Stable Financial Footing

[LeazesMag 0]

Quick edit from you

It was.

 

The end of the season is the time to make judgements about relative league positions and relegation cost the club £50m, which has to be disastrous for a club supposedly facing administration 12 months earlier.

 

We can go over and over this endlessly repetitive debate until Alan Smith scores a goal, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating and when dessert is finally served I’m expecting it to taste like a shit-cake covered in turd-sauce. You obviously have a more optimistic view and I hope you're right.

 

 

If we hadn't gone down, Carroll would probably have never broke into the team. His fee has effectively made the relegation free. I understand the pessimism, it's easy to take the comments about signing players that have resale value as we want to be a selling club, but for me it means that a player is coming here and playing well enough for his value to increase, as opposed to Luque/Viana/Boumsong and the ilk.

They weren’t flops because they cost a lot of money; it was down to bad judgement. Even managers of SBR’s calibre make mistakes, managers like Souness are one long mistake. Perch was cheap, is he good player? Campbell cost nowt, has he been good value? What about Rooney, he cost MU £25m, would SAF have been better off paying £2m for Best and Routledge?

 

As for Carroll. I appreciate what you’re saying and wouldn’t disagree, but all relegation did was bring forward the inevitable. He’s too good not to have broken into the first team. The difference is if we had an owner with any ambition we might have been able to hang onto him. Beardsley, Waddle, Gazza... the club went backwards after each was sold. Selling your best players is false economy.

 

he doesn't get it mate. He genuinely thinks buying 3rd rate players is less of a risk, or something like that, in his own warped way, and mentions 3 players in x amount of years that didn't live up to their fee and never mentions all the others who pushed the club into europe and the Champions League. Staggering. Then he tries to tell us he "has a balanced view".

 

[Guest alex]

Was there really a deadline for the sale set by the Halls? I haven't seen evidence of this or heard about it before ASM mentioned it. Seems unlikely, given they were pretty eager to sell, that they would have pulled out even if there was a deadline and Ashley failed to meet it. It could have been a ploy on their part to get Ashley to be buy before he had a chance to look at the books but, even if that were the case, he was an absolute fool to fall for this ploy. Of course, Ashley / the club saying the deadline existed, doesn't mean it did. If the deadline was in place neither the Halls or Ashley come out of it very well. It's certainly not a good reason not to do due diligence, it's a very bad reason imo. The argument there are only a finite amount of PL clubs doesn't really wash with me either, unless there's evidence there were other buyers waiting in the wings ready to swoop, should Ashley not buy the club. That argument also relies on those buyers being prepared to buy the club without completing due diligence themselves. Pie in the sky stuff really.

Edited February 11, 2011 by alex

[LeazesMag 0]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

 

if you don't take a shot, you don't score a goal. Smart lad aren't you

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

Its a mistake to band Halls and Shepherd together. They did an excellent job while Sir John Hall was the major player in the management of the club. In my opinion, things started to go wrong when Sir John stopped taking an active roll.

 

Judging by appearances it seems Freddy Shepherd took all the biggest rolls as soon as he could get his hand in.

 

I wasn't really going to reply to Scoular, I realise he is an older person like me and has seen a lot, but Sir John Hall stepping down had absolutely nothing to do with the appointment of managers and the backing of them within the club. Neither the Halls or Shepherd owned the club independently of each other and made those decisions without the other because they couldn't do it.

 

As has been pointed out by myself and supported by one or two others [Craig and Shackbleep I think], from a playing point of view, it was Keegan who started it all rolling in the first place and he was approached and persuaded to take the job by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher while Sir John Hall didn't want to make the change and sack Ardiles.

 

Sorry for going into this again, it just seemed relevant to respond in this way.

 

When I said rolls, I was referring to sausage rolls. Sorry for being silly.

[LeazesMag 0]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

[LeazesMag 0]

Its a mistake to band Halls and Shepherd together. They did an excellent job while Sir John Hall was the major player in the management of the club. In my opinion, things started to go wrong when Sir John stopped taking an active roll.

 

Judging by appearances it seems Freddy Shepherd took all the biggest rolls as soon as he could get his hand in.

 

I wasn't really going to reply to Scoular, I realise he is an older person like me and has seen a lot, but Sir John Hall stepping down had absolutely nothing to do with the appointment of managers and the backing of them within the club. Neither the Halls or Shepherd owned the club independently of each other and made those decisions without the other because they couldn't do it.

