Guest Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I don't think he'd have skipped due diligence without there being a very good reason to. I love you really, btw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I don't think he'd have skipped due diligence without there being a very good reason to. I love you really, btw Name one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I don't think he'd have skipped due diligence without there being a very good reason to. I love you really, btw Name one. A deadline for the sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I don't think he'd have skipped due diligence without there being a very good reason to. I love you really, btw Name one. A deadline for the sale. It would be reason, but not a good one. Would you pay top wack for car if the vendor set a deadline that prevented you from checking the engine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I don't think he'd have skipped due diligence without there being a very good reason to. I love you really, btw Name one. A deadline for the sale. It would be reason, but not a good one. Would you pay top wack for car if the vendor set a deadline that prevented you from checking the engine? No, but then theres millions of cars in the uk, there's 20 premiership football clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I don't think he'd have skipped due diligence without there being a very good reason to. I love you really, btw Name one. A deadline for the sale. It would be reason, but not a good one. Would you pay top wack for car if the vendor set a deadline that prevented you from checking the engine? No, but then theres millions of cars in the uk, there's 20 premiership football clubs. Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 (edited) I don't think he'd have skipped due diligence without there being a very good reason to. I love you really, btw Name one. A deadline for the sale. It would be reason, but not a good one. Would you pay top wack for car if the vendor set a deadline that prevented you from checking the engine? No, but then theres millions of cars in the uk, there's 20 premiership football clubs. Why not? Thought I'd just answered that. Because there's millions of cars to choose from, as said, there's 20 premiership football clubs. Edited February 9, 2011 by AshleysSkidMark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Edited February 10, 2011 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Hall and Shepherd did a lot for the club and it was only in the last two or three years of their tenure that things started to go awry. Backing a manager with £50m is no bad thing, backing Souness with that amount of money was a major cock up. However, when you look at the big picture the good they did far outweighed the bad. What I don’t buy is the idea Ashley saved the club from administration. We had about £70m of debt most of which was a structured loan for redeveloping the ground, in others words most of it was a sound long term investment. The debt was nothing out of the ordinary for a PL club. The operating costs were a different matter. A £30m a year loss isn’t sustainable and something had to be done. Something sensible, not Ashley’s ham fisted cost cutting assault on the fabric of the club that got us relegated and cost the club £50m. I don’t want to talk about Shepherd and Hall but as long as they are blamed for Ashley’s mistakes it’s hard not too. They were far from perfect but they are not to blame for the state the club is in now and the sooner people stop letting Ashley of the hook the sooner we’ll get shot of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoular 0 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? It's you that doesn't understand what they did for the club. I have a balanced view on them. I am grateful that they got the crowds up, got us into europe regularly and challenged at the top. I am angry that they sacked our best manager and blew £50m backing Graham Souness, leaving us in a level of debt that so high that we could no longer compete. They took us the the top then let us down through their own poor decision making. That's what I understand. Your inability to take a balanced view means you're the only one who's opinion of them is 'irrational', to quote yourself. You also seem unable to comprehend that Ashley didn't take over a club that was regularly qualifying for Europe. I understand that the club was in a state when the Halls/Shepherd came in. But in Ashley's case, the state the club was in wasn't a case of drawing the crowds back etc. Without spending his own money, something the old board didn't do, there's little alternative to the "bargain basement" culture we've adopted. Lack of ambition is a daft criticism too, you can be ambitious without spending recklessly. We've signed quality players. Our back 4 is as strong as it's ever been (though last weekend might fool you), the signings of Tiote and Ben Arfa are top quality, and Nolan and Barton are two of the best leaders on the pitch we've had in years. Ambition whilst working within sensible financial restraints is difficult, but I don't think we're doing too badly with it. We need two top quality strikers in the summer and we need some more cover. Edited February 10, 2011 by AshleysSkidMark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Hall and Shepherd did a lot for the club and it was only in the last two or three years of their tenure that things started to go awry. Backing a manager with £50m is no bad thing, backing Souness with that amount of money was a major