***Official Mike Ashley Euro express thread***

[LeazesMag 0]

Did you go to SToke City in 1968, Watford in 1974, Brighton in 1983 or Burnley in 1969 ?

 

You don't know, man! You weren't there!

 

silly boy. I was, during some of that time, looking over my shoulder when I travelled on trains all over the UK, for bombs planted by your "freedom fighter heroes cowards", although fortunately nobody got me.

[LeazesMag 0]

I knew you'd like that. The expansion of the club in the 90s was a combination of the right ambition at the right time, the two factors working together to produce fantastic results both on and off the pitch. Not possible without Keegan but the evironment was just right for us to massively expand due to the massive increase in revenues from all aspects of the game.

 

how did nobody else ie expand, such as Sheff Wed for instance, do it better than we did ?

 

Face it Chez, your excuses for Mike Ashley are wearing thin. The bottom line is he is not showing the will to compete with his rivals like his predecessors, but I have been saying this for over 4 years, and told people longer than that, that is was far from automatic that any new owner would be "better than Fred".

[NJS 4385]

 

Did you go to SToke City in 1968, Watford in 1974, Brighton in 1983 or Burnley in 1969 ?

 

Went to Brighton. Others were before my time.

 

The point is if you try and make out that its black and white between the regimes I'm going to point out they both pulled the same shit at various times.

 

Windows with no money spent, players bought and sold behind backs and pissing on the fans on various issues were/are all too common to both.

[ChezGiven 0]

I knew you'd like that. The expansion of the club in the 90s was a combination of the right ambition at the right time, the two factors working together to produce fantastic results both on and off the pitch. Not possible without Keegan but the evironment was just right for us to massively expand due to the massive increase in revenues from all aspects of the game.

 

how did nobody else ie expand, such as Sheff Wed for instance, do it better than we did ?

 

Face it Chez, your excuses for Mike Ashley are wearing thin. The bottom line is he is not showing the will to compete with his rivals like his predecessors, but I have been saying this for over 4 years, and told people longer than that, that is was far from automatic that any new owner would be "better than Fred".

 

Sheff Wed played in the premiership as much as we did in the 90's but thats not really the point. The fact that you interpret my posts today as 'excuses for ashley' speak volumes about your troubled psyche. I was providing context on the success of the 90s, some of which was down to ambition and some of which was down to external influences. I never once mentioned Ashley.

[LeazesMag 0]

Did you go to SToke City in 1968, Watford in 1974, Brighton in 1983 or Burnley in 1969 ?

 

Went to Brighton. Others were before my time.

 

The point is if you try and make out that its black and white between the regimes I'm going to point out they both pulled the same shit at various times.

 

Windows with no money spent, players bought and sold behind backs and pissing on the fans on various issues were/are all too common to both.

 

at the end of the day, nobody else has came close to having the 5th highest average league position in 15 years, qualfied for the Champions League and europe more than any other club bar 4 in 15 years, transformed the club from one that could not be sold for 1.25m quid into one that had the 14th biggest revenues in football, expanded the cow shed of a stadium that was half full into one of the best in europe - a development that previous directors and owners had failed to get done for over 80 years since the original development was first muted, broke the world transfer record, and attracted title winnng managers to the club.

 

You can't argue with the facts, whatever occasional "shit" comes with it. I think most sensible football supporters would put up with a little bit of shit for that, which they did at the time, before developing an irrational hatred for the people who made it all possible. So much for knowledgeable supporters, most clubs would have killed for what we had during those years.

[LeazesMag 0]

I knew you'd like that. The expansion of the club in the 90s was a combination of the right ambition at the right time, the two factors working together to produce fantastic results both on and off the pitch. Not possible without Keegan but the evironment was just right for us to massively expand due to the massive increase in revenues from all aspects of the game.

 

how did nobody else ie expand, such as Sheff Wed for instance, do it better than we did ?

