Time to show your hand Mr. Ashley

[brummie]

Getting back to the original point about when Ashley is going to show his hand .... this is something we realised just after our takeover had gone through......

 

When the club was a PLC, even whilst under the Ellis junta, we got the chance to go to the AGM once a year, ask him awkward questions, tell him what a cnut he was. The club was also legally obliged to keep the stock market informed on certain issues, make information public.

 

Now, when clubs are wholly owned by billionaires, the fans actually have less access to information than before - which is kind of ironic, really.

[Mick]

 

no you haven't. The simple fact is that, you are so obsessed with blaming Shepherd for it raining, that you really and honestly and stupidly think that the Halls had millions of pounds invested in the football club and allowed someone else to run it as he saw fit.

 

The answer is above. The highest 3 consecutive positions in over 50 years means that while he was chairman, he did at least the 2nd best job as chairman during that period. Throw in 2 FA Cup Finals which nobody else managed either and you really can't disupte it. Unless of course you are - stupidly going to make something up or ignore these facts, but I expect that you will

 

You're a joke.  mackems.gif

 

If Allardyce is successful, who will you credit ? If he isn't, who will you blame ? We know why you don't reply  mackems.gif

 

No you're a joke, you questioned if I could read etc but the answer to your question was done ages ago and you replied to it here, it's post #2767  http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=40533.msg865350#msg865350 You replied to it in post #2773 

 

Maybe you could now admit that all of those things you said applied to me for not answering your question now apply to you.  Getting back to my question about the Shepherd quote, what's the answer?  I've quoted him and what he thought about the running of the club, he clearly thought it was him, is he a liar?  Or, do you defend him even when he admits to doing something?

[Mick]

 

do you know this or are you just saying it because it suits you, like MICK does ?

 

I don't think you can dispute the 50m that was handed to Souness, and the backing gave when he wanted to peddle Bellamy and Robert, that he was allowed to do what he wanted.

 

The phrase "within reason" is interesting. I take that to mean when it suited you, you would use it to justify a veto on financial grounds, and equally so to justify "meddling".

 

 

 

I'd take more notice of a him, a former member of the Magpie Group who went out and helped Sir John gain control over the club than I would of you, although I'm sure you know more than he does about what went on at that time.

[Mick]

Getting back to the original point about when Ashley is going to show his hand .... this is something we realised just after our takeover had gone through......

 

When the club was a PLC, even whilst under the Ellis junta, we got the chance to go to the AGM once a year, ask him awkward questions, tell him what a cnut he was. The club was also legally obliged to keep the stock market informed on certain issues, make information public.

 

Now, when clubs are wholly owned by billionaires, the fans actually have less access to information than before - which is kind of ironic, really.

 

Few, if any know how we'll be informed about what is going on within the club, time will tell but we're unlikely to get to know too much until the review of the club has been carried out.

[NE5]

 

no you haven't. The simple fact is that, you are so obsessed with blaming Shepherd for it raining, that you really and honestly and stupidly think that the Halls had millions of pounds invested in the football club and allowed someone else to run it as he saw fit.

 

The answer is above. The highest 3 consecutive positions in over 50 years means that while he was chairman, he did at least the 2nd best job as chairman during that period. Throw in 2 FA Cup Finals which nobody else managed either and you really can't disupte it. Unless of course you are - stupidly going to make something up or ignore these facts, but I expect that you will

 

You're a joke.  mackems.gif

 

If Allardyce is successful, who will you credit ? If he isn't, who will you blame ? We know why you don't reply  mackems.gif

 

No you're a joke, you questioned if I could read etc but the answer to your question was done ages ago and you replied to it here, it's post #2767  http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=40533.msg865350#msg865350 You replied to it in post #2773 

 

Maybe you could now admit that all of those things you said applied to me for not answering your question now apply to you.  Getting back to my question about the Shepherd quote, what's the answer?  I've quoted him and what he thought about the running of the club, he clearly thought it was him, is he a liar?  Or, do you defend him even when he admits to doing something?

