m was brought in through sponsorship, and trust me if you've got an empty stadium and nobody buying shirts then that takes a hit too. Add in further that if we go down, he looses the TV money and we'd all agree that a full stadium decreases the likelihood of relegation but to be honest to get shot of him it's a price I'd accept in a heartbeat to have my club back. In summary: Don't talk utter rot. I didn't look at the accounts Is that total profit of the club in the 2017-2018 season then? £17.6m? If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Seymour, surely you can see the gaps in your thinking here. If a business loses is value, regardless of the debt it has accrued, there will be no willing buyers paying the amount the seller is asking for with the cost of debt included within. For very recent evidence of this, see Sunderland: their owner had to basically give the club away to two idiots for almost nought, while having them give him the parachute money to pay back the debt he loaned to the club. Short sold the club in league 1,we're a premier league club where the ticket revenue isn't the main source of revenue. Take away ticket revenue and he would probably just reduce the transfer budget Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Wrong again. If we keep making a loss, and will keep making a loss in the future, he has to either keep taking the loss or has to sell for cheap and write some of the loss off. Like what Ellis Short did. He'll have no choice. If he asks unreasonable amounts for a club with debt, nobody will buy it off him and so it (and therefore he!) will keep making a loss. No failing business has ever had its owner keep the high business value and just tack the debt on and see a successful sale. History is replete with examples of businesses being sold for nominal sums like £1 because of how they're performing. Nothing you're saying makes sense. He's already asking for an unreasonable amount and the club is in over a 100m in debt... You remind me of the arguments I have with my parents about Brexit or global warming. There is no level of proof which is high enough to convince them that they might be wrong. No matter how much actual evidence I put in front of them, from experts and peer-reviewed sources, they just go "Nah, that's not right" and show me some Daily Mail article about how forrins are ruining the country. It's about as rewarding as trying to kick water up a hill. You're the same. Not saying you're a Brexiteer or climate change denier, of course, but you're so deeply entrenched that where this is concerned there's no level of evidence which is satisfactory for you to question your standpoint. You just dismiss everything anyone puts as if none of it carries any weight whatsoever, no matter how backed in facts, figures, or historical evidence. I don't want to be rude to you, because you've not been rude to me or indeed anyone on here and for that at least I respect you. But I come from a scientific background and believe strongly in the scientific method. I like to think I'm very open to new ideas and reassessing my viewpoint in light of new information as that's how we grow as people and how we expand our horizons. But you don't have this in your DNA and when I can see that only one side is putting out a compelling case there's no way of getting around that discussing anything with you is just a complete waste of time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Take away ticket revenue and he would probably just reduce the transfer budget Our net transfer spend is fucking zero. He can't reduce it and survive in the PL. If he reduces the transfer budget, our chances of staying up drop dramatically. And then we crash out the PL and then he looses a hundred million a year. Can you see where this is going yet? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Its less revenue, so he would be less happy obviously. But no I don't think that would make him sell the club, ticket revenue is a small percentage of his income. But if that "less revenue" is enough to mean the club makes him a loss rather than a profit, his whole reason for owning us disappears. It doesn't have to reduce his income to zero. Just enough to make us a millstone around his neck rather than a cash cow for him. Saying "but other revenue is more" is completely missing the point. Ticket revenue wouldn't be the difference between profit and loss How can you type that with a straight face? According to the latest released figures for 2017/18, we made an operating profit of £17.6m Ticket revenues were £24m So yes, on its own and without looking at anything else, ticket revenue absolutely is the difference between profit and loss for Mike Ashley. A further £28m was brought in through sponsorship, and trust me if you've got an empty stadium and nobody buying shirts then that takes a hit too. Add in further that if we go down, he looses the TV money and we'd all agree that a full stadium decreases the likelihood of relegation but to be honest to get shot of him it's a price I'd accept in a heartbeat to have my club back. In summary: Don't talk utter rot. I didn't look at the accounts Is that total profit of the club in the 2017-2018 season then? £17.6m? If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Seymour, surely