Colocho Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Do people seriously think that becoming a profitable club, increases the chances of Ashley selling up? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Do people seriously think that becoming a profitable club, increases the chances of Ashley selling up? ohh dear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 He's a businessman, making money is his game. If you honestly think that after the time and investment he's put into this club he's just going to sell up the instant it starts making him a return, you've got another thing coming pal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Antec Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 How many Premier League clubs have disappeared due to financial problems? None. Only one has ever gone into administration and they were punching way above their weight to start with. The club's finances were in a poor state when Ashley arrived but some go way overboard with it IMO. And people forget that it was Ashley that brought in the likes of Colo, Enrique, Gutierrez and Xisco on £40k+ wages? (Never mind signing players like Geremi, Smith, Viduka and Cacapa on ridiculous wages as well when he first came here). Who has forgotten that? He owned the club and backed his manager first up. A mistake of course, followed by a badly thought out over reaction - you don't want Colo and Enrique (and more controversially Jonas maybe) to play for us? He's funded every decision he's made. He may have funded all the decisions but the majority have been bad decisions(often quite terrible) that have cost the club money. Instead of writing off these bad decisions that he has made he wants to recuperate the losses with little regard for the direction of the club. Shocking decisions no argument there. Need some proof on what you say in your second sentence. And how has he shown that he wants to recuperate his losses? The sale of Andy Carroll isn't enough of an answer at present. Obviously this is my theory, there is no proof either way. It seems to me that most recently the decision to sack Hughton was made because his main aim is to make the club more profitable so he can sell it on and recuperate his signifcant losses. His terrible decisions have backed him into a corner I feel and he is just trying to make the best of a bad financial situation for himself. Spot fucking on. I reckon everything he does from now on will be purely for his own benefit. We'll just have to hope and pray that these decisions also benefit the club Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Big difference between the club becoming profitable and Ashley making money out of the club, which I'm not sure he ever will do given his level of investment. A profitable club certainly increases the chance of finding a buyer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 This thread makes Jose cry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 How many Premier League clubs have disappeared due to financial problems? None. Only one has ever gone into administration and they were punching way above their weight to start with. The club's finances were in a poor state when Ashley arrived but some go way overboard with it IMO. And people forget that it was Ashley that brought in the likes of Colo, Enrique, Gutierrez and Xisco on £40k+ wages? (Never mind signing players like Geremi, Smith, Viduka and Cacapa on ridiculous wages as well when he first came here). Who has forgotten that? He owned the club and backed his manager first up. A mistake of course, followed by a badly thought out over reaction - you don't want Colo and Enrique (and more controversially Jonas maybe) to play for us? He's funded every decision he's made. He may have funded all the decisions but the majority have been bad decisions(often quite terrible) that have cost the club money. Instead of writing off these bad decisions that he has made he wants to recuperate the losses with little regard for the direction of the club. Shocking decisions no argument there. Need some proof on what you say in your second sentence. And how has he shown that he wants to recuperate his losses? The sale of Andy Carroll isn't enough of an answer at present. Obviously this is my theory, there is no proof either way. It seems to me that most recently the decision to sack Hughton was made because his main aim is to make the club more profitable so he can sell it on and recuperate his signifcant losses. His terrible decisions have backed him into a corner I feel and he is just trying to make the best of a bad financial situation for himself. Spot f***ing on. I reckon everything he does from now on will be purely for his own benefit. We'll just have to hope and pray that these decisions also benefit the club They said from the very begining and I think it was Mort, that they by failing businesses and turn them round. They've wanted from the very start to rid the club of the over paid wasters and start a production line of young talent to be sold off. Its no secret. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 They haven't exactly come out and said that promising, young players are being brought in, developed and then sold off. Of course, we all know that is the plan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 They haven't exactly come out and said that promising, young players are being brought in, developed and then sold off. Of course, we all know that is the plan. We've all assumed that's the plan because we all hate Ashley. (Obviously there is plenty of reason to hate him, don't get me wrong). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 How many Premier League clubs have disappeared due to financial problems? None. Only one has ever gone into administration and they were punching way above their weight to start with. The club's finances were in a poor state when Ashley arrived but some go way overboard with it IMO. And people forget that it was Ashley that brought in the likes of Colo, Enrique, Gutierrez and Xisco on £40k+ wages? (Never mind signing players like Geremi, Smith, Viduka and Cacapa on ridiculous wages as well when he first came here). Who has forgotten that? He owned the club and backed his manager first up. A mistake of course, followed by a badly thought out over reaction - you don't want Colo and Enrique (and more controversially Jonas maybe) to play for us? He's funded every decision he's made. He may have funded all the decisions but the majority have been bad decisions(often quite terrible) that have cost the club money. Instead of writing off these bad decisions that he has made he wants to recuperate the losses with little regard for the direction of the club. Shocking decisions no argument there. Need some proof on what you say in your second sentence. And how has he shown that he wants to recuperate his losses? The sale of Andy Carroll isn't enough of an answer at present. Obviously this is my theory, there is no proof either way. It seems to me that most recently the decision to sack Hughton was made because his main aim is to make the club more profitable so he can sell it on and recuperate his signifcant losses. His terrible decisions have backed him into a corner I feel and he is just trying to make the best of a bad financial situation for himself. Spot fucking on. I reckon everything he does from now on will be purely for his own benefit. We'll just have to hope and pray that these decisions also benefit the club When it comes to Mike Ashley, "hope" is the denial of reality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 They haven't exactly come out and said that promising, young players are being brought in, developed and then sold off. Of course, we all know that is the plan. If that is "the plan", it's not a bad plan. It's his execution of it that is utterly woeful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 They haven't exactly come out and said that promising, young players are being brought in, developed and then sold off. Of course, we all know that is the plan. If that is "the plan", it's not a bad plan. It's his execution of it that is utterly woeful at times. Like appointing Kevin Keegan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 I'm pretty sure Ashley released a statement saying that buying young promising players developing them and selling them on was his plan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 How many Premier League clubs have disappeared due to financial problems? None. Only one has ever gone into administration and they were punching way above their weight to start with. The club's finances were in a poor state when Ashley arrived but some go way overboard with it IMO. And people forget that it was Ashley that brought in the likes of Colo, Enrique, Gutierrez and Xisco on £40k+ wages? (Never mind signing players like Geremi, Smith, Viduka and Cacapa on ridiculous wages as well when he first came here). Who has forgotten that? He owned the club and backed his manager first up. A mistake of course, followed by a badly thought out over reaction - you don't want Colo and Enrique (and more controversially Jonas maybe) to play for us? He's funded every decision he's made. He may have funded all the decisions but the majority have been bad decisions(often quite terrible) that have cost the club money. Instead of writing off these bad decisions that he has made he wants to recuperate the losses with little regard for the direction of the club. Shocking decisions no argument there. Need some proof on what you say in your second sentence. And how has he shown that he wants to recuperate his losses? The sale of Andy Carroll isn't enough of an answer at present. Obviously this is my theory, there is no proof either way. It seems to me that most recently the decision to sack Hughton was made because his main aim is to make the club more profitable so he can sell it on and recuperate his signifcant losses. His terrible decisions have backed him into a corner I feel and he is just trying to make the best of a bad financial situation for himself. Spot f***ing on. I reckon everything he does from now on will be purely for his own benefit. We'll just have to hope and pray that these decisions also benefit the club They said from the very begining and I think it was Mort, that they by failing businesses and turn them round. They've wanted from the very start to rid the club of the over paid wasters and start a production line of young talent to be sold off. Its no secret. I doubt he had imagined his shocking decisions would have been quite so costly for him at the start though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 They haven't exactly come out and said that promising, young players are being brought in, developed and then sold off. Of course, we all know that is the plan. If that is "the plan", it's not a bad plan. It's his execution of it that is utterly woeful at times. Like appointing Kevin Keegan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 tbf Stu has it spot on. Given my very public opinion of Keegan, people might think this is a comment that is deliberately looking for a bite. But approaching and hiring Kevin Keegan was the biggest mistake that Ashley made and it's been all downhill from there. I bet the same thing happens with Dalglish at Liverpool. You just don't mess with club legends, because you will never come away from the situation as the favourable party. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 tbf Stu has it spot on. Given my very public opinion of Keegan, people might think this is a comment that is deliberately looking for a bite. But approaching and hiring Kevin Keegan was the biggest mistake that Ashley made and it's been all downhill from there. I bet the same thing happens with Dalglish at Liverpool. You just don't mess with club legends, because you will never come away from the situation as the favourable party. Agreed, though Ashley did listen to the fans over the Keegan appointment. He topped many polls as who the fans wanted. Should remember this was the 1st mangerial appointment most fans agreed with as well since Sir Bob's appointment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Pretty much JH. The FCB plan isn't that bad, when you look at the overall pros and cons, it's just that he'll be forever tainted as the man who tried "to shoot Bambi" (and was exposed as a liar by the tribunal) so it'd take something completely unimaginable for the supporters to ever trust his judgement again. This leads to the inevitable second guessing of every decisions, announcement or rumour in the press about what he's doing and why he's doing it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Wow, some sense talked about Ashley. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Pretty much JH. The FCB plan isn't that bad, when you look at the overall pros and cons, it's just that he'll be forever tainted as the man who tried "to shoot Bambi" (and was exposed as a liar by the tribunal) so it'd take something completely unimaginable for the supporters to ever trust his judgement again. This leads to the inevitable second guessing of every decisions, announcement or rumour in the press about what he's doing and why he's doing it. If he appointed a chairman who actually knew about football and how to run a football club, and met the fans halfway in terms of spending a bit more money on the team, things wouldn't be as bad as claimed. What he's doing is not actually the wrong way to run a football club, the way he's going about it (lies, lack of communication and trust, unwillingness to loosen the purse strings just a tad) is the major problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Pretty much JH. The FCB plan isn't that bad, when you look at the overall pros and cons, it's just that he'll be forever tainted as the man who tried "to shoot Bambi" (and was exposed as a liar by the tribunal) so it'd take something completely unimaginable for the supporters to ever trust his judgement again. This leads to the inevitable second guessing of every decisions, announcement or rumour in the press about what he's doing and why he's doing it. If he appointed a chairman who actually knew about football and how to run a football club, and met the fans halfway in terms of spending a bit more money on the team, things wouldn't be as bad as claimed. What he's doing is not actually the wrong way to run a football club, the way he's going about it (lies, lack of communication and trust, unwillingness to loosen the purse strings just a tad) is the major problem. is anyone arguing with this point of view on things lads? all seems pretty obvious to me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Pretty much JH. The FCB plan isn't that bad, when you look at the overall pros and cons, it's just that he'll be forever tainted as the man who tried "to shoot Bambi" (and was exposed as a liar by the tribunal) so it'd take something completely unimaginable for the supporters to ever trust his judgement again. This leads to the inevitable second guessing of every decisions, announcement or rumour in the press about what he's doing and why he's doing it. If he appointed a chairman who actually knew about football and how to run a football club, and met the fans halfway in terms of spending a bit more money on the team, things wouldn't be as bad as claimed. What he's doing is not actually the wrong way to run a football club, the way he's going about it (lies, lack of communication and trust, unwillingness to loosen the purse strings just a tad) is the major problem. is anyone arguing with this point of view on things lads? all seems pretty obvious to me Me too. It's also obvious(and has been for a long time now) that he isn't going to appoint a proper chairman, start communicating with the fans or meet us half way so what's the point in dreaming about it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Me too. It's also obvious(and has been for a long time now) that he isn't going to appoint a proper chairman, start communicating with the fans or meet us half way so what's the point in dreaming about it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Me too. It's also obvious(and has been for a long time now) that he isn't going to appoint a proper chairman, start communicating with the fans or meet us half way so what's the point in dreaming about it? It's not all bad though, at least we now know what the situation is. I honestly wouldn't want Ashley to sell up to a random new owner at the moment... I'd rather he stuck to the current plan for a few years and see how far it can take us. If he could avoid any more catastrophic mistakes, hold onto our better players and invest some of the Carroll money it would be good too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Me too. It's also obvious(and has been for a long time now) that he isn't going to appoint a proper chairman, start communicating with the fans or meet us half way so what's the point in dreaming about it? It's not all bad though, at least we now know what the situation is. I honestly wouldn't want Ashley to sell up to a random new owner at the moment... I'd rather he stuck to the current plan for a few years and see how far it can take us. If he could avoid any more catastrophic mistakes, hold onto our better players and invest some of the Carroll money it would be good too. well, this is the real issue that Stu raises isn't it, what the fuck is the real plan? we can assume it's a version of the arsenal/spurs models and if the intention of that model is to progress the club on the field then i'm sure everyone would get on board, i would the issue is whether ashley is remotely interested in progress on the pitch or just on the financial side of things - personally i've seen no evidence that he wouldn't be less than happy if we just stagnate for 5 years scraping past relegation until he's ready to go signs point towards this tbh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now