 

As has been pointed out by myself and supported by one or two others [Craig and Shackbleep I think], from a playing point of view, it was Keegan who started it all rolling in the first place and he was approached and persuaded to take the job by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher while Sir John Hall didn't want to make the change and sack Ardiles.

 

Sorry for going into this again, it just seemed relevant to respond in this way.

 

When I said rolls, I was referring to sausage rolls. Sorry for being silly.

 

I know. Stick to politics, especially muslims

[Guest alex]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

[LeazesMag 0]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

Edited February 11, 2011 by LeazesMag

[scoular 0]

We are going round in circles. No-one knows what the financial state of the club is until we see the next set of accounts.

If they show an improvement, then I would certainly hope to see serious investment in the playing staff during the summer. Right or wrong, I don't think that MA will increase his loans to the club unless, at a minimum, the position has stabilised.

I think that Ashley would sell, if any sort of realistic offer came along, but the alarming fact is, that there does not seem to be any interest from investors wising to buy our club.

Why not?

[Toonpack 10076]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

Have you said where the stake for the gamble's comming from yet ?? (if we hadn't sold Carroll)

 

I'd love us to plash the cash and maybe we will in the summer, no excuse if we don't as we actually have some spare cash.

 

BTW Liverpool (the gamblers) broke even on dealings in January, which is what the owners insisted on.

[LeazesMag 0]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

Have you said where the stake for the gamble's comming from yet ?? (if we hadn't sold Carroll)

 

I'd love us to plash the cash and maybe we will in the summer, no excuse if we don't as we actually have some spare cash.

 

BTW Liverpool (the gamblers) broke even on dealings in January, which is what the owners insisted on.

 

same place as the Halls and Shepherd found it, restore the clubs revenue to what it was when he took over. What is wrong with that, how has it fallen, when the halls and Shepherd were so shite and Ashley was so astute a businessman ?

First priority of any business is to maximise revenue, under Mike Ashley is has fallen, relative to our competitors, to such a degree that many of them do not see us as their competitors anymore. You simply cannot argue with this, despite what anybody on skunkers may be saying - who equally can't bring themselves to admit how they had their heads up their arse about the old regime and so didn't appreciate them to the extent they were completely and totally taken in by Mike Ashley when he spun them a little of PR rubbish and because he was "anybody but Fred"

 

We will not splash the cash. Liverpool may have broke even, but they spent the money in the first place on "trophy signings" to compete at the higher levels which is precisely what the Halls and Shepherd had us until Mike Ashley along and took the clubs expectations and levels of competition downwards

[Guest Your Name Here]

We are going round in circles. No-one knows what the financial state of the club is until we see the next set of accounts.

If they show an improvement, then I would certainly hope to see serious investment in the playing staff during the summer. Right or wrong, I don't think that MA will increase his loans to the club unless, at a minimum, the position has stabilised.

I think that Ashley would sell, if any sort of realistic offer came along, but the alarming fact is, that there does not seem to be any interest from investors wising to buy our club.

Why not?

Financial analysts reckon the club will record a profit this season, and that’s doesn’t include the Carroll money.

 

http://www.true-faith.co.uk/tf/features.ns...E0?OpenDocument

[Guest]

I have a lot of sympathy with ASM's viewpoint in that the financial landscape must have changed since Ashley bought the club due to the GFC. I think the previous Board would have had to make some tough calls and maybe even pruned things back, simply because the banks would probably have demanded it. This process was just under way with Allardyce when Ashley swooped (or should that be belly-flopped?) on the club.

 

At the same time other clubs seem to have found the money to buy players. When Ashley came on board we actually spent a lot of money.....and the the shutter came down when he got all huffy about the fall out from the KK debacle. Since then the plan seems to be to live within our means, which means loooking out for loan deals and bargains, with the aim of making the club self financing in the short term.

 

I don't know much about NUFC's finances other than what gets posted on here and following the arguments that go back and forth. But it seems to me that we are at the extreme end of the spectrum in terms of financial caution, where the likes of Hull and Blackpool operate. I don't know whether we're typical of most clubs outside the top 4 now?

 

It may be that Ashley simply won't put his hand in his pocket whereas other owners will. I don't know what he expected when he bought us but surely he didn't expect the club to be self financing? I'm all for running the club sensibly but I'd like to see the squad strengthened season to season and if that money has to come from Ashley rather than profit, I'm not really bothered. I think he has a responsibility as our owner to take the club forward.