 

Face it Chez, your excuses for Mike Ashley are wearing thin. The bottom line is he is not showing the will to compete with his rivals like his predecessors, but I have been saying this for over 4 years, and told people longer than that, that is was far from automatic that any new owner would be "better than Fred".

 

Sheff Wed played in the premiership as much as we did in the 90's but thats not really the point. The fact that you interpret my posts today as 'excuses for ashley' speak volumes about your troubled psyche. I was providing context on the success of the 90s, some of which was down to ambition and some of which was down to external influences. I never once mentioned Ashley.

 

yes it is. The point is that your scaremongering is nothing more than that, and whatever "changes" football has gone through, those changes affected EVERY club, but WE had directors who competed against their rivals more than the vast majority of other clubs, in fact all other clubs bar 4 and that is subject to debate considering the starting point when put against manU, Liverpool and Arsenal.

 

Don't let the footballing facts get in the way of your spreadsheets though.

[ChezGiven 0]

 

yes it is. The point is that your scaremongering is nothing more than that, and whatever "changes" football has gone through, those changes affected EVERY club, but WE had directors who competed against their rivals more than the vast majority of other clubs, in fact all other clubs bar 4 and that is subject to debate considering the starting point when put against manU, Liverpool and Arsenal.

 

Don't let the footballing facts get in the way of your spreadsheets though.

I'm not using spreadsheets, am speaking from experience. The only thing scarey about this exchange is that you think i'm scaremongering. I'm the positive soothsayer, trying to reassure people that their may be some method to the apparent madness, you're the merchant of doom, not me.

 

The way we competed in the 90s was fantastic but there were exceptional environmental factors also driving the club forward. Thats why you cant compare the club's performance across time within the same framework.

[NJS 4385]

So if the four have become six and we could only ever get as high as fifth in that sense with the right approach how do you think we can improve on that now?

[trophyshy 7083]

 

you have to actually go to games to understand this point of view.

 

I go to games and I don't understand this point of view, but I don't smoke tabs in the bog so maybe I missed the meeting.

 

Don't we have to pay for any tickets not bought from the allocation? 800 £30 tickets is £24k.

 

Thank you for offering something more concrete than, 'you'd know if you went to the games'.

 

I've not been able to confirm what you suggest but it makes sense as either club may feel they could sell out for certain games. i'd say it was generous of Brighton to offer us more in this instance as they should sell out.

 

Lets work it through with estimation then. Tickets are actually £24 but we'll round down across the board for concessions and maths.

 

800 tickets @ £20 each go completely unsold, beyond unlikely, but lets look at worst case.

 

Ashley pays £16,000 to Brighton but this must class as gate receipts from Brighton's point of view whether they sell or not.

 

Estimated Brighton gate receipts for the night are £540 000 (capacity 22,500 x £20)

 

10% is taken by the FA £54,000

 

Each club gets 45% £243,000

 

So Ashley gets 45% of his outlay back = £7,200, meaning that his risk of taking on extra allocation and not selling a single one is £8,800.

 

Risk per ticket = £11

 

His potential reward for selling all the tickets is only £7,200 and he might get that anyway if their fans get excited about the Toon coming. So he doesn't stump up £16,000 but could still stand to make an extra £7,200

 

Therefore he'd rather have the risk sit with the opponent (which is no risk to them as they don't have to pre-purchase their own tickets).

 

Fits in with his way of working, maintains his poor treatment of the fans.

 

Thank you Chez.

[Gemmill 44879]

Spreadsheet alert.

[ChezGiven 0]

Spreadsheet alert.

If the farming analogies dont work, bombard them with calculations!

[PaddockLad 17257]

Taken from the book

 

Good book that. You going to post the chapter from the same book on Olympique Lyon as well, which details how they became one of the best teams in Europe for a decade by selling their best players and replacing them the season before they leave with carefully scouted yet equally impressive young players?