cock up. However, when you look at the big picture the good they did far outweighed the bad. What I don’t buy is the idea Ashley saved the club from administration. We had about £70m of debt most of which was a structured loan for redeveloping the ground, in others words most of it was a sound long term investment. The debt was nothing out of the ordinary for a PL club. The operating costs were a different matter. A £30m a year loss isn’t sustainable and something had to be done. Something sensible, not Ashley’s ham fisted cost cutting assault on the fabric of the club that got us relegated and cost the club £50m. I don’t want to talk about Shepherd and Hall but as long as they are blamed for Ashley’s mistakes it’s hard not too. They were far from perfect but they are not to blame for the state the club is in now and the sooner people stop letting Ashley of the hook the sooner we’ll get shot of him. Don't just point fingers without offering alternative solutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEADMAN 0 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 heh 30million for carroll all we have in loan is this shuqi player. huh tipical ashley get cheap but keep the rest of the money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Hall and Shepherd did a lot for the club and it was only in the last two or three years of their tenure that things started to go awry. Backing a manager with £50m is no bad thing, backing Souness with that amount of money was a major cock up. However, when you look at the big picture the good they did far outweighed the bad. What I don’t buy is the idea Ashley saved the club from administration. We had about £70m of debt most of which was a structured loan for redeveloping the ground, in others words most of it was a sound long term investment. The debt was nothing out of the ordinary for a PL club. The operating costs were a different matter. A £30m a year loss isn’t sustainable and something had to be done. Something sensible, not Ashley’s ham fisted cost cutting assault on the fabric of the club that got us relegated and cost the club £50m. I don’t want to talk about Shepherd and Hall but as long as they are blamed for Ashley’s mistakes it’s hard not too. They were far from perfect but they are not to blame for the state the club is in now and the sooner people stop letting Ashley of the hook the sooner we’ll get shot of him. Don't just point fingers without offering alternative solutions. A solution? How about a gradual reduction in the operating deficit set against a background of stability, thereby retaining our Premier League status and boosting the coffers by at least £50m. The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Hall and Shepherd did a lot for the club and it was only in the last two or three years of their tenure that things started to go awry. Backing a manager with £50m is no bad thing, backing Souness with that amount of money was a major cock up. However, when you look at the big picture the good they did far outweighed the bad. What I don’t buy is the idea Ashley saved the club from administration. We had about £70m of debt most of which was a structured loan for redeveloping the ground, in others words most of it was a sound long term investment. The debt was nothing out of the ordinary for a PL club. The operating costs were a different matter. A £30m a year loss isn’t sustainable and something had to be done. Something sensible, not Ashley’s ham fisted cost cutting assault on the fabric of the club that got us relegated and cost the club £50m. I don’t want to talk about Shepherd and Hall but as long as they are blamed for Ashley’s mistakes it’s hard not too. They were far from perfect but they are not to blame for the state the club is in now and the sooner people stop letting Ashley of the hook the sooner we’ll get shot of him. Don't just point fingers without offering alternative solutions. A solution? How about a gradual reduction in the operating deficit set against a background of stability, thereby retaining our Premier League status and boosting the coffers by at least £50m. The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. Operating at a huge loss and you suggest gradually reducing it. Surely it's like an oil leak, you want to plug it asap, I would have thought. If you do it slowly, more leaks out. Relegation wasn't because of cost-cutting either, it was because of the farcical events of the season, and big money players not being up for it (generally what happens when you sign trophy players, they couldn't give a fuck) Edited February 10, 2011 by AshleysSkidMark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Hall and Shepherd did a lot for the club and it was only in the last two or three years of their tenure that things started to go awry. Backing a manager with £50m is no bad thing, backing Souness with that amount of money was a major cock up. However, when you look at the big picture the good they did far outweighed the bad. What I don’t buy is the idea Ashley saved the club from administration. We had about £70m of debt most of which was a structured loan for redeveloping the ground, in others words most of it was a sound long term investment. The debt was nothing out of the ordinary for a PL club. The operating costs were a different matter. A £30m a year loss isn’t sustainable and something had to be done. Something sensible, not Ashley’s ham fisted cost cutting assault on the fabric of the club that got us relegated and cost the club £50m. I don’t want to talk about Shepherd and Hall but as long as they are