Guest alex Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 at the end of the day anyone who is willing to buy a football club from shepherd and hall without due dilligence cannot call themselves a businessman. If he had done that then we wouldn't have been in the mess we are now. He would have either walked away or negotiated a better purchase price leaving more to invest wisely. Very true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottish Mag 3 Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 at the end of the day anyone who is willing to buy a football club from shepherd and hall without due dilligence cannot call themselves a businessman. If he had done that then we wouldn't have been in the mess we are now. He would have either walked away or negotiated a better purchase price leaving more to invest wisely. Why not? You called him one N'Zogbia has already stated he wants to leave and Owen has not had a contract renewed, he is away in the summer regardless therefore a businessman (which is what Ashley is) will try and get cash in for him rather than let him go on a free (on top of that we will save £100k every week hes not here). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matty 0 Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 I agree with the people who are saying that the results don't show us in great financial light, however, what cannot be ignored is the state that we're in and the league table doesn't lie. A quick glance at the fixtures also shows that, for the sake of £20m, the future income of the club could be saved. Speculate to accumulate and all that eh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottish Mag 3 Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 I agree with the people who are saying that the results don't show us in great financial light, however, what cannot be ignored is the state that we're in and the league table doesn't lie. A quick glance at the fixtures also shows that, for the sake of £20m, the future income of the club could be saved. Speculate to accumulate and all that eh! Is that 20 taking into account salaries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevietoon 0 Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 I agree with the people who are saying that the results don't show us in great financial light, however, what cannot be ignored is the state that we're in and the league table doesn't lie. A quick glance at the fixtures also shows that, for the sake of £20m, the future income of the club could be saved. Speculate to accumulate and all that eh! Is that 20 taking into account salaries? why? do salaries get paid a a lumpa at SJP - most people get paid weekly or monthly how many companies dont take people on cos they havent already got their salary banked for the next 4 years. he could of re mortgaged the debt at the time it became apparent that it was there to be settled. he chose not too and used cash to pay it off; SJH was devious in not mentioning it - perhaps we need to fire some flack to him too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 These accounts come out and King Cunt crawls out the woodwork again. I know it's hard when you find out that if it wasn't for Ashley guaranteeing to support us financially we would be in administration but you've got to take it on the chin. I'd have a modicum of respect for you (not that I'm suggesting you're arsed about that) if you didn't go hiding when he was doing things like offering Kinnear the job on a permanent basis or trying to flog Given. But where would you and your petty point scoring be then? don't worry about it mate, if his man stays around long enough, we will end up right back where the Halls and shepherd found us, with the DOF running the show, and hopefully he would fuck off for good. Amusing how he instinctively knew who I was talking about as well (i.e. the bit in bold) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 at the end of the day anyone who is willing to buy a football club from shepherd and hall without due dilligence cannot call themselves a businessman. If he had done that then we wouldn't have been in the mess we are now. He would have either walked away or negotiated a better purchase price leaving more to invest wisely. Why not? You called him one N'Zogbia has already stated he wants to leave and Owen has not had a contract renewed, he is away in the summer regardless therefore a businessman (which is what Ashley is) will try and get cash in for him rather than let him go on a free (on top of that we will save £100k every week hes not here). Yeah, I can call him a businessman, he however can't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImpossiblyDaft 1 Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Dennis Wise, basically hated by everyone outside the clubs he played for, and probably several within. There's no 'probably' as to whether he doesn't get on with the Reserve Team Manager: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=nb5Igo2LvNs (any excuse to link to that classic eh) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2207 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 I agree with the people who are saying that the results don't show us in great financial light, however, what cannot be ignored is the state that we're in and the league table doesn't lie. A quick glance at the fixtures also shows that, for the sake of £20m, the future income of the club could be saved. Speculate to accumulate and all that eh! This is the crux of it for me. We're not talking about spending money to take us into the top 6 - it's purely about survival now, and the squad is so lightweight and undermanned that we're in serious danger of going down through the effect of injuries and suspensions and players who just aren't good enough (not to mention the manager). I can accept we are carrying players who are overrated and overpaid but the summer's the time to address that and try to re-engineer the squad.......now we he has to protect the club's income which is in peril. I can't see how he would be better off in the championship, it's likely quite a few of our top paid players - Owen, Viduka etc will leave anyway in the summer. And nobody could take for granted either that we'd bounce straight back up, or that