 

There's a chance Ashley, Dekka Graham Carr have read it and taken note, it would appear that they're trying something similar. I'm in two minds about the whole thing really. Spurs have gone a long way by this system too. Maybe its early days in the "plan"(?). But I truly beleive that our 6 best players will be sold in the next 18 months. Spurs and Lyon didnt do that.

[trophyshy 7083]

Our last plan, ultimately, didn't work. Is it wrong to try a different method?

 

What did that bloke say about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?

[Andrew 4748]

Our last plan, ultimately, didn't work. Is it wrong to try a different method?

 

What did that bloke say about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?

 

He didnt go to games though

[trophyshy 7083]

Our last plan, ultimately, didn't work. Is it wrong to try a different method?

 

What did that bloke say about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?

 

He didnt go to games though

 

[toonotl 2979]

Our last plan, ultimately, didn't work. Is it wrong to try a different method?

 

What did that bloke say about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?

 

Glass houses. Considering who you're arguing with tbf.

[trophyshy 7083]

Not really in a glass house, I'm not an MACS, just fair to note that teams have achieved success in different ways. While it remains to be seen what will happen with his tenure is it unreasonable to try the thrifty evolution/acquisition model when the throw money at it for 15 years model failed to bring any silverware and left us in rather large amounts debt?

[PaddockLad 17257]

Our last plan, ultimately, didn't work. Is it wrong to try a different method? What did that bloke say about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?

 

Yeah but I don't trust the current regime to do it "the Lyon way" if you like.

 

Can we make players stay with us? Colo, if you ask me, will/is in the process of "do/doing an Enrique" and will try to let his contract run out.

So he may well, at the age of 29, be first out the door, possibly next week. What do we do? make him an offer we cant refuse? Honestly we're fuckin mid table dross without him this season.Could Graham Carr get a player remotely as good to join in January?

 

This is all supposition, the player and/or the board may prove me completely wrong, I hope they do. But for all thats gone before I don't for a minute trust them to make a good fist of it. Hopes are raised, the past 2 and a half seasons have largely been enjoyable, I just think all the hard work may go tits up if the likes of Krul,Tiote,Cabaye and Demba all leave/are sold. Carr is key. The most important figure at the club for me.

[Guest CabayeAye]

 

Did you go to SToke City in 1968, Watford in 1974, Brighton in 1983 or Burnley in 1969 ?

 

Nobody else on this forum was even born then, you archaic bellend!

[ChezGiven 0]

1983? i think you'll find quite a few were born by 1974 too.

[Guest CabayeAye]

So are you admitting to stinking off piss and rusks too, ChezGiven?

[ChezGiven 0]

Only after a massive session.

[Guest alex]

Piss and rusks. Mmm.

[Baggio 0]

So we're in a position where we want the Scousers to win the cup final to keep 7th spot a possibility for Europe.

[Baggio 0]

Maybe this should be posted in the FA Cup thread but its another indication of the small time penny pinching attitude of Ashley.

 

Basically we have sold our initial allocation of 2,500 tickets for Brighton (quite amazing and a demonstration of how big this club is) but we have declined an additional allocation of 800 tickets. Thats quite disgraceful from Ashley, he regularly accepts reduced allocations for away games and he is depriving a further 800 fans of getting the chance to see their club play in the FA Cup.

 

Is this sort of penny pinching the actions of a man who has great ambitions to drive the club forward and challenge for a top 4 place?

 

This was brought up at the supporters panel with Mort when it first started up, one of the lads from .com I think it was made the point about the club not taking the smallest possible allocation under Shepherd as they thought his thinking was the less tickets they sell the more people he will get in Shearer's bar to watch the games.

 

So the club went down the road of gauging demand for tickets by threads on Newcatle-Online etc, plenty said they should take the full allocation as they would sell out until the time came and there were plenty left over which the club had to pay for, so since then if the demand isn't there at the ticket office then they will just take the smaller allocation.