 

I didn't think even you would be stupid enough to think that as chairman of the club he would deliberately discredit himself and his position at the club by admitting publicly that he wasn't in charge of running the club in the way you think he did. obviously, you are even dafter than I thought.....or maybe are even more obsessed than I thought, which is borne out by your signature,

[email protected]  <-------------Just click left but hurry before its no longer a valid e-mail address.

emphasising the depth of your pathetic obsession.

 

 

[NE5]

 

do you know this or are you just saying it because it suits you, like MICK does ?

 

I don't think you can dispute the 50m that was handed to Souness, and the backing gave when he wanted to peddle Bellamy and Robert, that he was allowed to do what he wanted.

 

The phrase "within reason" is interesting. I take that to mean when it suited you, you would use it to justify a veto on financial grounds, and equally so to justify "meddling".

 

 

 

I'd take more notice of a him, a former member of the Magpie Group who went out and helped Sir John gain control over the club than I would of you, although I'm sure you know more than he does about what went on at that time.

 

I see. You take notice of someone with "more experience" when it suits you, but not when it doesn't ie I have supported NUFC more and longer than you ?

 

I'm not surprised. Do you always look at things so illogically ? The answer is yes, you do. Hence the refusal to answer what I keep asking you.

 

If Allardyce is successful who will you credit ? If he isn't who will you blame ?

 

We know why you won't answer.

 

You're a joke. Everybody else knows why you don't answer too.

 

As for the magpie group :

 

1. Belonging to the group doesn;t mean you know more about the club than those who weren't in it.

 

2. I understand that the magpie group wasn't given an insight into the affairs of the club - hence macbeths bitterness at not being allowed it for free  mackems.gif - which means that merlins [nothing personal here] doesn't know any more than I do, or it means that macbeth is telling lies ?

 

 

 

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

Getting back to the original point about when Ashley is going to show his hand .... this is something we realised just after our takeover had gone through......

 

When the club was a PLC, even whilst under the Ellis junta, we got the chance to go to the AGM once a year, ask him awkward questions, tell him what a cnut he was. The club was also legally obliged to keep the stock market informed on certain issues, make information public.

 

Now, when clubs are wholly owned by billionaires, the fans actually have less access to information than before - which is kind of ironic, really.

 

 

the joke was that all the fan shareholders willingly took a loss on their investment to see it through too

 

and as you've just reminded me, someone on here was trying to justify to me that buying shares was not just about investment - giving protest as an example!

 

which leads me to the question, why did none of these fans ever get off their arses to buy shares to form a protest group with a voice on the board? At the end of it all, 8% of fans held shares, enough to make Fred uncomfotable.

 

but fuck it, we have a lawyer in charge now, and he's ace apparently

[Mick]

 

I didn't think even you would be stupid enough to think that as chairman of the club he would deliberately discredit himself and his position at the club by admitting publicly that he wasn't in charge of running the club in the way you think he did. obviously, you are even dafter than I thought.....or maybe are even more obsessed than I thought, which is borne out by your signature,  emphasising the depth of your obsession.

 

 

 

 

You'll find an excuse to keep him fitting in with how you see him, even if he's quoted saying something which doesn't fit in with your ideal Mr Shepherd, you're like a character out of Viz the way you go on.

[Mick]

 

do you know this or are you just saying it because it suits you, like MICK does ?

 

I don't think you can dispute the 50m that was handed to Souness, and the backing gave when he wanted to peddle Bellamy and Robert, that he was allowed to do what he wanted.

 

The phrase "within reason" is interesting. I take that to mean when it suited you, you would use it to justify a veto on financial grounds, and equally so to justify "meddling".

 

 

 

I'd take more notice of a him, a former member of the Magpie Group who went out and helped Sir John gain control over the club than I would of you, although I'm sure you know more than he does about what went on at that time.

 

I see. You take notice of someone with "more experience" when it suits you, but not when it doesn't ie I have supported NUFC more and longer than you ?

