NJS

Seen that on a few US TV shows (though they call it "Epi")

Internal markets were introduced nto the NHS under Major as well. Of course that's a long way from having to pay to see a doctor which isn't far away now.

Why don't you address the simple point that the financial crisis was global CT? Too awkward a question?

The Vatican came out with some stuff a while ago about how they were confident any aliens would be God's children too - no word on why we got his "only son" and what the poor aliens had to do with instead.

I tend to agree - you can't use the argument that human morality is generally derived from being social, empathatic animals (as I do) so any attempt to set that morality from an arbitrary book is superfluous - and then write such a book.

what planet do you live on ? Find me any articles from 2007 that anticipate a sale. If it was so obvious then why do you think they wanted to sell? Who says they wanted to sell? SJH seemed keen but I’ve never seen anything from FF confirming he did. The Hall/Shepherd "split" was one of the most interesting things about it imo - in fact I'd give Shepherd credit for his reluctance versus Hall's eagerness to sell.

Chance to perve over Kate Humble surely?

what planet do you live on ? Find me any articles from 2007 that anticipate a sale. If it was so obvious then why do you think they wanted to sell?

You mean the club who've followed Ashley's latest blueprint? (Only spend money generated by transfer profits)

The sale was completely out of the blue man - I don't believe you could find one person who "wanted rid" of him as nobody had the slightest idea the club was up for sale - more made up opinions for other people.

Stupid tackle by Crouch for the red but he should have lamped Carvalho's heed off for being a twat.

The thing is PP it looks like to some extent they had seen the writing on the wall as they were looking at refinancing/investors/sale so a "blind" faith that they had something up their sleeves is imo going a bit too far. As it stands now as Chez posted, most if not all the premier league clubs only exist as going businesses based on guarantees in one form or another from rich owners. The Halls and Shepherd never had to do that explicitly based on a mixture of timing and I have no problem admitting good times on the pitch. However that was then, this is now. I think the failure of Moat to buy the club based on Barclays bot accepting him as a guarantor (my reading) shows that as it stand its hard to see an alternative mode other than an underwriting owner. The question then becomes what does that owner want? Is he an Abramovitch or an Ashley/any of the others? They have to chose between running the club purely for "fun" or trying to run it "properly". As I've said before, I think the worst thing about Ashley is that he either doesn't know or hasn't decided which one he wants. My real hope is that he still wants to sell but again that depends on the intentions of any new owner.

They were absolute nutters. How can you interpret the Bible literally when it is full of contradictions? No wonder they are mad. There are no contradictions when it comes to homosexuality though.

Im sorry I must have missed the post on this, where does this figure of £30m per year come from? I'd guess the 34m loss in Shepherd's last year repeated.

"Get the football right and all else follows" sounds sensible but there has to be another side to that - you could look at Leeds and Portsmouth as good examples of it crashing and burning badly. fuck me. Two clubs out of how many ? Lets have it your way then. Lets try and win the title or attempt to qualify for the Champions League on a consistent basis while selling our best players to our rivals behind the managers back and replacing them with inferior replacements offered minimal wages. Can you tell us any good examples that have done this ? Or are you accepting that we are no longer contenders and have no chance in the future, as in the likes of Stoke and Bolton ? "Get the football right and all else follows" is EXACTLY how it works in football. This is like banging your head against a brick wall. The teams that take the most shots at goal generally score the most goals. The teams that have the most quality footballers generally generate the most income, the teams with the best quality footballers are generally the ones who get it right on the pitch and increase their income. What is difficult about this ? Whatever way you look at it, you people are letting your blind irrational hatred of an individual or individuals dominate your entire judgement. How sad can you get. Seeing as Toonpack predictably doesn't answer my question about his mans "plan" he so fervently backs, where do YOU think we will be with 5 more years of Mike Ashleys "plan", bearing in mind his long term aim is to finish 10th ? YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. How would you pay for an assault on the top 4? If you say "like we did pre-2007" then the next question is who will lend us the money? In answer to your question - about the same as we are now - as we were in 2007 - in debt with our heads just above water. If Shepherd was still in charge where do you think we;d be now?

"Get the football right and all else follows" sounds sensible but there has to be another side to that - you could look at Leeds and Portsmouth as good examples of it crashing and burning badly.