some of the dead wood would then piss off. Surely there's sense in investing to protect the value of his investment......why not chuck another 20-30 mill into the pot, eh? If he's in for 250m isn't another 10% worht a shot to preserve value? Maybe he could get co-investors in in the summer if he needs to recoup it. Or are we just a rudderless ship, hoping for the best? Unless there's no way to borrow the cash of course, which I find hard to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 (edited) he's a billionaire who has tried to fix the accounts with those loans etcbut whats the point if he's then going to allow the club to get relegated over 20m in transfers.. It's even more bizarre when success = £££'s as much as it does in football. I think a £0 NUFC is going to have us punching well below our weight, though. We have decent income possiblities (as the 90's showed). The truly damning thing though is if Ashley is prepared to risk relegation for just £20m there is no way in hell he is going to invest the amount required to bring NUFC back from relegation and into the Premiership in anything but a yoyo club way - at best. So we're completely fucked if we do go down. Edited January 24, 2009 by Fop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hadrian 0 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 there is a huge amount to this argument/situ ranging from sale price of club , what he bought (land ,what he intends todo with it(jiminezect) and what he did with debt and other 'investment . aswell as players wages brought in under his tenure , im sure we(deloitte) were reporting a drop in wages outgoings after the purchase of duke geremi ect , Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Got to keep the first team competitive, that should never be diluted as a philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
super_jonas 0 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Just posted this on another thread its the link to his previous communication for anyone who has forgotten it. shows that the accounts are in line with what he said, its not lies. Like any business with assets the club has debts. I paid £134 million out of my own pocket for the club. I then poured another £110 million into the club not to pay off the debt but just to reduce it. The club is still in debt. Even worse than that, the club still owes millions of pounds in transfer fees. I shall be paying out many more millions over the coming year to pay for players bought by the club before I arrived. But there was a double whammy. Commercial deals such as sponsorships and advertising had been front loaded. The money had been paid upfront and spent. I was left with a club that owed millions and part of whose future had been mortgaged. Unless I had come into the club then it might not have survived. It could have shared the fate of other clubs who have borrowed too heavily against their future. Before I had spent a penny on wages or buying players Newcastle United had cost me more than a quarter of a billion pounds. I knew that the club would cost me money every year after I had bought it. I have backed the club with money. You can see that from the fact that Newcastle has the fifth highest wage bill in the Premier League. I was always prepared to bank roll Newcastle up to the tune of £20 million per year but no more. That was my bargain. I would make the club solvent. I would make it a going concern. I would pour up to £20 million a year into the club and not expect anything back. It has to be realised that if I put £100 million into the club year in year out then it would not be too long before I was cleaned out and a debt ridden Newcastle United would find itself in the position that faced Leeds United. That is the nightmare for every fan. To love a club that overextends itself, that tries to spend what it can't afford. My plan and my strategy for Newcastle is different. It has to be. Arsenal is the shining example in England of a sustainable business model. It takes time. It can't be done overnight. Newcastle has therefore set up an extensive scouting system. We look for young players, for players in foreign leagues who everyone does not know about. We try and stay ahead of the competition. We search high and low looking for value, for potential that we can bring on and for players who will allow Newcastle to compete at the very highest level but who don't cost the earth. This is a long term plan. A long term plan for the future of the club so that it can flourish. Also one of the reasons that the club was so in debt when I took over was due to transfer dealings caused by managers moving in and out of the club. Every time there was a change in manager millions would be spent on new players and millions would be lost as players were sold. It can't keep on working like that. It is just madness. I have put Newcastle on a sound financial footing. It is reducing its debt. It is spending within itself. It is recruiting exciting new players and bringing in players for the future." What lies is it that everyone talks about? not including quotes from NOTW etc Im not trying to cause an argument, just looking for the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hadrian 0 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 (edited) that was mikes statement , the deloitee report and also other statements conradict most of what he says in that. like the debt , it was 66 million secured against the season tickets with a 7% interest rate , which turned into 100m according to mike . roman abramovich paid 110m for chelski , spent about 500+ mill and just knocked back an offer of 750 mill . which would have repaid his investment and make him over 100m . proper investment = equity . Edited January 24, 2009 by Hadrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Just posted this on another thread its the link to his previous communication for anyone who has forgotten it. shows that the accounts are in line with what he said, its not lies. Like any business with assets the club has debts. I paid £134 million out of my own pocket for the club. I then poured another £110 million into the club not to pay off the debt but just to reduce it. The club is still in debt. Even worse than that, the club still owes millions of pounds in