 

I'm not surprised. Do you always look at things so illogically ? The answer is yes, you do. Hence the refusal to answer what I keep asking you.

 

If Allardyce is successful who will you credit ? If he isn't who will you blame ?

 

We know why you won't answer.

 

You're a joke. Everybody else knows why you don't answer too.

 

As for the magpie group :

 

1. Belonging to the group doesn;t mean you know more about the club than those who weren't in it.

 

2. I understand that the magpie group wasn't given an insight into the affairs of the club - hence macbeths bitterness at not being allowed it for free  mackems.gif - which means that merlins [nothing personal here] doesn't know any more than I do, or it means that macbeth is telling lies ?

 

 

 

 

Are you blind or what?  I've just provided you with a link to where I answered the question the first time you asked it.  You really do seem to like making yourself look like a fool, does this happen by accident or is it something you work at while off-line?

 

Merlin helped out but doesn't know any more than you?  Arrogance from you knows no bounds.  

[NE5]

 

do you know this or are you just saying it because it suits you, like MICK does ?

 

I don't think you can dispute the 50m that was handed to Souness, and the backing gave when he wanted to peddle Bellamy and Robert, that he was allowed to do what he wanted.

 

The phrase "within reason" is interesting. I take that to mean when it suited you, you would use it to justify a veto on financial grounds, and equally so to justify "meddling".

 

 

 

I'd take more notice of a him, a former member of the Magpie Group who went out and helped Sir John gain control over the club than I would of you, although I'm sure you know more than he does about what went on at that time.

 

I see. You take notice of someone with "more experience" when it suits you, but not when it doesn't ie I have supported NUFC more and longer than you ?

 

I'm not surprised. Do you always look at things so illogically ? The answer is yes, you do. Hence the refusal to answer what I keep asking you.

 

If Allardyce is successful who will you credit ? If he isn't who will you blame ?

 

We know why you won't answer.

 

You're a joke. Everybody else knows why you don't answer too.

 

As for the magpie group :

 

1. Belonging to the group doesn;t mean you know more about the club than those who weren't in it.

 

2. I understand that the magpie group wasn't given an insight into the affairs of the club - hence macbeths bitterness at not being allowed it for free  mackems.gif - which means that merlins [nothing personal here] doesn't know any more than I do, or it means that macbeth is telling lies ?

 

 

 

 

Are you blind or what?  I've just provided you with a link to where I answered the question the first time you asked it.  You really do seem to like making yourself look like a fool, does this happen by accident or is it something you work at while off-line?

 

Merlin helped out but doesn't know any more than you?  Arrogance from you knows no bounds.  

 

Of course, you having seen less of NUFC than me, doesn't translate into admitting you know less than me ? Your hypocrisy and stupidity knows no bounds  :laugh:

 

And now that Fred has gone, I look forward to us winning loads of cups and trophies as it was all his fault that we didn't.

 

mackems.gif

 

According to you, that is.  :laugh:

 

Whatever will you say if we don't  :laugh:

 

 

[merlin]

Correct - because Ashley will give Allardyce a free rein(within reason)to run the team as he wishes, and that INCLUDES recruitment /disposal of players which was a privilege NOT granted at ALL TIMES to his managers by Shepherd ; note I said ALL times....!

 

I doubt that Ashley would enforce a player on Allardyce simply because HE thought it was an eye-catching deal, but that remains to be seen - what is NOT in doubt is that Ashley is going to have a more professional approach and personal gain is not a major issue with him - he's got more than enough already.

 

And now for the core question of this thread, do you KNOW this for a FACT or are you, as I suspect, just PRESUMING..?

 

Yes - I'm PRESUMING - just as I'm PRESUMING that the sun will come up tomorrow..!

None of us know that for a fact, but its a reasonable assumption - just as reasonable as assuming that a VERY successful modern businessman, who has just paid a king's ransom for a football club with prospects, will allow his managers to do the job themselves - failure to do so will result in the sack but I am willing to bet that Ashley WILL allow Allardyce a crack of the whip...its a matter of personal opinion whether you think he will be better than Shepherd - I happen to think he WILL, but you, of course, are entitled to your own opinion - WHICH IS...!