blamed for Ashley’s mistakes it’s hard not too. They were far from perfect but they are not to blame for the state the club is in now and the sooner people stop letting Ashley of the hook the sooner we’ll get shot of him. Don't just point fingers without offering alternative solutions. A solution? How about a gradual reduction in the operating deficit set against a background of stability, thereby retaining our Premier League status and boosting the coffers by at least £50m. The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. Operating at a huge loss and you suggest gradually reducing it. Surely it's like an oil leak, you want to plug it asap, I would have thought. If you do it slowly, more leaks out. Relegation wasn't because of cost-cutting either, it was because of the farcical events of the season, and big money players not being up for it (generally what happens when you sign trophy players, they couldn't give a fuck) The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Hall and Shepherd did a lot for the club and it was only in the last two or three years of their tenure that things started to go awry. Backing a manager with £50m is no bad thing, backing Souness with that amount of money was a major cock up. However, when you look at the big picture the good they did far outweighed the bad. What I don’t buy is the idea Ashley saved the club from administration. We had about £70m of debt most of which was a structured loan for redeveloping the ground, in others words most of it was a sound long term investment. The debt was nothing out of the ordinary for a PL club. The operating costs were a different matter. A £30m a year loss isn’t sustainable and something had to be done. Something sensible, not Ashley’s ham fisted cost cutting assault on the fabric of the club that got us relegated and cost the club £50m. I don’t want to talk about Shepherd and Hall but as long as they are blamed for Ashley’s mistakes it’s hard not too. They were far from perfect but they are not to blame for the state the club is in now and the sooner people stop letting Ashley of the hook the sooner we’ll get shot of him. Don't just point fingers without offering alternative solutions. A solution? How about a gradual reduction in the operating deficit set against a background of stability, thereby retaining our Premier League status and boosting the coffers by at least £50m. The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. Operating at a huge loss and you suggest gradually reducing it. Surely it's like an oil leak, you want to plug it asap, I would have thought. If you do it slowly, more leaks out. Relegation wasn't because of cost-cutting either, it was because of the farcical events of the season, and big money players not being up for it (generally what happens when you sign trophy players, they couldn't give a fuck) The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. I don't see how the price he paid relates really. I doubt if he'd have been able to buy it for the lower, reflected price you suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Hall and Shepherd did a lot for the club and it was only in the last two or three years of their tenure that things started to go awry. Backing a manager with £50m is no bad thing, backing Souness with that amount of money was a major cock up. However, when you look at the big picture the good they did far outweighed the bad. What I don’t buy is the idea Ashley saved the club from administration. We had about £70m of debt most of which was a structured loan for redeveloping the ground, in others words most of it was a sound long term investment. The debt was nothing out of the ordinary for a PL club. The operating costs were a different matter. A £30m a year loss isn’t sustainable and something had to be done. Something sensible, not Ashley’s ham fisted cost cutting assault on the fabric of the club that got us relegated and cost the club £50m. I don’t want to talk about Shepherd and Hall but as long as they are blamed for Ashley’s mistakes it’s hard not too. They were far from perfect but they are not to blame for the state the club is in now and the sooner people stop letting Ashley of the hook the sooner we’ll get shot of him. Don't just point fingers without offering alternative solutions. A solution? How about a gradual reduction in the operating deficit set against a background of stability, thereby retaining our Premier League status and boosting the coffers by at least £50m. The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. Operating at a huge loss and you suggest gradually reducing it. Surely it's like an oil leak, you want to plug it asap, I would have thought. If you do it slowly, more leaks out. Relegation wasn't because of cost-cutting either, it was because of the farcical events of the season, and big money players not being up for it (generally what happens when you sign trophy players, they couldn't give a fuck) The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. I don't see how the price he paid relates really. I doubt if he'd have been able to buy it for the lower, reflected price you suggest. Then he shouldn’t have bought it then should he. Nobody was holding a gun to his head. He took a huge gamble, fucked up and nearly four years later we had to sell our best player because the club is (apparently) still neck deep in financial shit. It's pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Hall and Shepherd did a lot for the club and it was only in the last two or three years of their tenure that things started to go awry. Backing a