Losing 500k a week apparently.

[Kitman 2204]

I find it hard to beleive that any new owner would agree to the loans remaining- this would effectively leave the club in Ashley's economic control, even if he had sold the equity.

 

So prospective buyers are going to expect Ashley to write off 100million? unfortunately that is the true cost of Newcastle United, Shepherds overspending followed by relegation doesn't come cheap. When/if we are bought out we will have large debts to MA.

 

It's quite simple. Any prospective lender would repay the debt to Ashley - Ashley would most likely require this as part of the sale. No-one would expect the loan to be written off. The money to repay the loan could come from the club or the buyer, but obviously the club would need replacement funding from somewhere if it repays the loan. This sort of issue arises all the time with buying company shares, it's nothing unusual. If the debt is repaid the interest rate on the debt is irrelevant.

 

The key question is same as it ever was - is the price demanded by Ashley for his shares reasonable or is he taking the piss?

[NUFC_Mag 0]

Agreed almost entirely, but £100million in debt may not neccesarily be paid in a lump sum, in which case the interest rate is indeed an important consideration as it is repaid in installments.

[Park Life 71]

Agreed almost entirely, but £100million in debt may not neccesarily be paid in a lump sum, in which case the interest rate is indeed an important consideration as it is repaid in installments.

 

It's a real shame we got relegated recently with such small interest rates of late.

[Matt 0]

Any prospective buyer who is prepared to inherit debts to former owners which far outweigh the actual value in the club would need to be clinically certified.

 

Forget these 'loans'. They do not exist. They are merely paper transactions to simplify Ashley's tax position. When you are faces with a buyout situation where there are shareholder loans then these loans are considered as quasi-equity and settled into the overall bargain. Kitman could not be more wrong- the debt should be totally written off, at a discount, as part of the wholesale price.

 

People are not buying this club to make money. Football is a SHIT business. You are better off putting your money in government bonds and going off for a wank.

 

People are buying this for the control element. Leaving in massive debt to former owners removes this element of control and would negate the one reason for actually buying the club.

 

If we are sold, the intercompany loans would be gone, or we'd be in the hands of genuine idiots.

[LeazesMag 0]

And almost as if it was planned...:

 

Hughton Thanks Ashley for Cash

 

(Sorry if already been posted in some form)

 

"planning"..........

 

according to wankers like Renton and Baggio a few years ago, this was the key to a golden future the likes of which Fat Fred and the Halls had never delivered

 

You could not make it up if you tried.

 

Edited February 26, 2010 by LeazesMag

[Kitman 2204]

Forget these 'loans'. They do not exist. They are merely paper transactions to simplify Ashley's tax position. When you are faces with a buyout situation where there are shareholder loans then these loans are considered as quasi-equity and settled into the overall bargain. Kitman could not be more wrong- the debt should be totally written off, at a discount, as part of the wholesale price.

 

You've lost me there, Matt. I assume these are real loans that Ashley has made to the club? It makes no sense to write them off and boost the net worth of his shares - surely it's much more tax efficient to have the loans repaid to him and accept a lower price for the sale of his shares? Even if the shares are worth less than the sale price, he'll get a bigger capital loss that way......

 

Please explain what you mean.

[peasepud 59]

We didnt get relegated JUST because of MA. We got relegated because we had money grabbing pricks on the pay roll. The reaction against Villa last season from some players said it all. Theres such a better harmony amongst the players at the moment.

 

As for Ashley, want him out obviously but I do give him credit for some of the things he's done. He has made us one of the most financially stable clubs in English football. No debt..... doesnt he deserve credit for that?

 

 

He certainly does and yes the players got us relegated. Even upping one of their piss poor performances would have kept us up. However in the fullness of time we may be viewed as lucky to have gone down. (as long as we get back up)

 

Are you bi-polar?

[Christmas Tree 4709]

We didnt get relegated JUST because of MA. We got relegated because we had money grabbing pricks on the pay roll. The reaction against Villa last season from some players said it all. Theres such a better harmony amongst the players at the moment.

 

As for Ashley, want him out obviously but I do give him credit for some of the things he's done. He has made us one of the most financially stable clubs in English football. No debt..... doesnt he deserve credit for that?

 

 

He certainly does and yes the players got us relegated. Even upping one of their piss poor performances would have kept us up. However in the fullness of time we may be viewed as lucky to have gone down. (as long as we get back up)

 

Are you bi-polar?