 

you have the same faith in Ashley as in the Sun coming up?

 

I think that says it all tbh

 

 

It doesn't actually say ANYTHING other than what is written there, Mr Kent Man !

YOU can't guarantee that the Sun will rise any more than I can guarantee Ashley's success - you go to bed

EXPECTING you will get a sunrise, but as sure as hell one day there WON'T be...

 

This is probably the only time I'll reply directly to one of your posts - you spend a great deal of time winding people up on this site but I've got better things to do than get involved with pratting about in tit-for-tat exchanges with you or anyone else on here ; you've got your opinion - that's fine by me ; I've got mine...

 

We'll soon see what Ashley does - if you really ARE a fan of NUFC, you'd better hope its going to be better than before - or would you prefer to see Shepherd in total charge once again....!??

[Unbelievable]

YOU can't guarantee that the Sun will rise any more than I can guarantee Ashley's success - you go to bed

EXPECTING you will get a sunrise, but as sure as hell one day there WON'T be...

 

[ohmelads]

Getting back to the original point about when Ashley is going to show his hand .... this is something we realised just after our takeover had gone through......

 

When the club was a PLC, even whilst under the Ellis junta, we got the chance to go to the AGM once a year, ask him awkward questions, tell him what a cnut he was. The club was also legally obliged to keep the stock market informed on certain issues, make information public.

 

Now, when clubs are wholly owned by billionaires, the fans actually have less access to information than before - which is kind of ironic, really.

 

It's incredible that so few on here seem at all bothered, and in fact celebrate the fact, that Ashley will soon delist the club and take it into private hands. We still don't know anything about his intentions, and very soon there'll be no transparency, very little information about what's going on. It's exciting to get rid of a crap chairman and bring in a billionaire, but it's healthy to ask questions.

[ChezGiven]

Getting back to the original point about when Ashley is going to show his hand .... this is something we realised just after our takeover had gone through......

 

When the club was a PLC, even whilst under the Ellis junta, we got the chance to go to the AGM once a year, ask him awkward questions, tell him what a cnut he was. The club was also legally obliged to keep the stock market informed on certain issues, make information public.

 

Now, when clubs are wholly owned by billionaires, the fans actually have less access to information than before - which is kind of ironic, really.

 

It's incredible that so few on here seem at all bothered, and in fact celebrate the fact, that Ashley will soon delist the club and take it into private hands. We still don't know anything about his intentions, and very soon there'll be no transparency, very little information about what's going on. It's exciting to get rid of a crap chairman and bring in a billionaire, but it's healthy to ask questions.

 

You would have preferred it if Ashely had just bought 51% and left it as a PLC?

[Guest Dev]

In the end today football is about money, in units of hundreds of millions. Asking questions is all well and good, but it doesn't stop Celestine Babayaro being signed, or Glen Roeder being appointed manager.

 

Choosing between a regime with just enough money and some useless questions, and one with a couple of billion and no questions, seems to most people pretty straightforward. At the end of the day our power still lies in our choice to buy tickets, shirts, and tv subscriptions. You can bet they are far more important to a man of business like Ashley than some question at an AGM.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

Correct - because Ashley will give Allardyce a free rein(within reason)to run the team as he wishes, and that INCLUDES recruitment /disposal of players which was a privilege NOT granted at ALL TIMES to his managers by Shepherd ; note I said ALL times....!

 

I doubt that Ashley would enforce a player on Allardyce simply because HE thought it was an eye-catching deal, but that remains to be seen - what is NOT in doubt is that Ashley is going to have a more professional approach and personal gain is not a major issue with him - he's got more than enough already.

 

And now for the core question of this thread, do you KNOW this for a FACT or are you, as I suspect, just PRESUMING..?

 

Yes - I'm PRESUMING - just as I'm PRESUMING that the sun will come up tomorrow..!

