Kitman

This story is flame grilled shizzle served in a bun. As if KK would come back, and as if Ashley would take him back!

It's a measure of how far we've sunk that I think this would be a good thing. Not that I think he would touch us with a shitty stick. It would be a step down for him tbh as things stand.

Hey, you do the math !

Or "You know exactly what you're doing" The way I see it.... Ashley has paid £138Million for the club. The value of which can depreciate. He's loaned the club £100M, the value of which is set in stone. Using transfer income to spend on transfer outgoings would mean the club is run within it's means and Ashley's return depends for the most part on the value of the club. Deferring transfer income, and using loans from Ashley to buy up front in full means that Ashley is assured his money back. So the £20M he's supposed to have since put in on top of the initial loan has bought players whose value might drop, Xisco for example. But the £6m Ashley pumped in for him is a loan he's guaranteed to be paid back in full. The club might only recoup £2M from his sale, but Ashley is still owed the full amount. I assume he saw the money being paid out on Luque and thought to himself, "well I'll fund those sorts of signings and be guaranteed the return irrespective of the success of the player". But he's not getting a "return" as such, is he? He's just getting his money back from loan repayments, as the loan's interest free. Arguably if you view the loan as part of the acquisition cost, the club is funding the purchase of itself, at the cost of investment. Whether that profits Ashley ultimately depends on the value of the club at sale date, and if he's run it down to the bones of its arse then he hasn't achieved a lot. So the way I see it, this is about minimising his investment i.e he takes out the money he's put in as soon as he can. However he only benefits if the club goes up in value, which it won't if we're relegated, all the fans stay away, or Sky won't show our dreary matches on the telly. I think the current strategy's mainly about maximising revenue and minimising cost. His motives for that depend on how you view his overall intentions. It might well be about rebalancing the books but that's ignoring the realities of football i.e. you need to invest a) to compete b retain your best players c) to keep the fans happy. But I really can't work out why they'd want pay upfront for transfers and accept deferred payments - that just makes no sense to me, unless you want to behave like a corner shop i.e only spend the cash you actually have. I can perhaps see the sense in not spending sponsors money in advance but not this.

I'm not convinced his efforts to sell the club were ever sincere. It might however be that some of the problems have come about because he's been badly advised. I'm hopeful taking more of a direct interest will open his eyes to some of the problems. I'm not convinced he's any better than the old board as businessmen, he might just be tighter. We will just have to see because he's not going anywhere, you can't sack the owner. I suspect you and I won't see eye to eye on this but I'm certainly not in the 'Ashley Out' camp (yet). I'm more in the 'Ashley get a grip' camp. However I think you should post more, which is in no way connected to your avatar.

I never go on N-O, I wasn't aware there was a pro-Ashley faction. I assumed the only position you could reasonably occupy would be one that is against the current regime. I simply cannot imagine why anyone would think otherwise. It's kind of based around the idea the club would have been history (debt wise) if MA hadn't rode into town or summink. Imo there does need to be perspective amongst the critisism - in terms of it is good to see a lot of potentially promising youngsters coming to the club, it is refreshing, and because people aren’t happy with other things it doesn’t mean they cant appreciate more promising aspects. At the end of the day if 70% of the income is going out to wages then thats clearly a problem - but a lot of those wages should be clear in the summer - & we will see if they then act upon that. And at least Llambias is trying to explain things now, whether its utter lies, misguided ideas or total crap, a big problem was zero communication & we now have things to go off, and he's meeting fans. The flip side is the sheer lack of ambition wanting Kinnear long term, and the lack of clarity regarding Wise's role (no-one knows EXACTLY what he does/how much influence he has), which in turn discredits the image of the manager position. Wasting your time looking for perspective on here. This is the home of the Cockney mafia out brigade, although they pretend otherwise. I don't agree with you tbh. I've said that getting the wages down and building the scouting/youth side are sound ideas. The trouble I have with this lot is that they don't tell the truth, they're also trying to do it all too quickly and risking our status in the league. In my opinion, Shepherd would have had no choice but to do similar things to Ashley or risk us going completely to the wall. He blew the lot on us getting back into Europe but we didn't make it. The debts were growing and the advances were all spent. This. Ashley could be a good owner if he took his head out of his arse.

