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

[McFaul 35]

So you'd be comfortable arguing that we're one of the biggest clubs in Europe then? No domestic trophies, no European finals and very limited success in the CL on the rare occasions we qualified.

 

All those numbers prove is that we can fill a big stadium.

No those figures prove that we were marketed brilliantly, gained vast media incomes due to our status then, the corporate side was booming, and people were paying bigger money for tickets than the vast majority of more successful clubs.

 

Bigger club is a very ambiguous caveat (did I use that right Alex?), it's all very personal, but we're not a successful club no one can argue that we are. I'd say there were two truly big clubs in England (Arsenal and Man Utd), two in Spain, three in Italy and one in Germany. The rest regardless what anyone says about trophies and finance, can at any time usurp all of the others outside of the 8 big clubs.

 

I think it's an absolute nonsense to claim that we are one of the biggest clubs in Europe.

 

Quite clearly we are not one of the biggest clubs in Europe, my point remains you can argue all day if you like, but it's an absolute undisputable fact, financially there were times we were Britain's second biggest club, and one of the very largest in Europe. The rest is subjective, trophies/fans etc.. you can't argue with the size of a business though.

[ewerk 31229]

and my point was and is we WERE financially in terms of income one of Europe's biggest clubs, which in modern football says a lot about a clubs size because it's not something that can be debated, it's there in front of you. We weren't articially supported like Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool etc...we made our own money and we spent it, we were at times making more money than Milan and Barcelona two of the four biggest clubs in the world. That in itself for a club which hasn't won a trophy since 1969, is one of the most staggering things you will ever read, and absolutely magnifies the sheer potential and size of Newcastle, and also the great job The Halls and Shepherd did, certainly up to 2004.

 

Nothing to do with the disparity in television and ticket income between Britain and the rest of Europe? Given that nine British teams made the top twenty.

 

I'm not saying that Shepherd did a bad job commercially, he didn't. But on its own it doesn't equate to being a big club.

[Gemmill 46093]

Quite clearly we are not one of the biggest clubs in Europe

 

So we agree!

[Guest alex]

Outside of the area there's very few people who would consider us to be one of the biggest clubs in Europe tbh. I think, since the size of a club isn't really something you can objectively quantify, that you have to take how we are perceived by outsiders as a very big indication as to how big a club we are at present.

[McFaul 35]

and my point was and is we WERE financially in terms of income one of Europe's biggest clubs, which in modern football says a lot about a clubs size because it's not something that can be debated, it's there in front of you. We weren't articially supported like Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool etc...we made our own money and we spent it, we were at times making more money than Milan and Barcelona two of the four biggest clubs in the world. That in itself for a club which hasn't won a trophy since 1969, is one of the most staggering things you will ever read, and absolutely magnifies the sheer potential and size of Newcastle, and also the great job The Halls and Shepherd did, certainly up to 2004.

 

Nothing to do with the disparity in television and ticket income between Britain and the rest of Europe? Given that nine British teams made the top twenty.

 

I'm not saying that Shepherd did a bad job commercially, he didn't. But on its own it doesn't equate to being a big club.

There's still 8 or 9 English clubs in the top 20 now, so that kind of weakens your point. Financially we were one of the biggest clubs in Europe, support wise judged on people who go to the match every week around the world we still are, but we will never be classed as such till we win trophies and not just the odd one, five or six a decade.

[LeazesMag 0]

So you'd be comfortable arguing that we're one of the biggest clubs in Europe then? No domestic trophies, no European finals and very limited success in the CL on the rare occasions we qualified.

 

All those numbers prove is that we can fill a big stadium.

 

and now, we aren't, right ?

 

Aren't what? Try and make some sense please.

 

it's fairly obvious, unless I have to clip it for you ?

[McFaul 35]

Outside of the area there's very few people who would consider us to be one of the biggest clubs in Europe tbh. I think, since the size of a club isn't really something you can objectively quantify, that you have to take how we are perceived by outsiders as a very big indication as to how big a club we are at present.