None of us know that for a fact, but its a reasonable assumption - just as reasonable as assuming that a VERY successful modern businessman, who has just paid a king's ransom for a football club with prospects, will allow his managers to do the job themselves - failure to do so will result in the sack but I am willing to bet that Ashley WILL allow Allardyce a crack of the whip...its a matter of personal opinion whether you think he will be better than Shepherd - I happen to think he WILL, but you, of course, are entitled to your own opinion - WHICH IS...!

 

you have the same faith in Ashley as in the Sun coming up?

 

I think that says it all tbh

 

 

It doesn't actually say ANYTHING other than what is written there, Mr Kent Man !

YOU can't guarantee that the Sun will rise any more than I can guarantee Ashley's success - you go to bed

EXPECTING you will get a sunrise, but as sure as hell one day there WON'T be...

 

This is probably the only time I'll reply directly to one of your posts - you spend a great deal of time winding people up on this site but I've got better things to do than get involved with pratting about in tit-for-tat exchanges with you or anyone else on here ; you've got your opinion - that's fine by me ; I've got mine...

 

We'll soon see what Ashley does - if you really ARE a fan of NUFC, you'd better hope its going to be better than before - or would you prefer to see Shepherd in total charge once again....!??

 

jesus christ.

 

I (and most normal people I imagine) think there is definitely more chance of a fuckup at SJP than a fucking apocolypse

 

 

[Guest Alan Shearer 9]

Correct - because Ashley will give Allardyce a free rein(within reason)to run the team as he wishes, and that INCLUDES recruitment /disposal of players which was a privilege NOT granted at ALL TIMES to his managers by Shepherd ; note I said ALL times....!

 

I doubt that Ashley would enforce a player on Allardyce simply because HE thought it was an eye-catching deal, but that remains to be seen - what is NOT in doubt is that Ashley is going to have a more professional approach and personal gain is not a major issue with him - he's got more than enough already.

 

And now for the core question of this thread, do you KNOW this for a FACT or are you, as I suspect, just PRESUMING..?

 

Yes - I'm PRESUMING - just as I'm PRESUMING that the sun will come up tomorrow..!

None of us know that for a fact, but its a reasonable assumption - just as reasonable as assuming that a VERY successful modern businessman, who has just paid a king's ransom for a football club with prospects, will allow his managers to do the job themselves - failure to do so will result in the sack but I am willing to bet that Ashley WILL allow Allardyce a crack of the whip...its a matter of personal opinion whether you think he will be better than Shepherd - I happen to think he WILL, but you, of course, are entitled to your own opinion - WHICH IS...!

 

you have the same faith in Ashley as in the Sun coming up?

 

I think that says it all tbh

 

 

It doesn't actually say ANYTHING other than what is written there, Mr Kent Man !

YOU can't guarantee that the Sun will rise any more than I can guarantee Ashley's success - you go to bed

EXPECTING you will get a sunrise, but as sure as hell one day there WON'T be...

 

This is probably the only time I'll reply directly to one of your posts - you spend a great deal of time winding people up on this site but I've got better things to do than get involved with pratting about in tit-for-tat exchanges with you or anyone else on here ; you've got your opinion - that's fine by me ; I've got mine...

 

We'll soon see what Ashley does - if you really ARE a fan of NUFC, you'd better hope its going to be better than before - or would you prefer to see Shepherd in total charge once again....!??

 

jesus christ.

 

I (and most normal people I imagine) think there is definitely more chance of a fuckup at SJP than a fucking apocolypse

 

 

 

I think that is a highly stupid statement. Could you please present some evidence to back this view of yours.

[ChezGiven]

Correct - because Ashley will give Allardyce a free rein(within reason)to run the team as he wishes, and that INCLUDES recruitment /disposal of players which was a privilege NOT granted at ALL TIMES to his managers by Shepherd ; note I said ALL times....!

 

I doubt that Ashley would enforce a player on Allardyce simply because HE thought it was an eye-catching deal, but that remains to be seen - what is NOT in doubt is that Ashley is going to have a more professional approach and personal gain is not a major issue with him - he's got more than enough already.