I never go on N-O, I wasn't aware there was a pro-Ashley faction. I assumed the only position you could reasonably occupy would be one that is against the current regime. I simply cannot imagine why anyone would think otherwise. It's kind of based around the idea the club would have been history (debt wise) if MA hadn't rode into town or summink. Imo there does need to be perspective amongst the critisism - in terms of it is good to see a lot of potentially promising youngsters coming to the club, it is refreshing, and because people aren’t happy with other things it doesn’t mean they cant appreciate more promising aspects. At the end of the day if 70% of the income is going out to wages then thats clearly a problem - but a lot of those wages should be clear in the summer - & we will see if they then act upon that. And at least Llambias is trying to explain things now, whether its utter lies, misguided ideas or total crap, a big problem was zero communication & we now have things to go off, and he's meeting fans. The flip side is the sheer lack of ambition wanting Kinnear long term, and the lack of clarity regarding Wise's role (no-one knows EXACTLY what he does/how much influence he has), which in turn discredits the image of the manager position. What I don't get is why some people are obsessed with debt. Every club has it. Whether we have too much debt is not up to the supporters to judge, that's up to the bank manager. Some people (not on here) seem more turned on by the club's books than the football. How does that work? If you get a hard on over the books, go and be an accountant imo. As if a numpty internet jockey can judge what the club/Ashley can and can't afford to spend, based on a set of historic records and guesswork! The example of Leeds is trawled up time and again. To me that's just scaremongering. I don't think Shepherd & Co were remotely as reckless as Ridsdale & Co. I don't doubt that we had overstretched ourselves and needed a period of retrenchment, but as always with the toon we've reacted in the opposite extreme and now our prem status is threatened through under investment - where a canny use of even the transfer profits to date would have made a massive difference. Aye, I agree in the way that some kind of debt will always probably come with success, definetely. In terms of wages, I'm not a mathematics genuis, but surley if 70% of the income is going on wages there's simply a problem there. I mean that the positive side is potentially having better young players coming through who are talented & hungry - something we have lacked over the years. I don't disagree at all with the need to bring wages down, ditch overpaid underperformers or invest heavily in youth. In particular I believe we couldn't sustain those wage levels in the medium term. What I can't understand is the thought that with a piss poor squad and manager we think we can get by with selling players and not reinvesting the money. In the short term it must be obvious that we can't rely on the current players to keep us in mind table, the evidence is there on the pitch and in our league position. I wasn't expecting mega-bucks but I was shocked that the January window went by with a net profit. That either smacks of complacency or obliviousness to our position. Judging by Llambias' recent statements, I'm beginning to think they are genuinely clueless about the state of the first team. That's not to say there aren't some positives by the way, but it won't matter if we're relegated, and that's what worries me most.

I never go on N-O, I wasn't aware there was a pro-Ashley faction. I assumed the only position you could reasonably occupy would be one that is against the current regime. I simply cannot imagine why anyone would think otherwise. It's kind of based around the idea the club would have been history (debt wise) if MA hadn't rode into town or summink. Imo there does need to be perspective amongst the critisism - in terms of it is good to see a lot of potentially promising youngsters coming to the club, it is refreshing, and because people aren’t happy with other things it doesn’t mean they cant appreciate more promising aspects. At the end of the day if 70% of the income is going out to wages then thats clearly a problem - but a lot of those wages should be clear in the summer - & we will see if they then act upon that. And at least Llambias is trying to explain things now, whether its utter lies, misguided ideas or total crap, a big problem was zero communication & we now have things to go off, and he's meeting fans. The flip side is the sheer lack of ambition wanting Kinnear long term, and the lack of clarity regarding Wise's role (no-one knows EXACTLY what he does/how much influence he has), which in turn discredits the image of the manager position. What I don't get is why some people are obsessed with debt. Every club has it. Whether we have too much debt is not up to the supporters to judge, that's up to the bank manager. Some people (not on here) seem more turned on by the club's books than the football. How does that work? If you get a hard on over the books, go and be an accountant imo. As if a numpty internet jockey can judge what the club/Ashley can and can't afford to spend, based on a set of historic records and guesswork! The example of Leeds is trawled up time and again. To me that's just scaremongering. I don't think Shepherd & Co were remotely as reckless as Ridsdale & Co. I don't doubt that we had overstretched ourselves and needed a period of retrenchment, but as always with the toon we've reacted in the opposite extreme and now our prem status is threatened through under investment - where a canny use of even the transfer profits to date would have made a massive difference.