Totally agree and how people perceived us in 2003, was generally we were a big club, people with short memories will forget that but that's a fact. We'd had three or four decent goes at the league, Cup Finals, world transfer record signings, fans and gloryhunters fucking everywhere, second best attendances by far, maybe not in Europe but in England we were seen as a big club. Newcastle v Man Utd was often build as a clash of the titans.

[LeazesMag 0]

Outside of the area there's very few people who would consider us to be one of the biggest clubs in Europe tbh. I think, since the size of a club isn't really something you can objectively quantify, that you have to take how we are perceived by outsiders as a very big indication as to how big a club we are at present.

 

my point has always partly been that we are not seen as such a big club, from outside the area, that we are, and Mike Ashley doesn't realise, like most others outside the area, how big a club we are either, even if he was a football man which he isn't.

 

Which doesn't help at all, and is a huge plus for the ex regime. They made the club what it was, because they knew what it could be and had the right approach and made the right decisions - not all, but mostly the right ones.

 

We need trophies, to show the outside world, how big NUFC are, the lack of trophies is the reason nobody else sees the club for what it is.

 

As Stevie says, it only emphasises what the ex regime did more strongly. People seriously underestimate what they did for the club, even now. Staggering, especially among older supporters who ought to have known better.

[McFaul 35]

Outside of the area there's very few people who would consider us to be one of the biggest clubs in Europe tbh. I think, since the size of a club isn't really something you can objectively quantify, that you have to take how we are perceived by outsiders as a very big indication as to how big a club we are at present.

 

my point has always partly been that we are not seen as such a big club, from outside the area, that we are, and Mike Ashley doesn't realise, like most others outside the area, how big a club we are either, even if he was a football man which he isn't.

 

Which doesn't help at all, and is a huge plus for the ex regime. They made the club what it was, because they knew what it could be and had the right approach and made the right decisions - not all, but mostly the right ones.

 

We need trophies, to show the outside world, how big NUFC are, the lack of trophies is the reason nobody else sees the club for what it is.

 

As Stevie says, it only emphasises what the ex regime did more strongly. People seriously underestimate what they did for the club, even now. Staggering, especially among older supporters who ought to have known better.

Couldn't agree more. If people lived in Newcastle for a year, in Manchester for a year, in Leeds for a year, in Liverpool for a year and in London for a year. I think every single of them who wasn't a cunt, would say there really is something special about Newcastle United. Shay Given for instance said when he was at Man City, that take the finance away and there's no comparison between NUFC and MCFC in terms of fans and what it means to the area. This is why when I speak to an OOT it takes me a while to appreciate and accept that they have a clue, as arrogant as that sounds.

[manc-mag 1]

 

and my point was and is we WERE financially in terms of income one of Europe's biggest clubs, which in modern football says a lot about a clubs size because it's not something that can be debated, it's there in front of you. We weren't articially supported like Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool etc...we made our own money and we spent it, we were at times making more money than Milan and Barcelona two of the four biggest clubs in the world. That in itself for a club which hasn't won a trophy since 1969, is one of the most staggering things you will ever read, and absolutely magnifies the sheer potential and size of Newcastle, and also the great job The Halls and Shepherd did, certainly up to 2004.

 

We are artificially supported now though in a different but still very real sense.

 

If we got a run in the CL we'd probably shoot right up again automatically on turnover (to what exact level I dont know). If Ashley managed that on a shoestring I doubt he'd be getting credit for it though from Leazes, even though Leazes is only arsed about turnover to begin with.

 

The uplift in turnover is only realistically available if you get in the CL from where we are now. What's being advocated now is spend more for the prospect of that. Ashley's not arsed to because he's already nuts deep to the tune of 100's millions of debt and 'financing' a CL push might not come off. His exposure is massive already whereas S&H's exposure was about a million.