 

And now for the core question of this thread, do you KNOW this for a FACT or are you, as I suspect, just PRESUMING..?

 

Yes - I'm PRESUMING - just as I'm PRESUMING that the sun will come up tomorrow..!

None of us know that for a fact, but its a reasonable assumption - just as reasonable as assuming that a VERY successful modern businessman, who has just paid a king's ransom for a football club with prospects, will allow his managers to do the job themselves - failure to do so will result in the sack but I am willing to bet that Ashley WILL allow Allardyce a crack of the whip...its a matter of personal opinion whether you think he will be better than Shepherd - I happen to think he WILL, but you, of course, are entitled to your own opinion - WHICH IS...!

 

you have the same faith in Ashley as in the Sun coming up?

 

I think that says it all tbh

 

 

It doesn't actually say ANYTHING other than what is written there, Mr Kent Man !

YOU can't guarantee that the Sun will rise any more than I can guarantee Ashley's success - you go to bed

EXPECTING you will get a sunrise, but as sure as hell one day there WON'T be...

 

This is probably the only time I'll reply directly to one of your posts - you spend a great deal of time winding people up on this site but I've got better things to do than get involved with pratting about in tit-for-tat exchanges with you or anyone else on here ; you've got your opinion - that's fine by me ; I've got mine...

 

We'll soon see what Ashley does - if you really ARE a fan of NUFC, you'd better hope its going to be better than before - or would you prefer to see Shepherd in total charge once again....!??

 

jesus christ.

 

I (and most normal people I imagine) think there is definitely more chance of a fuckup at SJP than a fucking apocolypse

 

 

 

I think that is a highly stupid statement. Could you please present some evidence to back this view of yours.

 

Dont be ridiculous.

[brummie]

Getting back to the original point about when Ashley is going to show his hand .... this is something we realised just after our takeover had gone through......

 

When the club was a PLC, even whilst under the Ellis junta, we got the chance to go to the AGM once a year, ask him awkward questions, tell him what a cnut he was. The club was also legally obliged to keep the stock market informed on certain issues, make information public.

 

Now, when clubs are wholly owned by billionaires, the fans actually have less access to information than before - which is kind of ironic, really.

 

It's incredible that so few on here seem at all bothered, and in fact celebrate the fact, that Ashley will soon delist the club and take it into private hands. We still don't know anything about his intentions, and very soon there'll be no transparency, very little information about what's going on. It's exciting to get rid of a crap chairman and bring in a billionaire, but it's healthy to ask questions.

 

I guess it is a double edged sword, really. You want a billionaire owner who will invest shit loads of money in the club? OK, but you're going to have to put up with the fact that he can do what he wants with the club with practically no scrutiny. You're going to have to live with the fact that being a billionaire's play thing is something we've all wanted for our clubs, but the flip side is that you are subject to his every whim.

 

This is great when things are going well, but it is going to be interesting when things get tense. We're still on the extended honeymoon with our new owners, your marriage hasn't even started yet, but I think that expecting everything to be rosy is naive.

 

The only way we'll be able to judge them is on experience, and that means what happens over a few years, not what they do in the first year (look at Magnusson at West Ham, desperately trying to buy instant success and appreciation - would you want to be run like that?).

 

Until then, a little healthy scepticism can be a good thing.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Getting back to the original point about when Ashley is going to show his hand .... this is something we realised just after our takeover had gone through......

 

When the club was a PLC, even whilst under the Ellis junta, we got the chance to go to the AGM once a year, ask him awkward questions, tell him what a cnut he was. The club was also legally obliged to keep the stock market informed on certain issues, make information public.

 

Now, when clubs are wholly owned by billionaires, the fans actually have less access to information than before - which is kind of ironic, really.

 

It's incredible that so few on here seem at all bothered, and in fact celebrate the fact, that Ashley will soon delist the club and take it into private hands. We still don't know anything about his intentions, and very soon there'll be no transparency, very little information about what's going on. It's exciting to get rid of a crap chairman and bring in a billionaire, but it's healthy to ask questions.