I would never attempt to argue that everything Shepherd did was good, far from it but I do have one simple overriding belief that "success on the pitch breeds increased revenue", that was Shepherds mantra and frankly should be what all football clubs strive for. Running as we do on the logic that we should break even and all will be good regardless of how we achieve that financial sweet spot is not the way to run a football club. The sales of players key to our season is a fine example. Maybe we've hit lucky with Carroll but relegation can be attributed to the sale of Given, with him in goal we would have gained that extra point. Selling Carroll was the same gamble and fortunately it appears to have paid off. Will next years gamble be as fortunate? What happens when the couple of players we buy a season dont include a Tiote or Ben Arfa but more Perch's? Both chairmen have gambled on players, Shepherds was that purchasing proven big names would do the job, he was unlucky with the likes of Owen but none of the 20k that turned up to chant his name predicted that just as us on here didnt. One thing that did come from it though was the increase in merchandising/sponsorship etc that come from these types of signings which helped to increase the revenue. Ashleys gamble is on cheap players making it big to then be sold and a portion of the proceeds invested in the next "big thing". Id be interested to see any examples of successful teams based on that model. how many times does this need to be explained to these fools ? Coherently, without insults and with facts to back the posts as PP does would be a good start

I thought she was with lamearse? I think its Ashely's daughter - Llambias' bird is the classic mutton dressed as lamb, home counties gold-digger type.

Did the course a few years ago - all well and good till the end when someone asked what happens if you do that and it isn't a heart attack - you'll probably kill them being the answer which makes you wary about stepping up. Like most people I'd hope there was someone there who'd step up.

Im more than happy to include that stat, you do realise that the 2008 figures are Shepherd dont you as these would relate to the 2006/07 financial year, just as 2010 relates to 2008/09 (ie pre relegation) And I cant see how relegation can be ignored as a factor unless you're now seriously stating that on field factors should not be taken into account when talking finances???? This whole argument is based on the chairman/owners abilities to raise revenue. As a football club, the bulk of that revenue would come from the on field activities. The whole point myself, LM and others are making. If Shepherd had got us relegated (which he didnt) then I would have included the figures from that. Income increases with the quality on the pitch, Shepherd knew that and worked towards that, at first he was successful and we hit CL and reaped the rewards, later on he wasnt but he still strived for it. The very thing that many on here are arguing he shouldnt have done. Ashley does the opposite, hopes to stay in the league on a shoestring. Its easy to see who was the most successful at raising income. Fair point on the figures relating to previous years which I accept and apologise for. I don't think I've ever tried to deny that there is a complete link between football and financial performance - in fact what I've been arguing agsinst is the attempt by some (more LM than you) to abstract that to one of pure business competence where I don't accept that Shepherd was somehow "better" then Ashley. By this I mean in day to day activities not directly related to the football like raising sponsorship and/or reducing costs. What I'm also trying to argue against is a polar view where everything Shepherd did was "great" and everything Ashley has done has been "shit". My view is that there has been good and bad elements to both regimes. I think attempting to reign in wages and to rely more on non-credit revenues is a laudible aim - even if it causes me pain to say that given my overall view of him and I think the "unambitious" definition of intent is one I'd call realistic though disappointing. I also think LM's view that "all" we have to do is run the club like Shepherd did to ensure success is fucking stupid in 2011. I think comparing methods not allowing for how football and finance has changed in the last 5 years is daft and isn't as black and white as even you suggest.

PP: As I've said relegation was 100% his fault imo but you can't honestly quote figures which are blatantly down to that and then say they illustrate something else ie something generally different in the business. Quoting any figure for 2010 is pretty "unfair" in that context surely? I think you also ignored the point that on that basis in 2008 the rich list figure (not position) was higher than any previous figure.

Name a club that has borrowed money and spent it on players in the last 3 years.

I went on a few training courses at a place called Learning Tree 3 or 4 years ago - 3/4 day things with an exam at the end on a Friday afternoon - you get a nice certificate which really counts for nowt but the actual courses are pretty decent. Anyway I remember one where a lad didn't bother with the exam as he said that he'd vowed after leaving university never to take another test in his life - pretty weird attitude I thought.

don't be stupid, thats like saying don't criticise Ameobi for not scoring enough goals when you yourself haven't played premiership football ? What a div. Well stop using it as an arguing point then. More finance savvy people than you are I have posted in this thread on both "sides" but you keep cherry picking phrases that "make your point". Its obvious you don't understand what they mean as HF's posts regarding turnover and revenues which gennerally prove that have been completely ignored. So if you say Shephed ran the club from a financial point of view better than Ashley either put up or shut up. Others who think he did have posted and made good points which I accept. You haven't. The FACT is that the club has gone down the football rich list, and its a FACT that they now harbour lower expectations. Its also a FACT that many people said that "anybody would be better than Fred", its now a FACT that this has not proved to be the case, so shut the fuck up yourself unless you can disprove all of the above, especially now he is 4 years into his "plan" [whatever the "plan" was] Explain the basis of the rich list if its so important. You keep forgetting btw - I hate Ashley more than I hate Shepherd - I just don't revere the latter either.

From what source? ask Mike Ashley, he's the expert who would automatically do better than Fred. He's the person who has made the decisions which have led to it, so ask him what decisions he made ? You made the statement, its up to you to justify it.