 

Ashley's fortune is 'linked' to the club in a way Shepherd and Hall's never was. Ashley could still easily afford to do something now as his wealth is so great, but he's not going to because it's not worth the risk (to him). Turnover means fuck all to him because it could be massive and still cost him in real terms as long as theres more out than in and no external financing. For S&H when turnover is in the 10's of millions on a 1 million £ investment and theres lots of external financing you're laughing, frankly. If it fails, what the fuck have you lost?

[McFaul 35]

and my point was and is we WERE financially in terms of income one of Europe's biggest clubs, which in modern football says a lot about a clubs size because it's not something that can be debated, it's there in front of you. We weren't articially supported like Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool etc...we made our own money and we spent it, we were at times making more money than Milan and Barcelona two of the four biggest clubs in the world. That in itself for a club which hasn't won a trophy since 1969, is one of the most staggering things you will ever read, and absolutely magnifies the sheer potential and size of Newcastle, and also the great job The Halls and Shepherd did, certainly up to 2004.

 

We are artificially supported now though in a different but still very real sense.

 

If we got a run in the CL we'd probably shoot right up again automatically on turnover (to what exact level I dont know). If Ashley managed that on a shoestring I doubt he'd be getting credit for it though from Leazes, even though Leazes is only arsed about turnover to begin with.

 

The uplift in turnover is only realistically available if you get in the CL from where we are now. What's being advocated now is spend more for the prospect of that. Ashley's not arsed to because he's already nuts deep to the tune of 100's millions of debt and 'financing' a CL push might not come off. His exposure is massive already whereas S&H's exposure was about a million.

 

Ashley's fortune is 'linked' to the club in a way Shepherd and Hall's never was. Ashley could still easily afford to do something now as his wealth is so great, but he's not going to because it's not worth the risk (to him). Turnover means fuck all to him because it could be massive and still cost him in real terms as long as theres more out than in and no external financing. For S&H when turnover is in the 10's of millions on a 1 million £ investment and theres lots of external financing you're laughing, frankly. If it fails, what the fuck have you lost?

Nah that's a good post. I will say although he did well for NUFC I always thought John Hall was a cunt. I mind when we signed Andy Cole every interview for weeks he mentioned he and Lady May were guarantors for the £1.75m transfer fee. So fuck! He got £80m out of the club.

[toonotl 3116]

Well, whether we like it or not, the media are now focussing on the race for fourth and due to our excellent position we are being included in the clubs chasing fourth.

 

The table doesnt lie and we are currently 5th, 3 points off Champions League qualification. Come Sunday evening we could well be joint fourth with 14 games left!

 

Now I know some will want to stick their heads in the sand and not contemplate its possibility, but we are still hanging in give injuries, suspensions and missing ANC players.

 

Unless we have a sudden crash of form, we are going to remain within touching distance all the way to the end.

 

As we have played some crap football and still achieved results, a crash of form would have to be pretty spectactular.

 

And lets consider our competitors. Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool are not the untouchable forces they have been previously.

 

And we face these last 15 games with a new striker.

 

Pretty exciting run in for quite a while.

 

I'm with you CT. We've come this far and there is no reason it can't continue. We'd have to perform very very well in the run in but its not impossible.

[manc-mag 1]

and my point was and is we WERE financially in terms of income one of Europe's biggest clubs, which in modern football says a lot about a clubs size because it's not something that can be debated, it's there in front of you. We weren't articially supported like Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool etc...we made our own money and we spent it, we were at times making more money than Milan and Barcelona two of the four biggest clubs in the world. That in itself for a club which hasn't won a trophy since 1969, is one of the most staggering things you will ever read, and absolutely magnifies the sheer potential and size of Newcastle, and also the great job The Halls and Shepherd did, certainly up to 2004.

 

We are artificially supported now though in a different but still very real sense.

 

If we got a run in the CL we'd probably shoot right up again automatically on turnover (to what exact level I dont know). If Ashley managed that on a shoestring I doubt he'd be getting credit for it though from Leazes, even though Leazes is only arsed about turnover to begin with.