 

Instead it looks like he's more interested in making transfer profits and running down the wage bill, to the detriment of the team. Some of the mistakes he's made seem like a deliberate 2 fingers to the fans. For instance I still can't understand why we don't make some limited investment in Jan 2009 to safeguard against relegation, it just seemed like pigheaded foolishness at the time. now we have the sale of Carroll, albeit for a great price, with no replacement lined up.

 

As a fan I'm not interested in the club's balance sheet, provided we're not in danger of bankruptcy. I'm interested in the team improving and progressing. I'd say we've had the opportunity to do that but I get baffled that we won't commit further investment to push us on. Not squillions on "trophy players" but plugging obvious gaps and improving quality in one or two key positions. I think this is where "showing some ambition" comes in.

 

It may be that the 35m is reinvested wisely but at the moment and given how things have unfolded, I think poeple have a right to be cynical.

 

despite what an obsessed wanker says in a different thread, that pretty much sums it up and has always been my thinking too

 

Edit. I'll just add that, as his business plan has saw the club plunge from 14th to 40th in the rich list, and will only go further downwards unless something changes, that the problems are all entirely of his own making for not recognising how to tap your fanbase and keep your revenue maximised which is what any decent business should do as its top priority.

 

 

Expected to return the the top 20 next year. Nice try though.

[Guest]

Was there really a deadline for the sale set by the Halls? I haven't seen evidence of this or heard about it before ASM mentioned it. Seems unlikely, given they were pretty eager to sell, that they would have pulled out even if there was a deadline and Ashley failed to meet it. It could have been a ploy on their part to get Ashley to be buy before he had a chance to look at the books but, even if that were the case, he was an absolute fool to fall for this ploy. Of course, Ashley / the club saying the deadline existed, doesn't mean it did. If the deadline was in place neither the Halls or Ashley come out of it very well. It's certainly not a good reason not to do due diligence, it's a very bad reason imo. The argument there are only a finite amount of PL clubs doesn't really wash with me either, unless there's evidence there were other buyers waiting in the wings ready to swoop, should Ashley not buy the club. That argument also relies on those buyers being prepared to buy the club without completing due diligence themselves. Pie in the sky stuff really.

 

 

Shepherd said he'd have "put up a fight" if he wasn't in hospital with pneumonia? I doubt he would have btw, but it was probably the angle used to push through a quick sale, going of those comments.

[Guest]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

 

if you don't take a shot, you don't score a goal. Smart lad aren't you

 

 

If you're able to build an attack it shows quality through the team, if you hoof it up to the striker, you're Bolton.

[Guest]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

SOURCE? QUOTE?

 

You'll ignore this, you utter embarrassment.

[Guest]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

Have you said where the stake for the gamble's comming from yet ?? (if we hadn't sold Carroll)

 

I'd love us to plash the cash and maybe we will in the summer, no excuse if we don't as we actually have some spare cash.

 

BTW Liverpool (the gamblers) broke even on dealings in January, which is what the owners insisted on.

 

same place as the Halls and Shepherd found it, restore the clubs revenue to what it was when he took over. What is wrong with that, how has it fallen, when the halls and Shepherd were so shite and Ashley was so astute a businessman ?

First priority of any business is to maximise revenue, under Mike Ashley is has fallen, relative to our competitors, to such a degree that many of them do not see us as their competitors anymore. You simply cannot argue with this, despite what anybody on skunkers may be saying - who equally can't bring themselves to admit how they had their heads up their arse about the old regime and so didn't appreciate them to the extent they were completely and totally taken in by Mike Ashley when he spun them a little of PR rubbish and because he was "anybody but Fred"

 

We will not splash the cash. Liverpool may have broke even, but they spent the money in the first place on "trophy signings" to compete at the higher levels which is precisely what the Halls and Shepherd had us until Mike Ashley along and took the clubs expectations and levels of competition downwards

 

 

We finished 14th the season before he bought us, so it's a little unfair to say we were competing at higher levels until he came along, no?

 

Oh and "same place the halls and shepherd found it" They borrowed it, and we're still paying for it

[LeazesMag 0]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

SOURCE? QUOTE?

 

You'll ignore this, you utter embarrassment.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...mp;#entry864974

 

apology accepted.

 

[LeazesMag 0]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

Have you said where the stake for the gamble's comming from yet ?? (if we hadn't sold Carroll)

 

I'd love us to plash the cash and maybe we will in the summer, no excuse if we don't as we actually have some spare cash.