you can see the gaps in your thinking here. If a business loses is value, regardless of the debt it has accrued, there will be no willing buyers paying the amount the seller is asking for with the cost of debt included within. For very recent evidence of this, see Sunderland: their owner had to basically give the club away to two idiots for almost nought, while having them give him the parachute money to pay back the debt he loaned to the club. Short sold the club in league 1,we're a premier league club where the ticket revenue isn't the main source of revenue. Take away ticket revenue and he would probably just reduce the transfer budget Bloody hell man. Then try and force the club down the divisions by not attending and reducing the home advantage (not that it'll take that anyway with Bagpuss in charge). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Just say 'I like going to the match and I don't want to stop', that's a much easier position to justify. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Its less revenue, so he would be less happy obviously. But no I don't think that would make him sell the club, ticket revenue is a small percentage of his income. But if that "less revenue" is enough to mean the club makes him a loss rather than a profit, his whole reason for owning us disappears. It doesn't have to reduce his income to zero. Just enough to make us a millstone around his neck rather than a cash cow for him. Saying "but other revenue is more" is completely missing the point. Ticket revenue wouldn't be the difference between profit and loss How can you type that with a straight face? According to the latest released figures for 2017/18, we made an operating profit of £17.6m Ticket revenues were £24m So yes, on its own and without looking at anything else, ticket revenue absolutely is the difference between profit and loss for Mike Ashley. A further £28m was brought in through sponsorship, and trust me if you've got an empty stadium and nobody buying shirts then that takes a hit too. Add in further that if we go down, he looses the TV money and we'd all agree that a full stadium decreases the likelihood of relegation but to be honest to get shot of him it's a price I'd accept in a heartbeat to have my club back. In summary: Don't talk utter rot. I made those same points earlier, as did a few others no doubt. It's not just the ticket sales, it's the associated loss of sponsorship with companies who find empty stadiums an unattractive proposition. But Seymour deliberately avoided answering that part of my post, which makes me think he's just taking the piss tbh. Ho Ho Ho, what fun. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 The thing is though the ticket sales alone ARE enough to tip us from profit to loss. It doesn't even need anything else, though obviously there'll be a domino effect and other things will take a hit too, exacerbating the issue further. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallowgate End Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Not the most hated on the forum anymore Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 incredible stamina from seymour here like Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Wrong again. If we keep making a loss, and will keep making a loss in the future, he has to either keep taking the loss or has to sell for cheap and write some of the loss off. Like what Ellis Short did. He'll have no choice. If he asks unreasonable amounts for a club with debt, nobody will buy it off him and so it (and therefore he!) will keep making a loss. No failing business has ever had its owner keep the high business value and just tack the debt on and see a successful sale. History is replete with examples of businesses being sold for nominal sums like £1 because of how they're performing. Nothing you're saying makes sense. He's already asking for an unreasonable amount and the club is in over a 100m in debt... You remind me of the arguments I have with my parents about Brexit or global warming. There is no level of proof which is high enough to convince them that they might be wrong. No matter how much actual evidence I put in front of them, from experts and peer-reviewed sources, they just go "Nah, that's not right" and show me some Daily Mail article about how forrins are ruining the country. It's about as rewarding as trying to kick water up a hill. You're the same. Not saying your a Brexiteer or climate change denier, of course, but you're so deeply entrenched that where this is concerned there's no level of evidence which is satisfactory for you to question your standpoint. You just dismiss everything anyone puts as if none of it carries any weight whatsoever, no matter how backed in facts, figures, or historical evidence. I don't want to be rude to you, because you've not been rude to me or indeed anyone on here and for that at least I respect you. But I come from a scientific background and believe strongly in the scientific method. I like to think I'm very open to new ideas and reassessing my viewpoint in light of new information as that's how we grow as people and how we expand our horizons. But you don't have this in your DNA and when I can see that only one side is putting out a compelling case there's no way of getting around