manager with £50m is no bad thing, backing Souness with that amount of money was a major cock up. However, when you look at the big picture the good they did far outweighed the bad. What I don’t buy is the idea Ashley saved the club from administration. We had about £70m of debt most of which was a structured loan for redeveloping the ground, in others words most of it was a sound long term investment. The debt was nothing out of the ordinary for a PL club. The operating costs were a different matter. A £30m a year loss isn’t sustainable and something had to be done. Something sensible, not Ashley’s ham fisted cost cutting assault on the fabric of the club that got us relegated and cost the club £50m. I don’t want to talk about Shepherd and Hall but as long as they are blamed for Ashley’s mistakes it’s hard not too. They were far from perfect but they are not to blame for the state the club is in now and the sooner people stop letting Ashley of the hook the sooner we’ll get shot of him. Don't just point fingers without offering alternative solutions. A solution? How about a gradual reduction in the operating deficit set against a background of stability, thereby retaining our Premier League status and boosting the coffers by at least £50m. The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. Operating at a huge loss and you suggest gradually reducing it. Surely it's like an oil leak, you want to plug it asap, I would have thought. If you do it slowly, more leaks out. Relegation wasn't because of cost-cutting either, it was because of the farcical events of the season, and big money players not being up for it (generally what happens when you sign trophy players, they couldn't give a fuck) The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. I don't see how the price he paid relates really. I doubt if he'd have been able to buy it for the lower, reflected price you suggest. Then he shouldn’t have bought it then should he. Nobody was holding a gun to his head. He took a huge gamble, fucked up and nearly four years later we had to sell our best player because the club is (apparently) still neck deep in financial shit. It's pathetic. Perhaps, but there's nothing at all to suggest we'd have been better off with the alternative. Even before relegation Ashley had put a lot of cash in, cash that I dare say wouldn't have been provided by the previous owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Hall and Shepherd did a lot for the club and it was only in the last two or three years of their tenure that things started to go awry. Backing a manager with £50m is no bad thing, backing Souness with that amount of money was a major cock up. However, when you look at the big picture the good they did far outweighed the bad. What I don’t buy is the idea Ashley saved the club from administration. We had about £70m of debt most of which was a structured loan for redeveloping the ground, in others words most of it was a sound long term investment. The debt was nothing out of the ordinary for a PL club. The operating costs were a different matter. A £30m a year loss isn’t sustainable and something had to be done. Something sensible, not Ashley’s ham fisted cost cutting assault on the fabric of the club that got us relegated and cost the club £50m. I don’t want to talk about Shepherd and Hall but as long as they are blamed for Ashley’s mistakes it’s hard not too. They were far from perfect but they are not to blame for the state the club is in now and the sooner people stop letting Ashley of the hook the sooner we’ll get shot of him. Don't just point fingers without offering alternative solutions. A solution? How about a gradual reduction in the operating deficit set against a background of stability, thereby retaining our Premier League status and boosting the coffers by at least £50m. The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. Operating at a huge loss and you suggest gradually reducing it. Surely it's like an oil leak, you want to plug it asap, I would have thought. If you do it slowly, more leaks out. Relegation wasn't because of cost-cutting either, it was because of the farcical events of the season, and big money players not being up for it (generally what happens when you sign trophy players, they couldn't give a fuck) The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. I don't see how the price he paid relates really. I doubt if he'd have been able to buy it for the lower, reflected price you suggest. Then he shouldn’t have bought it then should he. Nobody was holding a gun to his head. He took a huge gamble, fucked up and nearly four years later we had to sell our best player because the club is (apparently) still neck deep in financial shit. It's pathetic. Perhaps, but there's nothing at all to suggest we'd have been better off with the alternative. Even before relegation Ashley had put a lot of cash in, cash that I dare say wouldn't have been provided by the previous owners. What would have happened if Ashley had stayed well away is the great unknown. We might have gone into administration or we might not. We might have been bought by Sheik Mansour for £100m or Barry Moat for a quid. There’s no way of knowing, which is why it’s better to stick with what has happened and on that front Ashley is definitely taking the piss. Edited February 10, 2011 by Your Name Here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 'Consolidate that postion'? Like Leeds did? None of us honestly know what Shepherd's motive were that summer. Was he looking to recover some of the previous losses to repay the