 

BTW Liverpool (the gamblers) broke even on dealings in January, which is what the owners insisted on.

 

same place as the Halls and Shepherd found it, restore the clubs revenue to what it was when he took over. What is wrong with that, how has it fallen, when the halls and Shepherd were so shite and Ashley was so astute a businessman ?

First priority of any business is to maximise revenue, under Mike Ashley is has fallen, relative to our competitors, to such a degree that many of them do not see us as their competitors anymore. You simply cannot argue with this, despite what anybody on skunkers may be saying - who equally can't bring themselves to admit how they had their heads up their arse about the old regime and so didn't appreciate them to the extent they were completely and totally taken in by Mike Ashley when he spun them a little of PR rubbish and because he was "anybody but Fred"

 

We will not splash the cash. Liverpool may have broke even, but they spent the money in the first place on "trophy signings" to compete at the higher levels which is precisely what the Halls and Shepherd had us until Mike Ashley along and took the clubs expectations and levels of competition downwards

 

 

We finished 14th the season before he bought us , so it's a little unfair to say we were competing at higher levels until he came along, no?

 

Oh and "same place the halls and shepherd found it" They borrowed it, and we're still paying for it

 

you mean qualifying for europe and the Champions League more than everybody bar 4 other teams in a period of 15 years ?

 

The joke is, lad, [see the bold bit] you've just said in your previous post you don't cherry pick

 

That's 2 examples.

Edited February 11, 2011 by LeazesMag

[Guest]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

SOURCE? QUOTE?

 

You'll ignore this, you utter embarrassment.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...mp;#entry864974

 

apology accepted.

 

 

 

I can't see where it says I believe we can reach the heights of the last board? Perhaps quote and bold this for me.

[Guest]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

Have you said where the stake for the gamble's comming from yet ?? (if we hadn't sold Carroll)

 

I'd love us to plash the cash and maybe we will in the summer, no excuse if we don't as we actually have some spare cash.

 

BTW Liverpool (the gamblers) broke even on dealings in January, which is what the owners insisted on.

 

same place as the Halls and Shepherd found it, restore the clubs revenue to what it was when he took over. What is wrong with that, how has it fallen, when the halls and Shepherd were so shite and Ashley was so astute a businessman ?

First priority of any business is to maximise revenue, under Mike Ashley is has fallen, relative to our competitors, to such a degree that many of them do not see us as their competitors anymore. You simply cannot argue with this, despite what anybody on skunkers may be saying - who equally can't bring themselves to admit how they had their heads up their arse about the old regime and so didn't appreciate them to the extent they were completely and totally taken in by Mike Ashley when he spun them a little of PR rubbish and because he was "anybody but Fred"

 

We will not splash the cash. Liverpool may have broke even, but they spent the money in the first place on "trophy signings" to compete at the higher levels which is precisely what the Halls and Shepherd had us until Mike Ashley along and took the clubs expectations and levels of competition downwards

 

 

We finished 14th the season before he bought us , so it's a little unfair to say we were competing at higher levels until he came along, no?

 

Oh and "same place the halls and shepherd found it" They borrowed it, and we're still paying for it

 

you mean qualifying for europe and the Champions League more than everybody bar 4 other teams in a period of 15 years ?

 

The joke is, lad, [see the bold bit] you've just said in your previous post you don't cherry pick

 

That's 2 examples.

 

 

Ok, Liverpool aren't in the Champions League this season because they weren't top 4 last season. They have new owners. If they don't finish top 4 this season, is it because their old owners took them backwards?

[LeazesMag 0]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

SOURCE? QUOTE?

 

You'll ignore this, you utter embarrassment.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...mp;#entry864974

 

apology accepted.

 

 

 

I can't see where it says I believe we can reach the heights of the last board? Perhaps quote and bold this for me.

 

so what exactly is your ambition ? To stay in the premiership ? Mike Ashley will wank over supporters like you if you are happy with that.

[LeazesMag 0]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

Have you said where the stake for the gamble's comming from yet ?? (if we hadn't sold Carroll)

 

I'd love us to plash the cash and maybe we will in the summer, no excuse if we don't as we actually have some spare cash.

 

BTW Liverpool (the gamblers) broke even on dealings in January, which is what the owners insisted on.

 

same place as the Halls and Shepherd found it, restore the clubs revenue to what it was when he took over. What is wrong with that, how has it fallen, when the halls and Shepherd were so shite and Ashley was so astute a businessman ?