 

 

[Renton 21391]

And almost as if it was planned...:

 

Hughton Thanks Ashley for Cash

 

(Sorry if already been posted in some form)

 

"planning"..........

 

according to wankers like Renton and Baggio a few years ago, this was the key to a golden future the likes of which Fat Fred and the Halls had never delivered

 

You could not make it up if you tried.

 

 

Talking bollocks and comparing me to Baggio now, nice one . All I said was it would have made sense to plan for Robson's replacement, rather than sack him 5 games into a season with the transfer window shut and no replacement, hence ending up with Souness. I would have thought this would have been universally agreed with but apparently not. Of course, at the time you thought Souness was a good appointment, didn't you?

 

You big bairn.

[Matt 0]

You've lost me there, Matt. I assume these are real loans that Ashley has made to the club? It makes no sense to write them off and boost the net worth of his shares - surely it's much more tax efficient to have the loans repaid to him and accept a lower price for the sale of his shares? Even if the shares are worth less than the sale price, he'll get a bigger capital loss that way......

 

Please explain what you mean.

 

If you own 100% of a company and loan it money on favourable terms, you are bearing all the risk and reward of that loan- really it is equity. Its a more tax efficient way of doing it and puts you into a stronger claim on the assets in event of administration or liquidation, but whether Ashley creates more shares in the club or puts it in as a loan the effect on the business is broadly the same.

 

A buyer valuing the business would do so on the basis that these loans are nil and would factor the lower debt figure when valuing the club. You would always assume that shareholder loans would be dealt with as part of the overall sale price. Considering the amount on-loaned from SJHL to NUFC the loans are worth more than NUFC as a business unit (ie NUFC is negative equity) and it's hard to see that situation being resolved any time soon.

 

So Ashley can't expect the loans to be repaid for a lower value of his shares- he'd have to be paying someone for taking the shares off him in that scenario!

[Happy Face 29]

“Newcastle United couldn’t survive at the moment without Mike’s money, it’s as simple as that."

 

This is remarkably similar to a statement made in December when 'a source' said “Without Mike's input, the club would be broke. Simple as that." which I wrote about here and commented was like saying Josef Fritzl deserved credit for supporting Elizabeth Fritzl all her life.

 

"If Mike and the banks weren't willing to cover the cost of relegation Newcastle may well be in a Portsmouth situation"

 

He's given no impression whatsoever that he's "willing" to do any such thing. Like a rat on a sinking ship (the rat that gnawed through the hull) he's had the club on the market during almost every transfer window he's been at the club (or has claimed to have it on the market). He's often referred to his desire to cut his losses and sell up. He's been forced to cover the cost of his own mistake and nothing more. This is no act of altruism we're seeing. It's pure business. He knows this club is worth more than the current value he's dragged us down to....and a great deal more than Portsmouth who are a far smaller club with an average gate less than half the size of ours even in the league above.

[NJS 4375]

was like saying Josef Fritzl deserved credit for supporting Elizabeth Fritzl all her life

 

Best analogy ever.

[Christmas Tree 4709]

“Newcastle United couldn’t survive at the moment without Mike’s money, it’s as simple as that."

 

This is remarkably similar to a statement made in December when 'a source' said “Without Mike's input, the club would be broke. Simple as that." which I wrote about here and commented was like saying Josef Fritzl deserved credit for supporting Elizabeth Fritzl all her life.

 

"If Mike and the banks weren't willing to cover the cost of relegation Newcastle may well be in a Portsmouth situation"

 

He's given no impression whatsoever that he's "willing" to do any such thing. Like a rat on a sinking ship (the rat that gnawed through the hull) he's had the club on the market during almost every transfer window he's been at the club (or has claimed to have it on the market). He's often referred to his desire to cut his losses and sell up. He's been forced to cover the cost of his own mistake and nothing more. This is no act of altruism we're seeing. It's pure business. He knows this club is worth more than the current value he's dragged us down to....and a great deal more than Portsmouth who are a far smaller club with an average gate less than half the size of ours even in the league above.

 

 

Regardless of the rights and wrongs, the key fact is that we have an owner who CAN do this. We also have an owner whose wealth will continue to grow as we come out of recession.

 

This is far more favorable than being sold off to a dodgy sheik or skint barry whatever his name was consortium.

 

Ashley to learn from mistakes and take the club forward on a sound footing with decent investment (not hysterical Shepherd buys as those days have gone) would be the best outcome.

[ewerk 30367]

Ashley to learn from mistakes and take the club forward on a sound footing with decent investment (not hysterical Shepherd buys as those days have gone) would be the best outcome.