 

I guess it is a double edged sword, really. You want a billionaire owner who will invest shit loads of money in the club? OK, but you're going to have to put up with the fact that he can do what he wants with the club with practically no scrutiny. You're going to have to live with the fact that being a billionaire's play thing is something we've all wanted for our clubs, but the flip side is that you are subject to his every whim.

 

This is great when things are going well, but it is going to be interesting when things get tense. We're still on the extended honeymoon with our new owners, your marriage hasn't even started yet, but I think that expecting everything to be rosy is naive.

 

The only way we'll be able to judge them is on experience, and that means what happens over a few years, not what they do in the first year (look at Magnusson at West Ham, desperately trying to buy instant success and appreciation - would you want to be run like that?).

 

Until then, a little healthy scepticism can be a good thing.

 

True enough, but I don't see any evidence (yet) to believe that Newcastle will be treated as a 'plaything' by MA. More likely he sees it as a business that has acheived some success but has immense untapped potential... not to mention the links in with his other sporting companies.

 

We can't deny that we don't know a lot about what Ashley is like, so let's not get carried away. But at the same time I think a lot of the scepticism is over the top and comes from the fact that people have unrealistic expectations about the signings we should be making/have made.

[Unbelievable]

Getting back to the original point about when Ashley is going to show his hand .... this is something we realised just after our takeover had gone through......

 

When the club was a PLC, even whilst under the Ellis junta, we got the chance to go to the AGM once a year, ask him awkward questions, tell him what a cnut he was. The club was also legally obliged to keep the stock market informed on certain issues, make information public.

 

Now, when clubs are wholly owned by billionaires, the fans actually have less access to information than before - which is kind of ironic, really.

 

It's incredible that so few on here seem at all bothered, and in fact celebrate the fact, that Ashley will soon delist the club and take it into private hands. We still don't know anything about his intentions, and very soon there'll be no transparency, very little information about what's going on. It's exciting to get rid of a crap chairman and bring in a billionaire, but it's healthy to ask questions.

 

I guess it is a double edged sword, really. You want a billionaire owner who will invest s*** loads of money in the club? OK, but you're going to have to put up with the fact that he can do what he wants with the club with practically no scrutiny. You're going to have to live with the fact that being a billionaire's play thing is something we've all wanted for our clubs, but the flip side is that you are subject to his every whim.

 

This is great when things are going well, but it is going to be interesting when things get tense. We're still on the extended honeymoon with our new owners, your marriage hasn't even started yet, but I think that expecting everything to be rosy is naive.

 

The only way we'll be able to judge them is on experience, and that means what happens over a few years, not what they do in the first year (look at Magnusson at West Ham, desperately trying to buy instant success and appreciation - would you want to be run like that?).

 

Until then, a little healthy scepticism can be a good thing.

 

True enough, but I don't see any evidence (yet) to believe that Newcastle will be treated as a 'plaything' by MA. More likely he sees it as a business that has acheived some success but has immense untapped potential... not to mention the links in with his other sporting companies.

 

We can't deny that we don't know a lot about what Ashley is like, so let's not get carried away. But at the same time I think a lot of the scepticism is over the top and comes from the fact that people have unrealistic expectations about the signings we should be making/have made.

 

Assuming you are talking about Tsunami, myself and possibly a few others, I'm sure you can quite easily point out a few examples of us having unrealistic expectations with regards to the transfer budget and targets..? I don't think you can, as our scepticism has really nothing to do with money or specific players. It's to do with something much more important: how he wants to run this club. Of course, it's easier and more comforting to assume that people who ask questions are spoilt and naive 12 year olds who think the new owner will fail if he doesn't get in Kaka or Messi before September..

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I'm not talking about anyone on here personally, I don't want to get into the sort of thing we've just seen for the last 5 pages.