 

The uplift in turnover is only realistically available if you get in the CL from where we are now. What's being advocated now is spend more for the prospect of that. Ashley's not arsed to because he's already nuts deep to the tune of 100's millions of debt and 'financing' a CL push might not come off. His exposure is massive already whereas S&H's exposure was about a million.

 

Ashley's fortune is 'linked' to the club in a way Shepherd and Hall's never was. Ashley could still easily afford to do something now as his wealth is so great, but he's not going to because it's not worth the risk (to him). Turnover means fuck all to him because it could be massive and still cost him in real terms as long as theres more out than in and no external financing. For S&H when turnover is in the 10's of millions on a 1 million £ investment and theres lots of external financing you're laughing, frankly. If it fails, what the fuck have you lost?

Nah that's a good post. I will say although he did well for NUFC I always thought John Hall was a cunt. I mind when we signed Andy Cole every interview for weeks he mentioned he and Lady May were guarantors for the £1.75m transfer fee. So fuck! He got £80m out of the club.

 

Thing is it's not even said as a criticism of one lot or an exultation of the other, it's just highlighting a very different set of factors. And yet despite all that, and the cerebral talk of high finance, the main factor is still (and all it boils down to for me) that Ashley isn't a fan. ie it doesn't make his cock twitch enough. Shepherd on the other hand was a fan, I'm sure of that. That said would he have been fan enough to put 100's of millions of his own tax paid savings on the line for the thrill of a Champions League run now? My guess is not in a million years.

 

In a sense it's a bit like the criticism of the bankers now. Like it or not Ashley is a real capitalist whereas Shepherd and Hall for a £1 million investment are more akin to the bankers/ phoney capitalists because of the limit of their exposure. That's going too far and is overly harsh on S&H because the bankers dont risk a penny of their own money, whereas S&H did but it still serves to demonstrate how much more cavalier people are happy to be with risk when your level of exposure doesnt keep you awake at night.

 

That's why it's a completely pointless debate for me.

[McFaul 35]

Thing is it's not even said as a criticism of one lot or an exultation of the other, it's just highlighting a very different set of factors. And yet despite all that, and the cerebral talk of high finance, the main factor is still (and all it boils down to for me) that Ashley isn't a fan. ie it doesn't make his cock twitch enough. Shepherd on the other hand was a fan, I'm sure of that. That said would he have been fan enough to put 100's of millions of his own tax paid savings on the line for the thrill of a Champions League run now? My guess is not in a million years.

 

In a sense it's a bit like the criticism of the bankers now. Like it or not Ashley is a real capitalist whereas Shepherd and Hall for a £1 million investment are more akin to the bankers/ phoney capitalists because of the limit of their exposure. That's going too far and is overly harsh on S&H because the bankers dont risk a penny of their own money, whereas S&H did but it still serves to demonstrate how much more cavalier people are happy to be with risk when your level of exposure doesnt keep you awake at night.

 

That's why it's a completely pointless debate for me.

I agree they're two separate debates, but Ashley's decision making even down to the moving of Level 7 seemed almost antagonistic and there are many reasons I will never find anything endearing about the man. Despite standing amongst toon fans for a year, he has never grasped and took on board what he needs to gain the favour of the support. Communication. We've never really known what's gone at the club through official channels for years, Mort was decent at PR but he was away soon, and we've got this fuckin glorified specky croupier who none of us trust. All of these things add up to people taking a while to admit by hook or by crook they have done some things reasonably well.

 

While it's true his exposure is a lot greater than FFS or SJH, neither of those two were near to having a personal wealthy of £100m let alone £1bn like Ashley has as well.

[Davey Dave 0]

I'm just enjoying the ride for what it is.

 

We may not get anywheres but it's been one of the most enjoyable seasons i've experienced for some time.