transfer fees. I shall be paying out many more millions over the coming year to pay for players bought by the club before I arrived. But there was a double whammy. Commercial deals such as sponsorships and advertising had been front loaded. The money had been paid upfront and spent. I was left with a club that owed millions and part of whose future had been mortgaged. Unless I had come into the club then it might not have survived. It could have shared the fate of other clubs who have borrowed too heavily against their future. Before I had spent a penny on wages or buying players Newcastle United had cost me more than a quarter of a billion pounds. I knew that the club would cost me money every year after I had bought it. I have backed the club with money. You can see that from the fact that Newcastle has the fifth highest wage bill in the Premier League. I was always prepared to bank roll Newcastle up to the tune of £20 million per year but no more. That was my bargain. I would make the club solvent. I would make it a going concern. I would pour up to £20 million a year into the club and not expect anything back. It has to be realised that if I put £100 million into the club year in year out then it would not be too long before I was cleaned out and a debt ridden Newcastle United would find itself in the position that faced Leeds United. That is the nightmare for every fan. To love a club that overextends itself, that tries to spend what it can't afford. My plan and my strategy for Newcastle is different. It has to be. Arsenal is the shining example in England of a sustainable business model. It takes time. It can't be done overnight. Newcastle has therefore set up an extensive scouting system. We look for young players, for players in foreign leagues who everyone does not know about. We try and stay ahead of the competition. We search high and low looking for value, for potential that we can bring on and for players who will allow Newcastle to compete at the very highest level but who don't cost the earth. This is a long term plan. A long term plan for the future of the club so that it can flourish. Also one of the reasons that the club was so in debt when I took over was due to transfer dealings caused by managers moving in and out of the club. Every time there was a change in manager millions would be spent on new players and millions would be lost as players were sold. It can't keep on working like that. It is just madness. I have put Newcastle on a sound financial footing. It is reducing its debt. It is spending within itself. It is recruiting exciting new players and bringing in players for the future." What lies is it that everyone talks about? not including quotes from NOTW etc Im not trying to cause an argument, just looking for the facts. The ones where he said Keegan had final say on players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timnufc 0 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Dennis Wise: "He'll say yes and no, he has the final word, no-one else. Everything that happens will be run past him." "I have to concentrate more on the academy, we need some young blood coming through of our own. We need to look abroad for players and that's my intention over the next few years." Mike Ashley - Is there money to spend?: "Yes, there is. If the deal is right - and that means its the right player who Kevin wants - then we will do the deal." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Can anyone confirm that basically what these accounts are saying is that we dont have any debts to a bank? Mortgages, that sort of thing have been cleared and we now only owe Ashley? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3966 Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 Are these accounts something they have to post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Are these accounts something they have to post? Can anyone confirm that basically what these accounts are saying is that we dont have any debts to a bank? Mortgages, that sort of thing have been cleared and we now only owe Ashley? Supposedly, barring players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 So if thats the case then whats this? filed at companies house on 25/11/08. No amounts on there but that is definitely a mortgage according to my totally non accountant eye. And in case anyone wants to think that Ive just photoshopped these then it can be easily found on Companies House at the same place as the accounts were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt 0 Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 (edited) Can anyone confirm that basically what these accounts are saying is that we dont have any debts to a bank? Mortgages, that sort of thing have been cleared and we now only owe Ashley? The accounts say that we had no long-term debt to any bank (there is an outstanding overdraft though) as at the accounting year end. The mortgage above may well have been to secure the overdraft if the bank felt like pulling it , or it could have been for a long-term borrowing. We'll only know when the next lot of accounts come out. Edited January 25, 2009 by Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Can anyone confirm that basically what these accounts are saying is that we dont have any debts to a bank? Mortgages, that sort of thing have been cleared and we now only owe Ashley? The accounts say that we had no long-term debt to any bank (there is an outstanding overdraft though) as at the accounting year end. The mortgage above may well have been to secure the overdraft if the bank felt like pulling it , or it could have been for a long-term borrowing. We'll only know when the next lot of accounts come out. Or could it be that the original mortgage was paid off (because it had to be), the accounts for 07/08 were finalised and then a new mortgage secured to repay some or all of the debt to Ashley? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt 0 Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Yep, could well be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Yep, could well be. Im not saying it is btw, I have absolutely no idea what or how much. What I do know is that no matter what, we are not just in debt to Ashley. 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