 

If your scepticism is about how he wants to run the club then that's sensible. I think the signs are all good so far though, and the caution over signings could even be considered as further evidence of the reviews and thorough going-over the club is being subjected to by Ashley's team. I just thing there are more signs of progress than signs of anything to be worried about.

[UV]

I'm not talking about anyone on here personally, I don't want to get into the sort of thing we've just seen for the last 5 pages.

 

If your scepticism is about how he wants to run the club then that's sensible. I think the signs are all good so far though, and the caution over signings could even be considered as further evidence of the reviews and thorough going-over the club is being subjected to by Ashley's team. I just thing there are more signs of progress than signs of anything to be worried about.

 

If by sceptisicm you mean "a method of intellectual caution and suspended judgment", then I'm happy to be called a sceptic.

 

The thing is, there's nothing happened so far (wrt transfers being made) that would not have happened under the old board anyway. Yet if the manager had complained about the slowness of the board to act on transfers under the old regime there would be uproar.

 

There have been very few actual statements or actions from the club, so what exactly are these "signs of progress" that are giving you and others such a positive feel about Ashley?. I've seen and heard pretty much nothing, so there's nothing to give me either a positive or negative feel, but the lack of any communication whatsoever is not IMO a good sign. At the moment it feels to me a bit like the Emperor's new clothes.

[Teasy]

I guess it is a double edged sword, really. You want a billionaire owner who will invest s*** loads of money in the club? OK, but you're going to have to put up with the fact that he can do what he wants with the club with practically no scrutiny. You're going to have to live with the fact that being a billionaire's play thing is something we've all wanted for our clubs, but the flip side is that you are subject to his every whim.

 

This is great when things are going well, but it is going to be interesting when things get tense. We're still on the extended honeymoon with our new owners, your marriage hasn't even started yet, but I think that expecting everything to be rosy is naive.

 

The only way we'll be able to judge them is on experience, and that means what happens over a few years, not what they do in the first year (look at Magnusson at West Ham, desperately trying to buy instant success and appreciation - would you want to be run like that?).

 

Until then, a little healthy scepticism can be a good thing.

 

Skepticism is fine, but I have to say I don't see anything mentioned here as a negative point.  As a PLC we were already Shepherds play thing anyway.  At least now we will not actually be run day to day by the man who owns the club.  Its pretty clear that Ashley isn't the kind of person who will try to run a Football club (nor is he in to play things).  He will have a chairman, manager ect running the club and they will all be held accountable for there actions.  In the past the Chairman was untouchable, now he's just an employee who can even be sacked if he makes the wrong decisions for long enough.  Sounds like another step forward to me..

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I'm not talking about anyone on here personally, I don't want to get into the sort of thing we've just seen for the last 5 pages.

 

If your scepticism is about how he wants to run the club then that's sensible. I think the signs are all good so far though, and the caution over signings could even be considered as further evidence of the reviews and thorough going-over the club is being subjected to by Ashley's team. I just thing there are more signs of progress than signs of anything to be worried about.

 

If by sceptisicm you mean "a method of intellectual caution and suspended judgment", then I'm happy to be called a sceptic.

 

The thing is, there's nothing happened so far (wrt transfers being made) that would not have happened under the old board anyway. Yet if the manager had complained about the slowness of the board to act on transfers under the old regime there would be uproar.

 

There have been very few actual statements or actions from the club, so what exactly are these "signs of progress" that are giving you and others such a positive feel about Ashley?. I've seen and heard pretty much nothing, so there's nothing to give me either a positive or negative feel, but the lack of any communication whatsoever is not IMO a good sign. At the moment it feels to me a bit like the Emperor's new clothes.

 

I agree partly, it's ultimately too soon to make a judgement on Mike Ashley either way... that's half the point. I suppose I'm just naturally optomistic. However, I also think that those statements (e.g. the Mort interview), and actions (e.g. a number of fairly low-key but quality signings, the internal review) that we have seen are signs for the better.

 

I don't think we can expect much communication from the club under the Ashley regime, the guy is historically very cautious with the media. I think that's another thing we can be thankful for after the Shepherd years.