[Toonpack 9993]

 

Thing is it's not even said as a criticism of one lot or an exultation of the other, it's just highlighting a very different set of factors. And yet despite all that, and the cerebral talk of high finance, the main factor is still (and all it boils down to for me) that Ashley isn't a fan. ie it doesn't make his cock twitch enough. Shepherd on the other hand was a fan, I'm sure of that. That said would he have been fan enough to put 100's of millions of his own tax paid savings on the line for the thrill of a Champions League run now? My guess is not in a million years.

 

In a sense it's a bit like the criticism of the bankers now. Like it or not Ashley is a real capitalist whereas Shepherd and Hall for a £1 million investment are more akin to the bankers/ phoney capitalists because of the limit of their exposure. That's going too far and is overly harsh on S&H because the bankers dont risk a penny of their own money, whereas S&H did but it still serves to demonstrate how much more cavalier people are happy to be with risk when your level of exposure doesnt keep you awake at night.

 

 

 

They didn't btw

 

Original outlay was a loan from Cameron Hall Ltd, to the club, at around 6% interest.

 

Was a leveraged buy out.

[Dr Gloom 22186]

I'm just enjoying the ride for what it is.

 

We may not get anywheres but it's been one of the most enjoyable seasons i've experienced for some time.

 

aye, same here. i'm not realistically expecting us to finish above 7th so anything better's a bonus. it's been our best season for years though whichever way you look at it.

 

the best thing about this season has been watching a group of players that genuinely care about the cause and never stop fighting. when was the last time we could say that about a toon team? the football hasn't always been pretty and we've had mroe than our fair share of luck compared with previous years but it's been a lot of fun watching a side that always gives its all and never rolls over.

[manc-mag 1]

Thing is it's not even said as a criticism of one lot or an exultation of the other, it's just highlighting a very different set of factors. And yet despite all that, and the cerebral talk of high finance, the main factor is still (and all it boils down to for me) that Ashley isn't a fan. ie it doesn't make his cock twitch enough. Shepherd on the other hand was a fan, I'm sure of that. That said would he have been fan enough to put 100's of millions of his own tax paid savings on the line for the thrill of a Champions League run now? My guess is not in a million years.

 

In a sense it's a bit like the criticism of the bankers now. Like it or not Ashley is a real capitalist whereas Shepherd and Hall for a £1 million investment are more akin to the bankers/ phoney capitalists because of the limit of their exposure. That's going too far and is overly harsh on S&H because the bankers dont risk a penny of their own money, whereas S&H did but it still serves to demonstrate how much more cavalier people are happy to be with risk when your level of exposure doesnt keep you awake at night.

 

That's why it's a completely pointless debate for me.

I agree they're two separate debates, but Ashley's decision making even down to the moving of Level 7 seemed almost antagonistic and there are many reasons I will never find anything endearing about the man. Despite standing amongst toon fans for a year, he has never grasped and took on board what he needs to gain the favour of the support. Communication. We've never really known what's gone at the club through official channels for years, Mort was decent at PR but he was away soon, and we've got this fuckin glorified specky croupier who none of us trust. All of these things add up to people taking a while to admit by hook or by crook they have done some things reasonably well.

 

While it's true his exposure is a lot greater than FFS or SJH, neither of those two were near to having a personal wealthy of £100m let alone £1bn like Ashley has as well.

 

@ glorified specky croupier.

 

As to the bit in bold, that's a totally fair point too. Like I say, Ashley could afford to if he wanted to, it just doesnt push his buttons from a fans point of view. Which is sadly probably why he'll casually do the more the more twatish things like L7 too. Zero emotional attachment. In some measure it's a good thing, in others its bad. Your communication point is spot on and exactly where its a bad thing. Quite needlessly too.