debt? Or was he looking to increase his dividend? One thing you can never accuse him of is lacking ambition. With looking to beatify him, if Ashley showed half the ambition of his predecessors then we'd all be happier fans. And I haven't. How would you like Ashley to show that ambition? Get the club into debt trying to reach a pretty unattainable top 4 position. With the money in the teams that are up there now, how much do you think it'd cost? That’s how everybody bar Man City do it. Your missing the key point. You can’t rest on your laurels in football. The moment a club stops trying to go forward it’s guaranteed to go backwards, and once that happens revenue streams start to fall and the club enters a vicious downward cycle. Nobody wants Ashley to run up huge debts in a mad dash to win the Champions League. They want him to have ambition for the club beyond having a profit on the balance sheet at the end of the season. As it stands he’s run up huge debts going nowhere. Diminishing our standing has club has cost a fortune. There’s ambition. There’s Ridsdale style madness, and there’s Bob Murray style complacency. The later of the three most reassembles how NUFC are being run. thats spot on really. And as for Ridsdale, Leeds are now on the way back, and while they have had these few years in the doldrums, talk to a Leeds supporter now and he will tell you about reaching the European Cup Semi Final, long after the downward slide has faded out of memory. Football is all about highs and lows, glory, and enjoying the highs. We don't have an FA Cup win in our lifetimes to remember and say "I was there" [i was 8 months old when we last won the FA Cup]. What I find staggering is the amount of supporters, taken in by this scaremongering about the Leeds model, who appear to be saying they would rather have semi-permanent almost complete obscurity and a healthy balance sheet while flitting between relegation and re-promotion instead, is their irrational hatred of the Halls and Shepherd, through not understanding what they did for the club. Is it really THAT extreme ? Hall and Shepherd did a lot for the club and it was only in the last two or three years of their tenure that things started to go awry. Backing a manager with £50m is no bad thing, backing Souness with that amount of money was a major cock up. However, when you look at the big picture the good they did far outweighed the bad. What I don’t buy is the idea Ashley saved the club from administration. We had about £70m of debt most of which was a structured loan for redeveloping the ground, in others words most of it was a sound long term investment. The debt was nothing out of the ordinary for a PL club. The operating costs were a different matter. A £30m a year loss isn’t sustainable and something had to be done. Something sensible, not Ashley’s ham fisted cost cutting assault on the fabric of the club that got us relegated and cost the club £50m. I don’t want to talk about Shepherd and Hall but as long as they are blamed for Ashley’s mistakes it’s hard not too. They were far from perfect but they are not to blame for the state the club is in now and the sooner people stop letting Ashley of the hook the sooner we’ll get shot of him. Don't just point fingers without offering alternative solutions. A solution? How about a gradual reduction in the operating deficit set against a background of stability, thereby retaining our Premier League status and boosting the coffers by at least £50m. The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. Operating at a huge loss and you suggest gradually reducing it. Surely it's like an oil leak, you want to plug it asap, I would have thought. If you do it slowly, more leaks out. Relegation wasn't because of cost-cutting either, it was because of the farcical events of the season, and big money players not being up for it (generally what happens when you sign trophy players, they couldn't give a fuck) The bottom line in all of this is the price Ashley paid. If the club was about to go tits up he should have paid a price that reflected the amount of investment needed to steady the ship. Instead what he did was piss money down the drain because (according to you) somebody set him a deadline and he shit his pants. I don't see how the price he paid relates really. I doubt if he'd have been able to buy it for the lower, reflected price you suggest. Then he shouldn’t have bought it then should he. Nobody was holding a gun to his head. He took a huge gamble, fucked up and nearly four years later we had to sell our best player because the club is (apparently) still neck deep in financial shit. It's pathetic. Perhaps, but there's nothing at all to suggest we'd have been better off with the alternative. Even before relegation Ashley had put a lot of cash in, cash that I dare say wouldn't have been provided by the previous owners. What would have happened if Ashley had stayed well away is the great unknown. We might have gone into administration or we might not. We might have been bought by Sheik Mansour for £100m or Barry Moat for a quid. There’s no way of knowing, which is why it’s better to stick with what has happened and on that front Ashley has been a disaster. We're higher in the league than we were when we came in, so on that front, disaster is an exaggeration. We took a huge step backwards in farcical circumstances, but even the relegation wasn't disastrous, because we've gone from strength to strength since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Quick edit from you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now