Toonpack

Over and above the purchase price and existing debt pay-off (£132Mill +£70Mill), the additional working capital that he's loaned is, as far as I can see, £69.8Mill up to 09/10. Not sure what the year by year increments are, it was around £41 Mill total up to year end 08/09.

Tell me you're not serious, really

Thank god. I seen someone had posted on this thread, and thought he'd scored. Just put 25 quid on Fulham. He didn't even travel (SSN) crocked (again) evidently fuck me. It's 3-0 to Liverpool after 17 minutes oh my god. Hopefully they give Dogleash the job and he reverts to being the manager we know he can be

Thank god. I seen someone had posted on this thread, and thought he'd scored. Just put 25 quid on Fulham. He didn't even travel (SSN) crocked (again) evidently

The thing is Leazes the "golden period" ended in 97, we had a brief hiatus under SBR and we didn't back him when we needed to (the Bowyer summer), because we couldn't afford it, we fucked off SBR and then unbelieveably mortgaged the future and threw buckets of cash at Souness, cash we didn't have. Will we get anywhwere near the nineties positon again, I very much doubt it, not without some form of bizare miracle. BUT ownership change or not, we wouldn't have got near it again either under any continuance of the previous regime. In fact we'd be a hell of a lot worse off than we are now IMO, but we can't discuss that area, we promised

Thought the same. He likes a game of, do you want to see my puppies, alledgedly

All the 5th best average of average shows is that if you finished 9.4th season on season that was enough for 5th best, which means the other teams must have been crap. As for listing them all it changed season on season BUT our average finishing position was 9.4th incontravertable FACT. There's a BIG reason we can't compete with Leverpool (rarely could) and Spurs currently and that is they are significantly richer than us, you and I differ greatly on why that is, and that's the subject our deal is based upon so I'll say nee more on that one.

Not the meandering half in jest one, this one -

Glad someone knows the technicalities. According to LM if we finished 10th two years in a row but unlikely as it seems the 9 teams above us were competely different between the 2 years then we would be the best club in the country as no other team had bettered our average. I'd argue our average position was 10th. Perhaps I'm missing something here but if you took a mean average, wouldn't ours be 5th best? If you have the 5th best average position and said position that equates to the 5th best is actually 9.4th year on year in real finishing position, to finish 10th or above year on year is all that's required to match it. Of course given the games changed and top 4 are a lock-in, near as damn it, finishing with an average real position of 9.4th may no longer be enough to finish 5th best average of the averages. But surely finishing with an actual average league position of 9.4th (or above) in real terms would equal (or surpass it if above 9.4th) the previous record of 5th best average when the real number was 9.4th. Easy really, hope I've cleared that one up Bottom line, 9.4th is the benchmark the other stat is bollocks. You can try and make it sound more complicated than it actually is but the 9.4th place figure is what was used to calculate 5th best over that period. Like I said, I don't think that's a definitive measure of success but it shouldn't be discounted as a method of measuring it either. Any more than jizzing over potentially turning a profit at some stage is something to get overly excited about. See my reply above.

Glad someone knows the technicalities. According to LM if we finished 10th two years in a row but unlikely as it seems the 9 teams above us were competely different between the 2 years then we would be the best club in the country as no other team had bettered our average. I'd argue our average position was 10th. Perhaps I'm missing something here but if you took a mean average, wouldn't ours be 5th best? If you have the 5th best average position and said position that equates to the 5th best is actually 9.4th year on year in real finishing position, to finish 10th or above year on year is all that's required to match it. Of course given the games changed and top 4 are a lock-in, near as damn it, finishing with an average real position of 9.4th may no longer be enough to finish 5th best average of the averages. But surely finishing with an actual average league position of 9.4th (or above) in real terms would equal (or surpass it if above 9.4th) the previous record of 5th best average when the real number was 9.4th. Easy really Bottom line, 9.4th is the benchmark the other stat is bollocks. so who are the 8 clubs with a higher average ? Irrelevant, it's actual finishing position that is important. Or would you contend that IF (hypothetically) we finished with an average finishing position of say 8th over the next 5 years but that was only good enough for 6th, or 7th or more, best average of averages, we would have a worse league record than the period where the actual average finishing position of 9.4th was good enough for 5th best average of averages ????

