JaMoUsE 0 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) I'd suggest, given that some of the worlds leading companies advertise by paying for blanket sponsorship of sports and music arenas that they think its a good way to advertise their products. Edited February 27, 2014 by JaMoUsE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 We weren't talking about the total commercial income (performance of which is poor, no argument there), I was talking about the in ground signage in particular, no way that would be £10Mill all by itself, it'd be lucky to be anywhere near £2-3Mill IMO, interest would likely be circa £8 mill at round about 6-ish % Absolutely, but the justification for Ashley NOT paying for ANY advertising, is the fact that he has £129m owed to him from the club. Through his free advertising and other activities that devalue the brand he has cost the club £13.8m a year though. Which would dwarf the interest on that debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howmanheyman 33841 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 We're debt free!! We owe £129M He's not charging us any interest! (We'll be able to repay the debt quicker!) We haven't repaid a nut (other than the relegation loan). Sports Direct and associated MA brands are getting free advertising which is revenue lost to the club. Ah but this is because he isn't charging interest, so in effect the loan is not interest free. And the loan amount never goes down but his 'interest' payments of 'free' advertising carries on. (seven years worth so far and counting!) All hail the Genius!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9945 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Absolutely, but the justification for Ashley NOT paying for ANY advertising, is the fact that he has £129m owed to him from the club. Through his free advertising and other activities that devalue the brand he has cost the club £13.8m a year though. Which would dwarf the interest on that debt. But the ONLY point of contention is the stadium signage, there's all sorts of reasons for commercial revenue performance, or lack thereof, and it's not just the margin on signage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9945 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Hows it irrelevant? If I own a business and I can make 10m per annum by investing 8m per annum its an extra 2m for me every year. It's only relevant IF you can prove that the lost revenue to the club from signage is greater than what the interest would be on £129 Mill, I don't think it would be greater. What any advertiser gets from their advert is irrelevant to the owner of what the advert's plastered on, all that matters is what is the benefit to the owner of said billboard for hosting said advert. The benefit to us is nil in income terms but is more than nil in the avoidance of a cost, the latter would far exceed (in my opinion) the income derived from sale of the advertising space if placed against the cost of interest on £129 Million. As I said earlier I don't particularly understand why he doesn't pay for it (as it's SD cash not his) but it's a perfectly equitable arrangement IMO. If it was a choice between advert income and the interest, I'd lose the advert income and avoid the interest every day of the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9945 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 We're debt free!! We owe £129M He's not charging us any interest! (We'll be able to repay the debt quicker!) We haven't repaid a nut (other than the relegation loan). Sports Direct and associated MA brands are getting free advertising which is revenue lost to the club. Ah but this is because he isn't charging interest, so in effect the loan is not interest free. And the loan amount never goes down but his 'interest' payments of 'free' advertising carries on. (seven years worth so far and counting!) But the difference between the two is likely to be about £4-£5 Million a year positive to the club YAY So over those 7 years so far and counting the clubs around £35 Mill better off (or one Andy Carroll even) All hail the Genius!!! FYP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howmanheyman 33841 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 You should support Aston Villa, mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7084 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 HI EVERYBODY! If I have 3 beans and I add 3 more beans, what do I have?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howmanheyman 33841 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 HI EVERYBODY! If I have 3 beans and I add 3 more beans, what do I have?! "Some more beans" "Yes... and no. Let's try again shall we? I have two beans, then I add two more beans. What does that make? "A very small trophy cabinet." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaMoUsE 0 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 It's only relevant IF you can prove that the lost revenue to the club from signage is greater than what the interest would be on £129 Mill, I don't think it would be greater.What any advertiser gets from their advert is irrelevant to the owner of what the advert's plastered on, all that matters is what is the benefit to the owner of said billboard for hosting said advert. The benefit to us is nil in income terms but is more than nil in the avoidance of a cost, the latter would far exceed (in my opinion) the income derived from sale of the advertising space if placed against the cost of interest on £129 Million.As I said earlier I don't particularly understand why he doesn't pay for it (as it's SD cash not his) but it's a perfectly equitable arrangement IMO. If it was a choice between advert income and the interest, I'd lose the advert income and avoid the interest every day of the week. My gripe is with the interest free bollocks. Its not interest free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9945 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 My gripe is with the interest free bollocks. Its not interest free. Erm, I think you'll find that it is, that it remains so appears to be conditional, but at the end of the day it is currently interest free. I don't know why it matters so much TBH If it wasn't because of the revilement of SD and MA no-one would give a toss, especially because when looking at both sides of the equation the club is better off (in my opinion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9945 