[manc-mag 1]

Thing is it's not even said as a criticism of one lot or an exultation of the other, it's just highlighting a very different set of factors. And yet despite all that, and the cerebral talk of high finance, the main factor is still (and all it boils down to for me) that Ashley isn't a fan. ie it doesn't make his cock twitch enough. Shepherd on the other hand was a fan, I'm sure of that. That said would he have been fan enough to put 100's of millions of his own tax paid savings on the line for the thrill of a Champions League run now? My guess is not in a million years.

 

In a sense it's a bit like the criticism of the bankers now. Like it or not Ashley is a real capitalist whereas Shepherd and Hall for a £1 million investment are more akin to the bankers/ phoney capitalists because of the limit of their exposure. That's going too far and is overly harsh on S&H because the bankers dont risk a penny of their own money, whereas S&H did but it still serves to demonstrate how much more cavalier people are happy to be with risk when your level of exposure doesnt keep you awake at night.

 

 

 

They didn't btw

 

Original outlay was a loan from Cameron Hall Ltd, to the club, at around 6% interest.

 

Was a leveraged buy out.

 

Well I spose I mean they could have done summat else with their time if they'd wanted to. They had vision which neebody else did you absolutely have to give them that and the loan could still have been pissed up the wall if their gamble hadnt come off. I fucking loved going from the bottom of the second to the top of the Prem and thats absolutely down to them, but it's just daft to say it's exactly the same risk factors at play now for Ashley.

[Christmas Tree 4852]

Tempted to merge this with the 'Euro express thread' where anyone less devoted to seeking attention would have put it anyway.

 

Oh do fuck off you drama queen.

 

The reason it didnt go in here because this thread and a few others like it are simply infected with the usual Shepherds cock is bigger than Ashleys cock patter.

 

There are probably others who tend to give this patter a wide berth but were quite happy to discuss current stuff such as being 3 points off a champions league spot in February and how the run in might go.

[Guest alex]

Thought it was a fair enough topic for discussion like.

[The Fish 10972]

MancMag, are you ever going to give a considered opinion, or what?!

[Christmas Tree 4852]

Another thread de-railed *sigh*

 

Surprise surprise. Good move Tom

[toonotl 3116]

MancMag, are you ever going to give a considered opinion, or what?!

 

Grey man tbh.

[LeazesMag 0]

and my point was and is we WERE financially in terms of income one of Europe's biggest clubs, which in modern football says a lot about a clubs size because it's not something that can be debated, it's there in front of you. We weren't articially supported like Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool etc...we made our own money and we spent it, we were at times making more money than Milan and Barcelona two of the four biggest clubs in the world. That in itself for a club which hasn't won a trophy since 1969, is one of the most staggering things you will ever read, and absolutely magnifies the sheer potential and size of Newcastle, and also the great job The Halls and Shepherd did, certainly up to 2004.

 

We are artificially supported now though in a different but still very real sense.

 

If we got a run in the CL we'd probably shoot right up again automatically on turnover (to what exact level I dont know). If Ashley managed that on a shoestring I doubt he'd be getting credit for it though from Leazes, even though Leazes is only arsed about turnover to begin with.

 

The uplift in turnover is only realistically available if you get in the CL from where we are now. What's being advocated now is spend more for the prospect of that. Ashley's not arsed to because he's already nuts deep to the tune of 100's millions of debt and 'financing' a CL push might not come off. His exposure is massive already whereas S&H's exposure was about a million.

 

Ashley's fortune is 'linked' to the club in a way Shepherd and Hall's never was. Ashley could still easily afford to do something now as his wealth is so great, but he's not going to because it's not worth the risk (to him). Turnover means fuck all to him because it could be massive and still cost him in real terms as long as theres more out than in and no external financing. For S&H when turnover is in the 10's of millions on a 1 million £ investment and theres lots of external financing you're laughing, frankly. If it fails, what the fuck have you lost?

 

blah blah blah. At the end of the day, all you are saying here is that Ashley is choosing not to show the ambition to succeed like the ex regime, but I've been telling you that for years and you've argued about it, like others.

 

You're the bluster queen, no doubt about it.