 

And is also a highly unlikely outcome, that's the problem. The ridiculous statements from Llambias prove that Ashley has learnt fuck all.

[Happy Face 29]

“Newcastle United couldn’t survive at the moment without Mike’s money, it’s as simple as that."

 

This is remarkably similar to a statement made in December when 'a source' said “Without Mike's input, the club would be broke. Simple as that." which I wrote about here and commented was like saying Josef Fritzl deserved credit for supporting Elizabeth Fritzl all her life.

 

"If Mike and the banks weren't willing to cover the cost of relegation Newcastle may well be in a Portsmouth situation"

 

He's given no impression whatsoever that he's "willing" to do any such thing. Like a rat on a sinking ship (the rat that gnawed through the hull) he's had the club on the market during almost every transfer window he's been at the club (or has claimed to have it on the market). He's often referred to his desire to cut his losses and sell up. He's been forced to cover the cost of his own mistake and nothing more. This is no act of altruism we're seeing. It's pure business. He knows this club is worth more than the current value he's dragged us down to....and a great deal more than Portsmouth who are a far smaller club with an average gate less than half the size of ours even in the league above.

 

 

Regardless of the rights and wrongs, the key fact is that we have an owner who CAN do this. We also have an owner whose wealth will continue to grow as we come out of recession.

 

This is far more favorable than being sold off to a dodgy sheik or skint barry whatever his name was consortium.

 

Ashley to learn from mistakes and take the club forward on a sound footing with decent investment (not hysterical Shepherd buys as those days have gone) would be the best outcome.

 

Weren't you Mr End of the week all summer?

 

Learned from his mistakes? The £15k a week wage cap isn't going to take us much further forward than another relegation scrap.

[Kitman 2204]

You've lost me there, Matt. I assume these are real loans that Ashley has made to the club? It makes no sense to write them off and boost the net worth of his shares - surely it's much more tax efficient to have the loans repaid to him and accept a lower price for the sale of his shares? Even if the shares are worth less than the sale price, he'll get a bigger capital loss that way......

 

Please explain what you mean.

 

If you own 100% of a company and loan it money on favourable terms, you are bearing all the risk and reward of that loan- really it is equity. Its a more tax efficient way of doing it and puts you into a stronger claim on the assets in event of administration or liquidation, but whether Ashley creates more shares in the club or puts it in as a loan the effect on the business is broadly the same.

 

A buyer valuing the business would do so on the basis that these loans are nil and would factor the lower debt figure when valuing the club. You would always assume that shareholder loans would be dealt with as part of the overall sale price. Considering the amount on-loaned from SJHL to NUFC the loans are worth more than NUFC as a business unit (ie NUFC is negative equity) and it's hard to see that situation being resolved any time soon.

 

So Ashley can't expect the loans to be repaid for a lower value of his shares- he'd have to be paying someone for taking the shares off him in that scenario!

 

Your post is quite hard to follow, but I think I can see what you're saying now. If the value of the club is less than the shareholder loan, then no purchaser is going to repay the loan and buy the shares. I can follow that (if I've got that right); in my post above I was assuming that the worth of the club would be more than the shareholder loan, so you just repay the loan as part of the deal to buy the shares. If the shares are worth less than the loan, then any purchaser would demand that it's capitalised or written off as part of the deal, I can see that.

[Christmas Tree 4709]

Ashley to learn from mistakes and take the club forward on a sound footing with decent investment (not hysterical Shepherd buys as those days have gone) would be the best outcome.

 

And is also a highly unlikely outcome, that's the problem. The ridiculous statements from Llambias prove that Ashley has learnt fuck all.

 

 

Definitely true. But if we examine all the realistic options. I still think this is the most likely.

 

Options

 

1. He sells us to a Barry Mort consortium with no real cash if things go wrong as they often do.

2. A billionaire shining knight of an owner turns up.

3. Another overseas play sheik takes us on for a few years.

4. Ashley keeps us and makes the same mistakes over again.

5. Ashley keeps us and supports steady sustained growth so he can prove all his knockers wrong (while increasing the value of his investment).

6. NUSC buys the club.

 

If anyone else has any other realistic scenarios then lets hear them. But bear in mind this Portsmouth scenario will have sent any slightly interested overseas money running for the hills.

[Christmas Tree 4709]

“Newcastle United couldn’t survive at the moment without Mike’s money, it’s as simple as that."