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 You should support Aston Villa, mate. You and several others should grow the fuck up. Ashley's not going anywhere, we're stuck with him, get used to it, because it could be incredibly worse (if you leave your hatred at the door and dispassionately think about it) Vincent Tan anyone ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desmondTUTU 0 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 You and several others should grow the fuck up. Ashley's not going anywhere, we're stuck with him, get used to it, because it could be incredibly worse (if you leave your hatred at the door and dispassionately think about it) Vincent Tan anyone ?? It could be worse. It could not be incredibly worse. It could be incredibly better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desmondTUTU 0 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I find it incredible that you can't see that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howmanheyman 33841 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I choose not to grow up. I choose not kow tow to anyone, least of all someone I think is taking, and has already taken, the piss out of my club and by association, me. P.s. Ever belted out 'sack the board' in the past? Bit childish maybe, but it does you good to let it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaMoUsE 0 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) Erm, I think you'll find that it is, that it remains so appears to be conditional, but at the end of the day it is currently interest free.I don't know why it matters so much TBHIf it wasn't because of the revilement of SD and MA no-one would give a toss, especially because when looking at both sides of the equation the club is better off (in my opinion). Its a trade off, interest free for free advertising. Dress it up how you want mate. If it isn't why not charge for the advertising like you suggest. Edited February 27, 2014 by JaMoUsE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9945 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 It could be worse. It could not be incredibly worse. It could be incredibly better. No doubt it could be incredibly better, but equally, of course it could be incredibly worse. It's really, really, not all bad, in fact it's more good than bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 17653 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 You and several others should grow the fuck up. Ashley's not going anywhere, we're stuck with him, get used to it, because it could be incredibly worse (if you leave your hatred at the door and dispassionately think about it) Vincent Tan anyone ?? So someone who hasnt paid to see Newcastle United in decades is telling us we should just suck it up because theres worse out there?....go fuck yourself you mealy mouthed passionless old cunt (no safety wink) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Growing up would involve not bothering with the multi millionaires kicking an inflated sack around the grass. Given the fact I'm childish enough to still be bothered about that I think it's fair enough to make childish demands on the owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigWalrus 0 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 LOUD NOISES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acrossthepond 878 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I fully expect a summer of continued negativity because we won't spend £50 - £60 Mill on transfer fees, but we'd better spend £30 to £40 Mill (net) because I really think we can easily afford that and still stay within the model. I was with you up until this sentence. It'll be a summer of negativity because we won't spend 50-60 million? The past two summers have been oppressively negative without cracking 10 mil, let alone 50! Nobody who follows this club is going to be "negative" because we're not spending Man City money. Then in the same breath you suggest we'd "better" spend at least 30 mil net. Tell me how likely to happen you think that is, then tell me who's being "negative." Most of what you're saying makes sense, but this part came across as hopelessly out of touch and is reminiscent of media coverage of NUFC circa 2008 - "sad, divine-righting Geordies kicking off because their new owner didn't splash enough cash." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 22149 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 No doubt it could be incredibly better, but equally, of course it could be incredibly worse. It's really, really, not all bad, in fact it's more good than bad. Get the fuck out of here with that shit man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9945 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 (edited) So someone who hasnt paid to see Newcastle United in decades is telling us we should just suck it up because theres worse out there?....go fuck yourself you mealy mouthed passionless old cunt (no safety wink) Been back this season as it happens, three ST's at this address.(renewed for next season as well btw). Edited February 28, 2014 by Toonpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9945 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 I was with you up until this sentence. It'll be a summer of negativity because we won't spend 50-60 million? The past two summers have been oppressively negative without cracking 10 mil, let alone 50! Nobody who follows this club is going to be "negative" because we're not spending Man City money. Then in the same breath you suggest we'd "better" spend at least 30 mil net. Tell me how likely to happen you think that is, then tell me who's being "negative." Most of what you're saying makes sense, but this part came across as hopelessly out of touch and is reminiscent of media coverage of NUFC circa 2008 - "sad, divine-righting Geordies kicking off because their new owner didn't splash enough cash." Ok maybe I worded it wrong, we can, and should be easily able to spend at least £30Mill Net, maybe more, and we bloody well should and yes I expect it, because even within the prudence model we must be able to afford it, based on the lack of action and the TV income explosion, of late. But (and maybe I had my N-O head on) that still won't be enough in some quarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desmondTUTU 0 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 You can take you n-o head off. 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