The level of optimism on N-O flies in the face of all the evidence. I can only assume that Prozac is widely prescribed these days.

Derek urges NUFC supporters to remain calm

Doesnt make sense unless its accounting wizardry getting the money to come in in a different financial year. It makes perfect sense. Football operates on a 'buy now, pay in instalments later' model. Unless you're NUFC which pays for everything upfront. It means that all our purchases have to be funded upfront, whereas none of our competitors do. Apparently this is a good thing, for reasons no-one can explain, unless you're running a corner shop.

That grid in full: Defenders: Need more players please Midfield: Need more players please Attackers: Need more players please

Reading his quotes, what strikes me is the complacency about avoiding relegation. Explains our January transfer dealings, or lack of.

Derek's very economical. With the spending and with the truth.

Yes. Which consists of setting his boxer shorts on fire while he's out training, then screaming into his face about growing some balls and kicking his opposite number up the arse. Probably.

How awful, RIP. I hope the family will be allowed to grieve in private. But somehow I doubt it.

Now that's entertainment!

I do think it's got less entertaining, especially for the armchair fans like me. Some of the highlights are even boring and that's supposed to be the best bits. At least you've got the craic at the pub before and after to look forward to Stevie. The Prem has lost its soul little by little, probably because of a combination of foreign managers/foreign players and the high stakes involved in losing. The calibre of player may be better but not the spectacle. What seems to have gone/be going is the sense of occasion and the belief that anything might happen. This, combined with saturation coverage and overhyping, the constant changing of fixtures by Sky, the domination of a small number of superclubs, and the exorbitant cost of going to games, will lead to a big fall off in attendances imo. Football will eat itself. Sky have a lot to answer for imho.

I'm half way through the graphic novel now. Very good. The graphic novel is very good iirc. Must have read it about 15 years ago now. Was the story by Alan Moore?

I just don't see what successive managers have seen in Ameobi. The odd flash of skill isn't worth the dross that precedes and follows it for long periods. He puts the opposition under very little pressure when he doesn't have the ball. I just don't see what he can offer long term and he won't improve now. I hope we've given him a new contract to ensure we can sell him on in the summer.

You'd think his card would be marked by refs going forward. Players get a reputation for this sort of thing.

If Boro fans stayed in their seats until a goal's scored, they wouldn't stand up at all this season tbh. Presumably when the crowd has shrunk to 500 people, Sue and their ilk will be happy because the stewards will be able to do their job properly.

I can't blame him for feeling more affinity for the side who paid his wages tbf. All I know is that we need someone better than JFK and Bruce fits the bill. You can blame him pretending he's arsed about NUFC though. I know what you mean, but he doesn't play for them now so I guess he can show a different allegiance. I don't doubt he USED to support us, then he went on to win pretty much everything with arguably the biggest and best British club of the nineties. It would have been insane for him to have rattled on about us. I doubt we'd want to hear one of our players singing the praises of a rival club just because they happened to have supported them as a kid. Don't forget we were actually their nearest rivals for a while too. Bobby Robson was no different. His "bleeding black and white" didn't appear to happen until he was nearly 70 and I love the guy. I am have this completely wrong but......didn't Bruce have a trial with us and end up going to Norwich instead? IF that's true - and it's just based on a vague recollection - I'd imagine he'd have disliked us for many years. Hell hath no fury and all that.