that discussing anything with you is just a complete waste of time. You haven't really shown me evidence though mate, you've basically just said that if you take away ticket revenue that we'd make a loss. I hadn't looked at the accounts and you're right we would make a loss. We made a profit of £18.7 so taking away ticket revenue we would make a loss. But do you really think that makes Ashley sell the club? We've had years in the past where we've made a loss and he hasn't sold the club or lowered his price. Im sorry like but just because you come from a scientific background that doesn't mean you're correct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Wrong again. If we keep making a loss, and will keep making a loss in the future, he has to either keep taking the loss or has to sell for cheap and write some of the loss off. Like what Ellis Short did. He'll have no choice. If he asks unreasonable amounts for a club with debt, nobody will buy it off him and so it (and therefore he!) will keep making a loss. No failing business has ever had its owner keep the high business value and just tack the debt on and see a successful sale. History is replete with examples of businesses being sold for nominal sums like £1 because of how they're performing. Nothing you're saying makes sense. He's already asking for an unreasonable amount and the club is in over a 100m in debt... You remind me of the arguments I have with my parents about Brexit or global warming. There is no level of proof which is high enough to convince them that they might be wrong. No matter how much actual evidence I put in front of them, from experts and peer-reviewed sources, they just go "Nah, that's not right" and show me some Daily Mail article about how forrins are ruining the country. It's about as rewarding as trying to kick water up a hill. You're the same. Not saying your a Brexiteer or climate change denier, of course, but you're so deeply entrenched that where this is concerned there's no level of evidence which is satisfactory for you to question your standpoint. You just dismiss everything anyone puts as if none of it carries any weight whatsoever, no matter how backed in facts, figures, or historical evidence. I don't want to be rude to you, because you've not been rude to me or indeed anyone on here and for that at least I respect you. But I come from a scientific background and believe strongly in the scientific method. I like to think I'm very open to new ideas and reassessing my viewpoint in light of new information as that's how we grow as people and how we expand our horizons. But you don't have this in your DNA and when I can see that only one side is putting out a compelling case there's no way of getting around that discussing anything with you is just a complete waste of time. You haven't really shown me evidence though mate, you've basically just said that if you take away ticket revenue that we'd make a loss. I hadn't looked at the accounts and you're right we would make a loss. We made a profit of £18.7 so taking away ticket revenue we would make a loss. But do you really think that makes Ashley sell the club? We've had years in the past where we've made a loss and he hasn't sold the club or lowered his price. Im sorry like but just because you come from a scientific background that doesn't mean you're correct. Why would he hang onto something that makes heavy losses year on year if he wasn't able to stem them (because he wasn't selling shirts or tickets)? Would you hang onto something that's costing you a fucking fortune that you get no benefit from? Actually yes you would, and you do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Will Pardewgate no longer be the most-remembered forum shame incident? Come on Seymour, keep it up mate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallowgate End Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Back to Bruce I think he will pick up some good results this season and we will be safe. NOTE.. Not due to Bruce's management but more the legacy Rafa has left behind. Yeah looks like he’s going to desperately try and live off the Rafa Benitez back 3. Against West Ham in the friendly you could see our team shape is so well drilled in it. He’s still going to need to replace the goal contribution of Rondon & Perez though. Might just stay up it might go to the last game against Liverpool.. over to you Brucey Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Wrong again. If we keep making a loss, and will keep making a loss in the future, he has to either keep taking the loss or has to sell for cheap and write some of the loss off. Like what Ellis Short did. He'll have no choice. If he asks unreasonable amounts for a club with debt, nobody will buy it off him and so it (and therefore he!) will keep making a loss. No failing business has ever had its owner keep the high business value and just tack the debt on and see a successful sale. History is replete with examples of businesses being sold for nominal sums like £1 because of how they're performing. Nothing you're saying makes sense. He's already asking for an unreasonable amount and the club is in over a 100m in debt... You remind me of the arguments I have with my parents about Brexit or global warming. There is no level of proof