First priority of any business is to maximise revenue, under Mike Ashley is has fallen, relative to our competitors, to such a degree that many of them do not see us as their competitors anymore. You simply cannot argue with this, despite what anybody on skunkers may be saying - who equally can't bring themselves to admit how they had their heads up their arse about the old regime and so didn't appreciate them to the extent they were completely and totally taken in by Mike Ashley when he spun them a little of PR rubbish and because he was "anybody but Fred"

 

We will not splash the cash. Liverpool may have broke even, but they spent the money in the first place on "trophy signings" to compete at the higher levels which is precisely what the Halls and Shepherd had us until Mike Ashley along and took the clubs expectations and levels of competition downwards

 

 

We finished 14th the season before he bought us , so it's a little unfair to say we were competing at higher levels until he came along, no?

 

Oh and "same place the halls and shepherd found it" They borrowed it, and we're still paying for it

 

you mean qualifying for europe and the Champions League more than everybody bar 4 other teams in a period of 15 years ?

 

The joke is, lad, [see the bold bit] you've just said in your previous post you don't cherry pick

 

That's 2 examples.

 

 

Ok, Liverpool aren't in the Champions League this season because they weren't top 4 last season. They have new owners. If they don't finish top 4 this season, is it because their old owners took them backwards?

 

nah, we are the only club ever in the history of football that had a board which took a club backwards

Edited February 11, 2011 by LeazesMag

[Guest]

Perhaps the Glaziers should get Man Utd relegated, sell it to a new owner, then when the new owners don't qualify for europe next season the Glaziers can divert blame because they qualified for europe every season before the last one. Ashley didn't buy a team in europe. He bought one that finished 14th. Fuck me.

[Guest]

Can we just be clear what you're saying when you say 'ambition' though. By ambition you mean someone who's prepared to spunk tens of millions of their own money on signings and/or servicing substantial debt. So basically Saudi oil or Russian gas billionaires. Because there's not that many of them at the end of the day and even less that want to buy football clubs. I think that's where Skidders exaccerbation comes from in part and I share that too fwiw, because some people seem to think that just the mere mention of the word 'ambition' sends you catapulting up the league.

 

This isn't getting done on tick anymore (unless it's leveraged debt like at Man U) until credit becomes available/money becomes cheap again.

Ambition doesn’t equate to spunking tens of millions on new signings. Ambition in footballing terms is about wanting to fulfil your potential and loitering around the PL is way below NUFC’s potential.

 

Take the ten year ST freeze bollocks. It’s a blatant admission the club are expecting to do jack shit over the next decade, that they have no interest in increasing their revenues though giving the punters a better product. Inflation alone will reduce our ability to bring in better players unless our revenue rises.

 

exactly. He's another dope who doesn't seem to get it and takes a point to the extremes. If you don't need to show ambition, why do the successful clubs do it ? What a prick.

 

At least he's not responding to me this time

Tbf Leazes, you're guilty of that too. You oversimplify the matter at hand and take it to extremes too. I agree with your sentiment but ASM's view (or some of his views) have merit too. As do manc-mag's. You can just say 'ambition' is required then not qualify that. You can't just point to the previous regime as they couldn't have done things in the same way in the current climate. That's not a defence of Ashley but, on the whole, ASM doesn't defend Ashley either. manc-mag certainly doesn't. Just saying like.

 

While I accept what you say, ASM cherry picks and genuinely thinks you can put together a good team and reach the heights of the ex board by buying exclusively from the lower leagues and bargain basements, which is simply not possible, it has never happened.

 

MancMag too, seems to think that all I want is big money players, I've stated numerous times that buying the best proven players from other clubs is only part of it, but it lays down statements, it increases your profile and status [see maximising financial potential] and attracting other top footballers.

 

Both come under the same barrier. Success costs money, consistent success costs big money, this has ALWAYS been the way. MancMag has made reference to "trophy players" in the thread about Benny Arentoft, then tried to say it is me derailing the thread. Pathetic.

 

The winners take gambles, the losers sell their best players to the gamblers. Look through history, including our own, and you will see this is the reality of football.

 

SOURCE? QUOTE?

 

You'll ignore this, you utter embarrassment.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...mp;#entry864974

 

apology accepted.

 

 

 

I can't see where it says I believe we can reach the heights of the last board? Perhaps quote and bold this for me.

 

so what exactly is your ambition ? To stay in the premiership ? Mike Ashley will wank over supporters like you if you are happy with that.

 

 

To get the club in a financial position to be able to afford better players.