 

This is remarkably similar to a statement made in December when 'a source' said “Without Mike's input, the club would be broke. Simple as that." which I wrote about here and commented was like saying Josef Fritzl deserved credit for supporting Elizabeth Fritzl all her life.

 

"If Mike and the banks weren't willing to cover the cost of relegation Newcastle may well be in a Portsmouth situation"

 

He's given no impression whatsoever that he's "willing" to do any such thing. Like a rat on a sinking ship (the rat that gnawed through the hull) he's had the club on the market during almost every transfer window he's been at the club (or has claimed to have it on the market). He's often referred to his desire to cut his losses and sell up. He's been forced to cover the cost of his own mistake and nothing more. This is no act of altruism we're seeing. It's pure business. He knows this club is worth more than the current value he's dragged us down to....and a great deal more than Portsmouth who are a far smaller club with an average gate less than half the size of ours even in the league above.

 

 

Regardless of the rights and wrongs, the key fact is that we have an owner who CAN do this. We also have an owner whose wealth will continue to grow as we come out of recession.

 

This is far more favorable than being sold off to a dodgy sheik or skint barry whatever his name was consortium.

 

Ashley to learn from mistakes and take the club forward on a sound footing with decent investment (not hysterical Shepherd buys as those days have gone) would be the best outcome.

 

Weren't you Mr End of the week all summer?

 

Hoping for a sale? Yep

 

Learned from his mistakes? The £15k a week wage cap isn't going to take us much further forward than another relegation scrap.

 

We are not up yet

[Kitman 2204]

Ashley to learn from mistakes and take the club forward on a sound footing with decent investment (not hysterical Shepherd buys as those days have gone) would be the best outcome.

 

And is also a highly unlikely outcome, that's the problem. The ridiculous statements from Llambias prove that Ashley has learnt fuck all.

 

As others have said, if Ashley admitted that LLambias is a know nowt tosser, sacked him immediately and appointed a professional CEO who actually knows how to run a football club (and I don't mean Ridsdale), it would be a start. Persisting with that casino creeping twat is one of his bigger mistakes imo.

[Happy Face 29]

“Newcastle United couldn’t survive at the moment without Mike’s money, it’s as simple as that."

 

This is remarkably similar to a statement made in December when 'a source' said “Without Mike's input, the club would be broke. Simple as that." which I wrote about here and commented was like saying Josef Fritzl deserved credit for supporting Elizabeth Fritzl all her life.

 

"If Mike and the banks weren't willing to cover the cost of relegation Newcastle may well be in a Portsmouth situation"

 

He's given no impression whatsoever that he's "willing" to do any such thing. Like a rat on a sinking ship (the rat that gnawed through the hull) he's had the club on the market during almost every transfer window he's been at the club (or has claimed to have it on the market). He's often referred to his desire to cut his losses and sell up. He's been forced to cover the cost of his own mistake and nothing more. This is no act of altruism we're seeing. It's pure business. He knows this club is worth more than the current value he's dragged us down to....and a great deal more than Portsmouth who are a far smaller club with an average gate less than half the size of ours even in the league above.

 

 

Regardless of the rights and wrongs, the key fact is that we have an owner who CAN do this. We also have an owner whose wealth will continue to grow as we come out of recession.

 

This is far more favorable than being sold off to a dodgy sheik or skint barry whatever his name was consortium.

 

Ashley to learn from mistakes and take the club forward on a sound footing with decent investment (not hysterical Shepherd buys as those days have gone) would be the best outcome.

 

Weren't you Mr End of the week all summer?

 

Hoping for a sale? Yep

 

 

Why? If Ashley is far more favourable?

[Christmas Tree 4709]

Ashley to learn from mistakes and take the club forward on a sound footing with decent investment (not hysterical Shepherd buys as those days have gone) would be the best outcome.

 

And is also a highly unlikely outcome, that's the problem. The ridiculous statements from Llambias prove that Ashley has learnt fuck all.

 

As others have said, if Ashley admitted that LLambias is a know nowt tosser, sacked him immediately and appointed a professional CEO who actually knows how to run a football club (and I don't mean Ridsdale), it would be a start. Persisting with that casino creeping twat is one of his bigger mistakes imo.

 

Agreed.

[Christmas Tree 4709]

“Newcastle United couldn’t survive at the moment without Mike’s money, it’s as simple as that."

 

This is remarkably similar to a statement made in December when 'a source' said “Without Mike's input, the club would be broke. Simple as that." which I wrote about here and commented was like saying Josef Fritzl deserved credit for supporting Elizabeth Fritzl all her life.