which is high enough to convince them that they might be wrong. No matter how much actual evidence I put in front of them, from experts and peer-reviewed sources, they just go "Nah, that's not right" and show me some Daily Mail article about how forrins are ruining the country. It's about as rewarding as trying to kick water up a hill. You're the same. Not saying your a Brexiteer or climate change denier, of course, but you're so deeply entrenched that where this is concerned there's no level of evidence which is satisfactory for you to question your standpoint. You just dismiss everything anyone puts as if none of it carries any weight whatsoever, no matter how backed in facts, figures, or historical evidence. I don't want to be rude to you, because you've not been rude to me or indeed anyone on here and for that at least I respect you. But I come from a scientific background and believe strongly in the scientific method. I like to think I'm very open to new ideas and reassessing my viewpoint in light of new information as that's how we grow as people and how we expand our horizons. But you don't have this in your DNA and when I can see that only one side is putting out a compelling case there's no way of getting around that discussing anything with you is just a complete waste of time. You haven't really shown me evidence though mate, you've basically just said that if you take away ticket revenue that we'd make a loss. I hadn't looked at the accounts and you're right we would make a loss. We made a profit of £18.7 so taking away ticket revenue we would make a loss. But do you really think that makes Ashley sell the club? We've had years in the past where we've made a loss and he hasn't sold the club or lowered his price. Im sorry like but just because you come from a scientific background that doesn't mean you're correct. Why would he hang onto something that makes heavy losses year on year if he wasn't able to stem them (because he wasn't selling shirts or tickets)? Would you hang onto something that's costing you a f***ing fortune that you get no benefit from? Actually yes you would, and you do. The club has made losses in this tenure previously and he hasn't sold the club, in fact the club was making a loss before he bought the fucker Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Wrong again. If we keep making a loss, and will keep making a loss in the future, he has to either keep taking the loss or has to sell for cheap and write some of the loss off. Like what Ellis Short did. He'll have no choice. If he asks unreasonable amounts for a club with debt, nobody will buy it off him and so it (and therefore he!) will keep making a loss. No failing business has ever had its owner keep the high business value and just tack the debt on and see a successful sale. History is replete with examples of businesses being sold for nominal sums like £1 because of how they're performing. Nothing you're saying makes sense. He's already asking for an unreasonable amount and the club is in over a 100m in debt... You remind me of the arguments I have with my parents about Brexit or global warming. There is no level of proof which is high enough to convince them that they might be wrong. No matter how much actual evidence I put in front of them, from experts and peer-reviewed sources, they just go "Nah, that's not right" and show me some Daily Mail article about how forrins are ruining the country. It's about as rewarding as trying to kick water up a hill. You're the same. Not saying your a Brexiteer or climate change denier, of course, but you're so deeply entrenched that where this is concerned there's no level of evidence which is satisfactory for you to question your standpoint. You just dismiss everything anyone puts as if none of it carries any weight whatsoever, no matter how backed in facts, figures, or historical evidence. I don't want to be rude to you, because you've not been rude to me or indeed anyone on here and for that at least I respect you. But I come from a scientific background and believe strongly in the scientific method. I like to think I'm very open to new ideas and reassessing my viewpoint in light of new information as that's how we grow as people and how we expand our horizons. But you don't have this in your DNA and when I can see that only one side is putting out a compelling case there's no way of getting around that discussing anything with you is just a complete waste of time. You haven't really shown me evidence though mate, you've basically just said that if you take away ticket revenue that we'd make a loss. I hadn't looked at the accounts and you're right we would make a loss. We made a profit of £18.7 so taking away ticket revenue we would make a loss. But do you really think that makes Ashley sell the club? We've had years in the past where we've made a loss and he hasn't sold the club or lowered his price. Im sorry like but just because you come from a scientific background that doesn't mean you're correct. Why would he hang onto something that makes heavy losses year on year if he wasn't able to stem them (because he wasn't selling shirts or tickets)? Would you hang onto something that's costing you a f***ing fortune that you get no benefit from? Actually yes you would, and you do. The club has made losses in this tenure previously and he hasn't sold the club, in fact the club was making a loss before he bought the fucker Year on year? Consistently? Without the crowd there to subsidise to the tune of £25m+ a year? When did this happen? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Wrong again. If we keep making a loss, and will keep making a loss in the future, he has to either keep taking the loss or has to sell for cheap and write some of the loss off. Like what Ellis Short did. He'll have no choice. If he asks unreasonable amounts for a club with debt, nobody will buy it off him and so it (and therefore he!) will keep making a loss. No failing business has ever had its owner keep the high business value and just tack the debt on and see a successful sale. History is replete with examples of businesses being sold for nominal sums like £1 because of how they're performing. Nothing you're saying makes sense. He's already asking for an unreasonable amount and the club is in over a 100m in debt... You remind me of the arguments I have with my parents about Brexit or global warming. There is no level of proof which is high enough to convince them that they might be wrong. No matter how much actual evidence I put in front of them, from experts and peer-reviewed sources, they just go "Nah, that's not right" and show me some Daily Mail article about how forrins are ruining the country. It's about as rewarding as trying to kick water up a hill. You're the same. Not saying your a Brexiteer or climate change denier, of course, but you're so deeply entrenched that where this is concerned there's no level of evidence which is satisfactory for you to question your standpoint. You just dismiss everything anyone puts as if none of it carries any weight whatsoever, no matter how backed in facts, figures, or historical evidence. I don't want to be rude to you, because you've not been rude to me or indeed anyone on here and for that at least I respect you. But I come from a scientific background and believe strongly in the scientific method. I like to think I'm very open to new ideas and reassessing my viewpoint in light of new information as that's how we grow as people and how we expand our horizons. But you don't have this in your DNA and when I can see that only one side is putting out a compelling case there's no way of getting around that discussing anything with you is just a complete waste of time. You haven't really shown me evidence though mate, you've basically just said that if you take away ticket revenue that we'd make a loss. I hadn't looked at the accounts and you're right we would make a loss. We made a profit of £18.7 so taking away ticket revenue we would make a loss. But do you really think that makes Ashley sell the club? We've had years in the past where we've made a loss and he hasn't sold the club or lowered his price. Im sorry like but just because you come from a scientific background that doesn't mean you're correct. Why would he hang onto something that makes heavy losses year on year if he wasn't able to stem them (because he wasn't selling shirts or tickets)? Would you hang onto something that's costing you a f***ing fortune that you get no benefit from? Actually yes you would, and you do. The club has made losses in this tenure previously and he hasn't sold the club, in fact the club was making a loss before he bought the fucker Because he felt he could reverse those losses with promotions etc. You can't reverse something with no cunt there. That's not a one-season fix. That's an unsustainable business. Particularly if we go down. He'd almost certainly HAVE to sell it then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Wrong again. If we keep making a loss, and will keep making a loss in the future, he has to either keep taking the loss or has to sell for cheap and write some of the loss off. Like what Ellis Short did. He'll have no choice. If he asks unreasonable amounts for a club with debt, nobody will buy it off him and so it (and therefore he!) will keep making a loss. No failing business has ever had its owner keep the high business value and just tack the debt on and see a successful sale. History is replete with examples of businesses being sold for nominal sums like £1 because of how they're performing. Nothing you're saying makes sense. He's already asking for an unreasonable amount and the club is in over a 100m in debt... You remind me of the arguments I have with my parents about Brexit or global warming. There is no level of proof which is high enough to convince them that they might be wrong. No matter how much actual evidence I put in front of them, from experts and peer-reviewed sources, they just go "Nah, that's not right" and show me some Daily Mail article about how forrins are ruining the country. It's about as rewarding as trying to kick water up a hill. You're the same. Not saying your a Brexiteer or climate change denier, of course, but you're so deeply entrenched that where this is concerned there's no level of evidence which is satisfactory for you to question your standpoint. You just dismiss everything anyone puts as if none of it carries any weight whatsoever, no matter how backed in facts, figures, or historical evidence. I don't want to be rude to you, because you've