Stable Financial Footing

[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.

 

 

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

 

better than Andy Carroll ?

[Tom 14011]

[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.

 

better than Andy Carroll ?

 

 

We managed without Andy Cole, didn't we?

[Guest Your Name Here]

Aye. We sold Cole for £6m and bought Ferdinand for £6m.

[Guest]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

[Guest Your Name Here]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

Cole went in January 95. Ferdinand was bought in the summer of 95 and was one of the top strikers in the country at the time. There wasn’t any of this shit about using the incoming transfer fee to fund wages. We sold a quality player and replaced him with a quality player.

 

What do you think our net transfer spend should be this summer? Let’s have a benchmark of how ambitious you think Ashley is.

Edited February 11, 2011 by Your Name Here

[LeazesMag 0]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

Cole went in January 95. Ferdinand was bought in the summer of 95 and was one of the top strikers in the country at the time. There wasn’t any of this shit about using the incoming transfer fee to fund wages. We sold a quality player and replaced him with a quality player.

 

What do you think our net transfer spend should be this summer? Let’s have a benchmark of how ambitious you think Ashley is.

 

it was also the managers decision to sell Cole, because he wanted to change the team around, and stood on the steps and told everybody.

 

As usual, Skidders not seeing the point. How dense is he ?

[plausibledenial 0]

Andy Cole out ...Sir Les ferdinand in ..

 

Andy Carroll out ...Shefki Kuqi in ...

 

When youre in a hole and all that : )

[Guest]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

Cole went in January 95. Ferdinand was bought in the summer of 95 and was one of the top strikers in the country at the time. There wasn’t any of this shit about using the incoming transfer fee to fund wages. We sold a quality player and replaced him with a quality player.

 

What do you think our net transfer spend should be this summer? Let’s have a benchmark of how ambitious you think Ashley is.

 

 

Again relating ambition to spending. I think it should be an amount that doesn't leave the club in debt, anything beyond that isn't ambition, it's stupidity.

[Guest]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

Cole went in January 95. Ferdinand was bought in the summer of 95 and was one of the top strikers in the country at the time. There wasn’t any of this shit about using the incoming transfer fee to fund wages. We sold a quality player and replaced him with a quality player.

 

What do you think our net transfer spend should be this summer? Let’s have a benchmark of how ambitious you think Ashley is.

 

it was also the managers decision to sell Cole, because he wanted to change the team around, and stood on the steps and told everybody.

 

As usual, Skidders not seeing the point. How dense is he ?

 

 

Do you not think £35m is team/club changing money like?

[Guest]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

Cole went in January 95. Ferdinand was bought in the summer of 95 and was one of the top strikers in the country at the time. There wasn’t any of this shit about using the incoming transfer fee to fund wages. We sold a quality player and replaced him with a quality player.

 

What do you think our net transfer spend should be this summer? Let’s have a benchmark of how ambitious you think Ashley is.

 

it was also the managers decision to sell Cole, because he wanted to change the team around, and stood on the steps and told everybody.

 

As usual, Skidders not seeing the point. How dense is he ?

 

 

The bitter irony

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[plausibledenial 0]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

Cole went in January 95. Ferdinand was bought in the summer of 95 and was one of the top strikers in the country at the time. There wasn’t any of this shit about using the incoming transfer fee to fund wages. We sold a quality player and replaced him with a quality player.

 

What do you think our net transfer spend should be this summer? Let’s have a benchmark of how ambitious you think Ashley is.

 

it was also the managers decision to sell Cole, because he wanted to change the team around, and stood on the steps and told everybody.

 

As usual, Skidders not seeing the point. How dense is he ?

 

 

Do you not think £35m is team/club changing money like?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Only if you fuckin well spend it : )

[LeazesMag 0]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

Cole went in January 95. Ferdinand was bought in the summer of 95 and was one of the top strikers in the country at the time. There wasn’t any of this shit about using the incoming transfer fee to fund wages. We sold a quality player and replaced him with a quality player.

 

What do you think our net transfer spend should be this summer? Let’s have a benchmark of how ambitious you think Ashley is.

 

 

Again relating ambition to spending. I think it should be an amount that doesn't leave the club in debt, anything beyond that isn't ambition, it's stupidity.

 

ah, back to that old chestnut. According to you, if you look at the latest figures [posted elsewhere] that means about 16 premiership clubs are stupid, and ironically some of them are in the Champions League while we sorry, you, talk about survival being your goal.

 

When will the message get through - sigh

[Guest]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

Cole went in January 95. Ferdinand was bought in the summer of 95 and was one of the top strikers in the country at the time. There wasn’t any of this shit about using the incoming transfer fee to fund wages. We sold a quality player and replaced him with a quality player.

 

What do you think our net transfer spend should be this summer? Let’s have a benchmark of how ambitious you think Ashley is.

 

 

Again relating ambition to spending. I think it should be an amount that doesn't leave the club in debt, anything beyond that isn't ambition, it's stupidity.

 

ah, back to that old chestnut. According to you, if you look at the latest figures [posted elsewhere] that means about 16 premiership clubs are stupid, and ironically some of them are in the Champions League while we sorry, you, talk about survival being your goal.

 

When will the message get through - sigh

 

 

SOURCEQUOTENOW?

[LeazesMag 0]

skidmarks should get himself out and drink some John Smiths instead of that Carling or whatever lemonade he drinks, ie get a life. It might help his brain.