 

"If Mike and the banks weren't willing to cover the cost of relegation Newcastle may well be in a Portsmouth situation"

 

He's given no impression whatsoever that he's "willing" to do any such thing. Like a rat on a sinking ship (the rat that gnawed through the hull) he's had the club on the market during almost every transfer window he's been at the club (or has claimed to have it on the market). He's often referred to his desire to cut his losses and sell up. He's been forced to cover the cost of his own mistake and nothing more. This is no act of altruism we're seeing. It's pure business. He knows this club is worth more than the current value he's dragged us down to....and a great deal more than Portsmouth who are a far smaller club with an average gate less than half the size of ours even in the league above.

 

 

Regardless of the rights and wrongs, the key fact is that we have an owner who CAN do this. We also have an owner whose wealth will continue to grow as we come out of recession.

 

This is far more favorable than being sold off to a dodgy sheik or skint barry whatever his name was consortium.

 

Ashley to learn from mistakes and take the club forward on a sound footing with decent investment (not hysterical Shepherd buys as those days have gone) would be the best outcome.

 

Weren't you Mr End of the week all summer?

 

Hoping for a sale? Yep

 

 

Why? If Ashley is far more favourable?

 

Hoping for a sale last summer like most fans.

 

Now understanding that the knights in shining armour are not out there and after seeing the shit thats gone on with Portsmouth various owners I would prefer, for the reasons stated, to stay with Ashley and HOPE he sees the benefit in building us up.

 

I have yet to hear a better scenario that does not involve blind hope in shining knights.

 

I certainly would hate to go through the next few years with a skint Barry whats his name consortium.

[ewerk 30367]

Ashley to learn from mistakes and take the club forward on a sound footing with decent investment (not hysterical Shepherd buys as those days have gone) would be the best outcome.

 

And is also a highly unlikely outcome, that's the problem. The ridiculous statements from Llambias prove that Ashley has learnt fuck all.

 

 

Definitely true. But if we examine all the realistic options. I still think this is the most likely.

 

Options

 

1. He sells us to a Barry Mort consortium with no real cash if things go wrong as they often do.

2. A billionaire shining knight of an owner turns up.

3. Another overseas play sheik takes us on for a few years.

4. Ashley keeps us and makes the same mistakes over again.

5. Ashley keeps us and supports steady sustained growth so he can prove all his knockers wrong (while increasing the value of his investment).

6. NUSC buys the club.

 

If anyone else has any other realistic scenarios then lets hear them. But bear in mind this Portsmouth scenario will have sent any slightly interested overseas money running for the hills.

 

Based on what exactly? You've got fuck all to support that.

[Park Life 71]

You've lost me there, Matt. I assume these are real loans that Ashley has made to the club? It makes no sense to write them off and boost the net worth of his shares - surely it's much more tax efficient to have the loans repaid to him and accept a lower price for the sale of his shares? Even if the shares are worth less than the sale price, he'll get a bigger capital loss that way......

 

Please explain what you mean.

 

If you own 100% of a company and loan it money on favourable terms, you are bearing all the risk and reward of that loan- really it is equity. Its a more tax efficient way of doing it and puts you into a stronger claim on the assets in event of administration or liquidation, but whether Ashley creates more shares in the club or puts it in as a loan the effect on the business is broadly the same.

 

A buyer valuing the business would do so on the basis that these loans are nil and would factor the lower debt figure when valuing the club. You would always assume that shareholder loans would be dealt with as part of the overall sale price. Considering the amount on-loaned from SJHL to NUFC the loans are worth more than NUFC as a business unit (ie NUFC is negative equity) and it's hard to see that situation being resolved any time soon.

 

So Ashley can't expect the loans to be repaid for a lower value of his shares- he'd have to be paying someone for taking the shares off him in that scenario!

 

Your post is quite hard to follow, but I think I can see what you're saying now. If the value of the club is less than the shareholder loan, then no purchaser is going to repay the loan and buy the shares. I can follow that (if I've got that right); in my post above I was assuming that the worth of the club would be more than the shareholder loan, so you just repay the loan as part of the deal to buy the shares. If the shares are worth less than the loan, then any purchaser would demand that it's capitalised or written off as part of the deal, I can see that.

 

Untill we get promoted the clubs worth jack shit that's all you need to know.

[trophyshy 7073]

cba to have a properganda at this bollox.