not been rude to me or indeed anyone on here and for that at least I respect you. But I come from a scientific background and believe strongly in the scientific method. I like to think I'm very open to new ideas and reassessing my viewpoint in light of new information as that's how we grow as people and how we expand our horizons. But you don't have this in your DNA and when I can see that only one side is putting out a compelling case there's no way of getting around that discussing anything with you is just a complete waste of time. You haven't really shown me evidence though mate, you've basically just said that if you take away ticket revenue that we'd make a loss. I hadn't looked at the accounts and you're right we would make a loss. We made a profit of £18.7 so taking away ticket revenue we would make a loss. But do you really think that makes Ashley sell the club? We've had years in the past where we've made a loss and he hasn't sold the club or lowered his price. Im sorry like but just because you come from a scientific background that doesn't mean you're correct. Why would he hang onto something that makes heavy losses year on year if he wasn't able to stem them (because he wasn't selling shirts or tickets)? Would you hang onto something that's costing you a f***ing fortune that you get no benefit from? Actually yes you would, and you do. The club has made losses in this tenure previously and he hasn't sold the club, in fact the club was making a loss before he bought the f***er Year on year? Consistently? Without the crowd there to subsidise to the tune of £25m+ a year? When did this happen? Even if with ticket revenue the club made a loss and he still didn't sell the club Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 If we do make a loss, then the debt goes up by the way, which means the price goes up which means its even more difficult for a potential buyer. Wrong again. If we keep making a loss, and will keep making a loss in the future, he has to either keep taking the loss or has to sell for cheap and write some of the loss off. Like what Ellis Short did. He'll have no choice. If he asks unreasonable amounts for a club with debt, nobody will buy it off him and so it (and therefore he!) will keep making a loss. No failing business has ever had its owner keep the high business value and just tack the debt on and see a successful sale. History is replete with examples of businesses being sold for nominal sums like £1 because of how they're performing. Nothing you're saying makes sense. He's already asking for an unreasonable amount and the club is in over a 100m in debt... You remind me of the arguments I have with my parents about Brexit or global warming. There is no level of proof which is high enough to convince them that they might be wrong. No matter how much actual evidence I put in front of them, from experts and peer-reviewed sources, they just go "Nah, that's not right" and show me some Daily Mail article about how forrins are ruining the country. It's about as rewarding as trying to kick water up a hill. You're the same. Not saying your a Brexiteer or climate change denier, of course, but you're so deeply entrenched that where this is concerned there's no level of evidence which is satisfactory for you to question your standpoint. You just dismiss everything anyone puts as if none of it carries any weight whatsoever, no matter how backed in facts, figures, or historical evidence. I don't want to be rude to you, because you've not been rude to me or indeed anyone on here and for that at least I respect you. But I come from a scientific background and believe strongly in the scientific method. I like to think I'm very open to new ideas and reassessing my viewpoint in light of new information as that's how we grow as people and how we expand our horizons. But you don't have this in your DNA and when I can see that only one side is putting out a compelling case there's no way of getting around that discussing anything with you is just a complete waste of time. You haven't really shown me evidence though mate, you've basically just said that if you take away ticket revenue that we'd make a loss. I hadn't looked at the accounts and you're right we would make a loss. We made a profit of £18.7 so taking away ticket revenue we would make a loss. But do you really think that makes Ashley sell the club? We've had years in the past where we've made a loss and he hasn't sold the club or lowered his price. Im sorry like but just because you come from a scientific background that doesn't mean you're correct. Why would he hang onto something that makes heavy losses year on year if he wasn't able to stem them (because he wasn't selling shirts or tickets)? Would you hang onto something that's costing you a f***ing fortune that you get no benefit from? Actually yes you would, and you do. The club has made losses in this tenure previously and he hasn't sold the club, in fact the club was making a loss before he bought the f***er Year on year? Consistently? Without the crowd there to subsidise to the tune of £25m+ a year? When did this happen? Even if with ticket revenue the club made a loss and he still didn't sell the club What? What question are you even answering? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts