Dr Gloom 21792 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 you know - for once I'm (almost) speechless - that last post sums up exactly why the game is in the s*** in what way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I've seen the figures that suggest Ashley hasnt made a penny since taking over the club but something still doesnt add up. When you see Villa, Spurs and Liverpool spending way more than we do despite having lower attendances and comparably wealthy owners then theres a rabbit off somewhere. We're £49m in the black from player deals since he's been here, Statto (HF), put a break down up a while ago. That's not taking in to account over all P&L though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 17053 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 (edited) I take it he's able to take some of that that 49 million, a percentage of the sky money,matchday receipts and any other income from the likes of advertising etc, and after we've paid the bills he can use any surplus loot to lower the asking price for the club in the event of a sale?.....does that actually amount to "taking money out of the club" though?....he might just as conceveably be actually trousering the lot and be using the club as a cash cow, and have no intention of selling it as long as we're turning up in enough numbers to make it pay...fuck me thats a depressing thought Edited April 12, 2011 by PaddockLad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21792 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 whichever way it's spun, the cold hard facts are that he's shafting us. he's getting shedloads of cash for players and he's not reinvesting it in the squad. that's why he's a cunt. and that's why it's difficult to get excited about our chances while he's in charge or to blame players for wanting to leave and play for more ambitious clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolly Potter MD 0 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Add a top winger into the mix [to compliment the potential or likely purchase of Enrique], along the lines of Elia providing their interest in the said winger is reignited, and Liverpool have the left flank pretty much locked down. The left side has been a problem area for them, in both facets of the game - in attack & defense. The rebuilding process, with the intention/ambition of regaining the club's CL status, is looking good for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9163 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 (edited) whichever way it's spun, the cold hard facts are that he's shafting us. he's getting shedloads of cash for players and he's not reinvesting it in the squad. that's why he's a cunt. and that's why it's difficult to get excited about our chances while he's in charge or to blame players for wanting to leave and play for more ambitious clubs. Link/evidence please, he's putting in (or has been) not taking out. That "will" change in the summer (one way or the other). I've seen the figures that suggest Ashley hasnt made a penny since taking over the club but something still doesnt add up. When you see Villa, Spurs and Liverpool spending way more than we do despite having lower attendances and comparably wealthy owners then theres a rabbit off somewhere. Villa, Have circa £100 Mill debt, of which just over £84 Mill has been lent to them by Lerner (via the 5 "holding" companies that wash his/Villa's money) he charges LIBOR +2% on the loans, he takes out sums equal to 15% of their turnover each year in interest, all his loans that haven't been to cover operating costs, have been invested on the field though, nothing on the ground or training facilities etc. Spurs - circa £60 Mill net debt, £15 Mill revolving loan with HSBC, £30 Mill with BoS plus £25 Mill of loan notes at 7.29%, but they had £11 mill cash at bank (at the time of those figures), debt was incurred to develop their training facilities (and that's what the loan cash is secured on). By and large they operate within their means. Liverpool - Debt HUGE but they turn a profit and can service it (so far) their "net" spend of late (January) was zero. The new top man says: "We've always spent money we've generated rather than deficit-spending and that will be the case in Liverpool,'' BTW their wages/turnover ratio (as far as I can find) is circa 56%, which is pretty low for the Prem. Edited April 12, 2011 by Toonpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolly Potter MD 0 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 (edited) Aye. He was shit today by his standards. Body language all wrong. A big reason as to why i believe the team is running on fumes now ie. picking up points at the tail end of the season. The win against Wolves was a godsend, along with earlier & unexpected points gains at Everton & Arsenal. There are some players [notably Enrique] who have done enough already over a large part of the campaign, to secure beneficial moves elsewhere - particularly in big games against strong opposition. Enrique has acclimatised to the pace & flow of top flight football, and his performances up until the final straight have reflected this, especially as a lock-down specialist who is capable of shutting down the opposition's attacking forays on his flank. Enrique is a pillar of strength, as per the above - the best in Europe imo. Some indifferent performances, at the tail end of the season for a club with no ambition whose recent & accompanying behaviour has probably demotivated & deflated some players, doesn't spoil his efforts & productivity and likewise it won't scare off suitors like Liverpool. Enrique has earnt a move away, on the strength of his overall season display - prior to his recent injury spell. His post-NUFC career imo has been sorted, and he's going through the motions now. Edited April 12, 2011 by Year Zero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21792 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 whichever way it's spun, the cold hard facts are that he's shafting us. he's getting shedloads of cash for players and he's not reinvesting it in the squad. that's why he's a cunt. and that's why it's difficult to get excited about our chances while he's in charge or to blame players for wanting to leave and play for more ambitious clubs. Link/evidence please, he's putting in (or has been) not taking out. That "will" change in the summer (one way or the other). ashley's shafting us by receiving big money for players and not reinvesting it in the squad. isn't that obvious? do you honestly expect to see the 50m net profit he's made from player sales reinvested? i don't. i don't even expect him to invest the kind of cash most us us would be happy with - the going amount needed to assemble a half decent squad in other words. he hasn't done it so far, why would he change all of a sudden? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9163 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 (edited) whichever way it's spun, the cold hard facts are that he's shafting us. he's getting shedloads of cash for players and he's not reinvesting it in the squad. that's why he's a cunt. and that's why it's difficult to get excited about our chances while he's in charge or to blame players for wanting to leave and play for more ambitious clubs. Link/evidence please, he's putting in (or has been) not taking out. That "will" change in the summer (one way or the other). ashley's shafting us by receiving big money for players and not reinvesting it in the squad. isn't that obvious? do you honestly expect to see the 50m net profit he's made from player sales reinvested? i don't. i don't even expect him to invest the kind of cash most us us would be happy with - the going amount needed to assemble a half decent squad in other words. he hasn't done it so far, why would he change all of a sudden? It's not obvious no. Far from it. If he'd spent the transfer surplus before now, he'd just have had to cover it out of his pocket on top of the circa £20 mill he's been putting in a year to cover the existing operational costs (even with the surplus coming in). He may change "all of a sudden" because - This summer (because of the Carroll surplus) we can spend (for the first time) without him dipping further into his own cash, that's a BIG difference. Whether he will or not remains to be seen. Someone lending circa £20 mill a year at zero interest is hardly "shafting". If we were running at a loss and he was a net "taker" as opposed to a "giver", that's shafting. Edited April 12, 2011 by Toonpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21792 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 whichever way it's spun, the cold hard facts are that he's shafting us. he's getting shedloads of cash for players and he's not reinvesting it in the squad. that's why he's a cunt. and that's why it's difficult to get excited about our chances while he's in charge or to blame players for wanting to leave and play for more ambitious clubs. Link/evidence please, he's putting in (or has been) not taking out. That "will" change in the summer (one way or the other). ashley's shafting us by receiving big money for players and not reinvesting it in the squad. isn't that obvious? do you honestly expect to see the 50m net profit he's made from player sales reinvested? i don't. i don't even expect him to invest the kind of cash most us us would be happy with - the going amount needed to assemble a half decent squad in other words. he hasn't done it so far, why would he change all of a sudden? It's not obvious no. Far from it. If he'd spent the transfer surplus before now, he'd just have had to cover it out of his pocket on top of the circa £20 mill he's been putting in a year to cover the existing operational costs (even with the surplus coming in). This summer (because of the Carroll surplus) we can spend (for the first time) without him dipping further into his own cash, that's a BIG difference. Whether he will or not remains to be seen. Someone lending circa £20 mill a year at zero interest is hardly "shafting". If we were running at a loss and he was a net "taker" as opposed to a "giver", that's shafting. fuck me. you sound almost happy with the way he's running the club. you make it sound like we should be grateful for him bailing us out. he's only got himself to blame that he didn't do due due diligence he's a billionaire man. the fact that he hasn't dipped into his own cash at all to help fund our transfers tells you everything you need to know about his ambitions for the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 6 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 whichever way it's spun, the cold hard facts are that he's shafting us. he's getting shedloads of cash for players and he's not reinvesting it in the squad. that's why he's a cunt. and that's why it's difficult to get excited about our chances while he's in charge or to blame players for wanting to leave and play for more ambitious clubs. Link/evidence please, he's putting in (or has been) not taking out. That "will" change in the summer (one way or the other). ashley's shafting us by receiving big money for players and not reinvesting it in the squad. isn't that obvious? do you honestly expect to see the 50m net profit he's made from player sales reinvested? i don't. i don't even expect him to invest the kind of cash most us us would be happy with - the going amount needed to assemble a half decent squad in other words. he hasn't done it so far, why would he change all of a sudden? Given we've had massive losses since 2007 you cant ask why he's not spent anything. The answer is obvious. We haven't had the money. We have done some very good business in the last three windows. All while we were posting losses. We are entering the first season Ashley doesn't have to put into the club, why do you assume he wants to rip us off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Is the reason he needs to subsidise the club because he didnt do due diligence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 whichever way it's spun, the cold hard facts are that he's shafting us. he's getting shedloads of cash for players and he's not reinvesting it in the squad. that's why he's a cunt. and that's why it's difficult to get excited about our chances while he's in charge or to blame players for wanting to leave and play for more ambitious clubs. ambition is a choice, not a right to demand, Ashley made his choice ages ago and people such as yourself took the ambition for granted. Sorry like, but that is the truth. There are still people out there who could be worse in fact. The prospective future is not good. We could easily end up like Sheffield Wednesday due to lack of ambition, re-investment, and long term apathy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 6 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Is the reason he needs to subsidise the club because he didnt do due diligence? No. Ashley knew about the debt (and lack of future income) and it was taken into account in the purchase price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9163 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 whichever way it's spun, the cold hard facts are that he's shafting us. he's getting shedloads of cash for players and he's not reinvesting it in the squad. that's why he's a cunt. and that's why it's difficult to get excited about our chances while he's in charge or to blame players for wanting to leave and play for more ambitious clubs. Link/evidence please, he's putting in (or has been) not taking out. That "will" change in the summer (one way or the other). ashley's shafting us by receiving big money for players and not reinvesting it in the squad. isn't that obvious? do you honestly expect to see the 50m net profit he's made from player sales reinvested? i don't. i don't even expect him to invest the kind of cash most us us would be happy with - the going amount needed to assemble a half decent squad in other words. he hasn't done it so far, why would he change all of a sudden? It's not obvious no. Far from it. If he'd spent the transfer surplus before now, he'd just have had to cover it out of his pocket on top of the circa £20 mill he's been putting in a year to cover the existing operational costs (even with the surplus coming in). This summer (because of the Carroll surplus) we can spend (for the first time) without him dipping further into his own cash, that's a BIG difference. Whether he will or not remains to be seen. Someone lending circa £20 mill a year at zero interest is hardly "shafting". If we were running at a loss and he was a net "taker" as opposed to a "giver", that's shafting. fuck me. you sound almost happy with the way he's running the club. you make it sound like we should be grateful for him bailing us out. he's only got himself to blame that he didn't do due due diligence he's a billionaire man. the fact that he hasn't dipped into his own cash at all to help fund our transfers tells you everything you need to know about his ambitions for the club. Name any owners/benefactors that do, or have, without charging high interest (outside the Russian or the Sheik and Al Fayed, who's in for £207 Mill (interest free) at Fulham but "only" £83 Mill of that is not secured against assetts). He's put circa 25% of his wealth in (interest free), to keep us a going concern (and yes I know it'd probably have been about 20% if he wasn't such an eejit). Really, why should he put in more ??. It would be nice, admittedly, but why should he, especially seeing crap he gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Aye. He was shit today by his standards. Body language all wrong. A big reason as to why i believe the team is running on fumes now ie. picking up points at the tail end of the season. The win against Wolves was a godsend, along with earlier & unexpected points gains at Everton & Arsenal. There are some players [notably Enrique] who have done enough already over a large part of the campaign, to secure beneficial moves elsewhere - particularly in big games against strong opposition. Enrique has acclimatised to the pace & flow of top flight football, and his performances up until the final straight have reflected this, especially as a lock-down specialist who is capable of shutting down the opposition's attacking forays on his flank. Enrique is a pillar of strength, as per the above - the best in Europe imo. Some indifferent performances, at the tail end of the season for a club with no ambition whose recent & accompanying behaviour has probably demotivated & deflated some players, doesn't spoil his efforts & productivity and likewise it won't scare off suitors like Liverpool. Enrique has earnt a move away, on the strength of his overall season display - prior to his recent injury spell. His post-NUFC career imo has been sorted, and he's going through the motions now. this current season could be the highest we ever finish under Mike Ashley. There is no way in the world we will adequately replace Carroll and Enrique and come out of this a better team. We won't even spend half that incoming transfer money and could easily be a lot less than that. Its hilarious and sad that some people think we are going to find a Tiotte every summer, these people who think that should be telling Alex Ferguson where he's been going wrong all these years. They are living in cloud cuckoo land. Why do people go off on these bursts of delusion and spout such crap anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9163 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Is the reason he needs to subsidise the club because he didnt do due diligence? No. Ashley knew about the debt (and lack of future income) and it was taken into account in the purchase price. He knew the debt was there, but I'm not sure he realised that the loans and overdraft etc had to be repaid on change of ownership mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 17053 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Is the reason he needs to subsidise the club because he didnt do due diligence? No. Ashley knew about the debt (and lack of future income) and it was taken into account in the purchase price. So you think 132 million was including "the debt"? Was the asking price a PR exercise then in disguising a huge black whole of debt, when really the asking price shouldve been £1 or some other nominal sum?.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9163 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Is the reason he needs to subsidise the club because he didnt do due diligence? Can't have helped, those that did due dilligence ran away. The subsidy is down to the fact we were literally brassic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt 0 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Is the reason he needs to subsidise the club because he didnt do due diligence? No. Ashley knew about the debt (and lack of future income) and it was taken into account in the purchase price. He knew the debt was there, but I'm not sure he realised that the loans and overdraft etc had to be repaid on change of ownership mind. He just didn't even look at the public accounts if you ask me. Ashley would know that there'd likely be change of control provisions in the club's core debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21792 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 whichever way it's spun, the cold hard facts are that he's shafting us. he's getting shedloads of cash for players and he's not reinvesting it in the squad. that's why he's a cunt. and that's why it's difficult to get excited about our chances while he's in charge or to blame players for wanting to leave and play for more ambitious clubs. ambition is a choice, not a right to demand, Ashley made his choice ages ago and people such as yourself took the ambition for granted. Sorry like, but that is the truth. eh? no i didn't. what are you on about now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21792 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Is the reason he needs to subsidise the club because he didnt do due diligence? Can't have helped, those that did due dilligence ran away. The subsidy is down to the fact we were literally brassic. he's a billionaire man; it's not like he's short of a bob or two is it? if he really wanted us to be succesful on the field, he'd put more money into player recruitment, whether that's his own, or the profits he's made from player sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 4679 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Hoping for a sheik is like hoping for a lottery win. Very nice if it happens but a bit unrealistic and not worth pinning your hopes on. Football can't really expect to go on running at a loss. Times have moved on and Financially Ashley is positioning us in a very favourable position. I would much rather see these new financial rules (that I don't fully understand) return football to a fairer more realistic scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9163 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Is the reason he needs to subsidise the club because he didnt do due diligence? Can't have helped, those that did due dilligence ran away. The subsidy is down to the fact we were literally brassic. he's a billionaire man; it's not like he's short of a bob or two is it? if he really wanted us to be succesful on the field, he'd put more money into player recruitment, whether that's his own, or the profits he's made from player sales. Which may happen in the summer (or not) because that's the first time the "profits" aren't just reducing losses. Aye he's a billionaire, how much more should he have put in over and above the £250 million ?? In your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14011 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I would much rather see these new financial rules (that I don't fully understand) return football to a fairer more realistic scenario. Because football has always been fair and realistic. Link to comment 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