Glad someone knows the technicalities. According to LM if we finished 10th two years in a row but unlikely as it seems the 9 teams above us were competely different between the 2 years then we would be the best club in the country as no other team had bettered our average. I'd argue our average position was 10th. Perhaps I'm missing something here but if you took a mean average, wouldn't ours be 5th best? If you have the 5th best average position and said position that equates to the 5th best is actually 9.4th year on year in real finishing position, to finish 10th or above year on year is all that's required to match it. Of course given the games changed and top 4 are a lock-in, near as damn it, finishing with an average real position of 9.4th may no longer be enough to finish 5th best average of the averages. But surely finishing with an actual average league position of 9.4th (or above) in real terms would equal (or surpass it if above 9.4th) the previous record of 5th best average when the real number was 9.4th. Easy really, hope I've cleared that one up Bottom line, 9.4th is the benchmark the other stat is bollocks.

Glad someone knows the technicalities. According to LM if we finished 10th two years in a row but unlikely as it seems the 9 teams above us were competely different between the 2 years then we would be the best club in the country as no other team had bettered our average. I'd argue our average position was 10th. Yep.

You had to hit them between the knee and the ankle though, well you did when I was a lad. Spot Japs and Commando's

You backed up your "Pish" statement yet ???

I’m choosing to ignore the meaningless fluff. I used the term allegedly as there those amongst us who don’t buy into idea the club was up shit creek without a paddle but it’s an issue that’s been debated at length and not worth going over again. However, there are many on here who highly critical of SHJ/FF and it would be interesting to find out how they think the club should have been run between 1991 and 2007. Interestingly those "in that camp", never produce any substantive evidence to repudiate the contrary evidence produced by twats like me. If we're using the "lesser of two evils" phrase, I can't agree with Tecato that the previous regime were the lesser of the two, Ashley's final chapters are yet to be written, so we don't know yet. BUT I firmly believe he was an absolutely necessary evil. Am open to being persuaded otherwise, but no-one's done it yet.

In a statement when the accounts were released, "10th or above year on year" I believe was the quote.

Do fuck off - they expanded the ground but apart from that heaped debt on the club and destroyed cash flow by spending sponsorship money upfront. Why did they cut and run if it was all about the long term? Exactly Interesting that the "cut and run" happened just when the cash was really drying up an all. Not hate, I don't care enough to hate, just the truth. Oh and paging Stevie, while I'm on, I am awaiting my post of yesterday, you know the one you stated was "pish" to be "properly replied to" as you said you would.

Would it be a total surprise, or do you think he had a hunch ???

So when a negative connotation can be put on anything it's gospel, all else is lies To be fair that's how it's gone in the past so there's no reason to think any different, you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise tbh. I have little expectation about what will happen, it'll be what it'll be, but I do find it amusing how everything is made out to be negative all of the time.

So when a negative connotation can be put on anything it's gospel, all else is lies

Id suggest having a conversation with any of the local journos, Bird, Caulkin, Starforth. All will tell you what a joke this football club is. Could also have a chat with the fake sheik for balance. There's some short memories on here.

If that's all the Liz and Phil the Greek could afford, that is what they would have to do. To continue the analogy, they'd mortgaged all the tiara's and had maxed out the credit cards and STILL they needed more money. But if they still trolled around in their state coaches waving to the crowds they'd be exactly like we were, all fur coat and no knickers, till the day the baillifs turned up. Look, Ashley rightly get's villified for many things but the one thing above all that he get's hammered for, the so called skinflint and "lining his pockets" is absolutely and utterly wrong. Even with our record revenues we made losses year on year, it had to stop somewhere. There comes a time when you have to realise that you've "missed the boat" the ONLY way to increase our revenues to the levels necessary (and the factual trend was down year on year from the "high" of 2003) was to be in the champions league, we just did not have the money to do that, we didn't really even have the money to troll around mid-table. You can set your sights as high as you like but you have to be able to back it up with hard £££'s. Everyone ignores debt "because all clubs have debts and they don't matter", well sorry like, but they do matter the minute you can't service them. As I've said before, our debt was incomparible to "other" football club debt, it was ALL leveraged and secured on the club and it's income streams (future and present). It was NOT like other club debt - Do the research (I have) and you'll see it's true. We did not have a pot to piss in. Our debt is now closer to not mattering than it ever was because it is now, LIKE other teams debts, underwritten by an owner, cunt though he may be. It remains different in one respect in that Ashley does NOT charge any interest on his loans, unlike almost every other owner, some like Lerner make a huge wedge from their "benevolence" (circa 15% of turnover). That is not a bad/evil thing, surely!. Even if turnover could be boosted to the £120 Million Stevie stated "easily" all that would do (because of our annual losses - even before Ashleys relegation genius) would have been to stand still because when your bleeding at £20-£30 million a year you'd better find some cash somehwere. All the above is factual (apart from the Queens knickers bit) and like it or not Ashley (or someone like him) was desperately needed at this club. Destroy the bloke for pissing off KK, sticking tacky adds on the roof, appointing Joe Kinnear, getting us relegated BUT to villify him for anything to do with the clubs money is beyond preposterous. I would fucking LOVE for someone to destroy my post with facts/evidence, anything substantial and I would gladly be shown up as wrong. But you know what, I don't think I am. We are what we are, because we are reaping what we (the club) sowed, and regretably we are all that we can afford to be. FACT.

So where'd the money come from to make this assault on the top 4 (or top 2 according to you). I'd love to know. I can't abide Ashley personally, but I do appreciate his moolah.

Man Utd - no chance Man City - no chance Arsenal - no chance Chelsea - no chance Liverpool - as I've said used generated funds to buy new players and as the Livepool fan said will probably spend a fair bit in the summer. they are a long way ahead of us. Spurs - used transfer profits over the last 4 years to build a squad which is a lot better than us The latter two is a level I'd like to aim for and I accept your argument that there's nothing wrong with that but they are streets ahead of us - that's simple realism without millions being spent which is what I keep saying. So where does that leave us? - you keep mentioning Blackburn but I'd say its more Villa, Everton, the Mackems and "functional" teams like Stoke. That is the next tier and thinking that we can compete above that is unrealistic - again as I keep saying "accepting" that Ashley won't invest. The funny thing is if a new owner did come in and try and do the same turnover expansion as the previous regime using revenue and loans only, you're probably talking a maximum spend of £50m - do you think that would give us a better squad than Spurs or Liverpool? you've just said how Spurs and Liverpool are aiming higher than we are, now. I like how you concede inferiority to Arsenal, where exactly do you think they will go when Wenger goes and if they don't make a similar calibre appointment ? Nothing is permanent, that is a fundamental you and others appear to fail to grasp. We have one of the biggest clubs and fanbases in the country, there is simply no excuse for any owner not attempting to capitalise on it. They are aiming higher because obviously they have better owners - what I'm saying is that they have funded most of their recent squad building by either transfer profits or debt in Liverpools case which has then been written off. At the end of the day they still have lot better squads than us which is why its unrealistic to expect competition in the immediate future. Arsenal will have to be judged when the new owner shows his hand - they may have a lot of money to spend to go with a much better academy than us at the moment. If you want to predict how things will be in 5 or 10 years time then good luck - obviously we agree we should be going all out but I think its going to be difficult given the present situation. As I've said before I've never been able to figure Ashley out and to a large extent I don't think he know what he wants either. We are of course the victims of that but I don't see the point of railing against it until things become clearer. We didn't have debt by buying players NJS. Our debt was down to a leveraged buy out and the two owners putting the buying of the club on to the club itself a year after they'd 'bought' it. Player transfers showed a net profit for their last two and a half years ownership. Prior to the Yanks all profit from annual turnover (usually around 10 to 15 million) and player sales were put back in to the club. David Moores made a complete hash of selling the club, and his merchandising of it during his time was shit, but neither he nor the directors ever took a penny out of it in dividends or anything. That's how it always was before him too. I thought that's how all clubs had to work. DM invested 12 million to buy the majority of shares in '92 and sold them for 80 million 15 years later, that was the way it always worked wasn't it? The owners made a profit only when they sold their shares on? I remember the uproar when Martin Edwards made himself Chief exec so that he could draw a wage because the FA had said one board member could be paid. Our new owners paid 300 million for the club to RBS because that's who the debt of buying the club was owed to. If they hope to make money from it surely the best way is to build it up, win things, and then sell it on at a profit 6 or 7 years down the line. Be interesting to see what your lot do in the summer, whether they do what's been done before, spend what the pot generates itself, or if JH flashes some of his own money. I suspect the former.

I agree and what that also confirms is, that if SBR had been in work, he wouldn't have come when he did. I also agree with LM's "end the career in ablaze of glory at the hometown club" sentiment, but only because the vacancy, and thus that opportunity, arose when he was otherwise unengaged.