[Guest]

skidmarks should get himself out and drink some John Smiths instead of that Carling or whatever lemonade he drinks, ie get a life. It might help his brain.

 

 

3.8%

[LeazesMag 0]

skidmarks should get himself out and drink some John Smiths instead of that Carling or whatever lemonade he drinks, ie get a life. It might help his brain.

 

 

3.8%

 

try it, it might help you. I realise you need to justify yourself or something, and I understand you might be pissed, the gibberish you spout get yourself out man.

 

[Guest Your Name Here]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

Cole went in January 95. Ferdinand was bought in the summer of 95 and was one of the top strikers in the country at the time. There wasn’t any of this shit about using the incoming transfer fee to fund wages. We sold a quality player and replaced him with a quality player.

 

What do you think our net transfer spend should be this summer? Let’s have a benchmark of how ambitious you think Ashley is.

 

 

Again relating ambition to spending. I think it should be an amount that doesn't leave the club in debt, anything beyond that isn't ambition, it's stupidity.

The club is in debt. Are you proposing we don’t buy any more players until it is paid off?

[Guest]

skidmarks should get himself out and drink some John Smiths instead of that Carling or whatever lemonade he drinks, ie get a life. It might help his brain.

 

 

3.8%

 

try it, it might help you. I realise you need to justify yourself or something, and I understand you might be pissed, the gibberish you spout get yourself out man.

 

 

 

I don't think it'd be worth getting the sack for. I know you don't work and that, you wouldn't pass an aptitude test, but some of us have to!

[Guest]

I think you're being economical with the truth there mate but then, posting that makes your point better so leave it be

Cole went in January 95. Ferdinand was bought in the summer of 95 and was one of the top strikers in the country at the time. There wasn’t any of this shit about using the incoming transfer fee to fund wages. We sold a quality player and replaced him with a quality player.

 

What do you think our net transfer spend should be this summer? Let’s have a benchmark of how ambitious you think Ashley is.

 

 

Again relating ambition to spending. I think it should be an amount that doesn't leave the club in debt, anything beyond that isn't ambition, it's stupidity.

The club is in debt. Are you proposing we don’t buy any more players until it is paid off?

 

 

I'm proposing that there's a fine line between being ambitious and spending recklessly. Do you really need that explaining to you though, really? I'll rephrase for the daft cunt, I think it should be an amount that doesn't leave the club with an increasing debt, i.e operating at a loss.

Edited February 11, 2011 by AshleysSkidMark

[LeazesMag 0]

skidmarks should get himself out and drink some John Smiths instead of that Carling or whatever lemonade he drinks, ie get a life. It might help his brain.

 

 

3.8%

 

try it, it might help you. I realise you need to justify yourself or something, and I understand you might be pissed, the gibberish you spout get yourself out man.

 

 

 

I don't think it'd be worth getting the sack for. I know you don't work and that, you wouldn't pass an aptitude test, but some of us have to!

 

 

haha, I'm 56 and had a good life thanks, you would happy to be a quid behind me skidders

[Guest]

No quote then?

[Toonpack 9409]

5un1uns Accounts:

 

Key highlights are;

 

Turnover is flat at £65m. However in there you have TV revenue +11% being offset by reductions in gate receipts (-9%), sponsorship (-4%), conferencing (-22%) and retail (-16%).

 

Wages:Turnover ratio has increased to 82.2%, up from 76.8% in 2009.

 

Loss for the year has increased to -£27.9m, up from a loss of -£26.5m in 2009.

 

The 4 directors (Quinn, Walton, Callaghan & Byrne) paid themselves £1.12m, down from £1.94m the previous year. The highest paid director (doesn't state who) earned £326k (down from £888k in 2009).

 

Ellis Short wrote off £19m of existing loans due from the club and invested a further £22.4m in the year to July 2010. These are interest free unsecured loans.

 

Due to the losses made, Sunderland's directors have had to request a commitment from Ellis Short that he is willing and able to continue to support the operations of the company for the foreseeable future. Short has provided this.

 

The club spent £39.3m in transfer fees in the year and recouped £12.0m.

 

The club still owes £15.5m on transfer fees plus potentially another £6.5m depending on performance of players bought.

Edited February 15, 2011 by Toonpack

[LeazesMag 0]

5un1uns Accounts:

 

Key highlights are;

 

Turnover is flat at £65m. However in there you have TV revenue +11% being offset by reductions in gate receipts (-9%), sponsorship (-4%), conferencing (-22%) and retail (-16%).

 

Wages:Turnover ratio has increased to 82.2%, up from 76.8% in 2009.

 

Loss for the year has increased to -£27.9m, up from a loss of -£26.5m in 2009.

 

The 4 directors (Quinn, Walton, Callaghan & Byrne) paid themselves £1.12m, down from £1.94m the previous year. The highest paid director (doesn't state who) earned £326k (down from £888k in 2009).

 

Ellis Short wrote off £19m of existing loans due from the club and invested a further £22.4m in the year to July 2010. These are interest free unsecured loans.

 

Due to the losses made, Sunderland's directors have had to request a commitment from Ellis Short that he is willing and able to continue to support the operations of the company for the foreseeable future. Short has provided this.

 

The club spent £39.3m in transfer fees in the year and recouped £12.0m.

 

The club still owes £15.5m on transfer fees plus potentially another £6.5m depending on performance of players bought.

 

bet you think they should all be saying come back Bob Murray do you ?