Kitman

Because CT doesn't like him, obviously. It's nailed on CT's had him in his cab, tried to engage in witty banter and been told to fuck off by the great man

CT, stop it man for God's sake! Every time you question Shearer a fairy dies!

I don't see how you can say that. 8 games in charge, with no experience behind him, a bunch of senior players like Owen and Martins who didn't give a fuck, at a club in crisis. The ship wasn't taking on water, it was smashed below the waterline with the crew already in the lifeboats. Alec Ferguson would have struggled. He may well be a crap manager but imo you can't conclude that from his time with us. See my later post. You either need to be a masterful tactician or a great motivator. Shearer, imo, is neither. Give over. You can't conclude anything from 5 minutes in any job, let alone the 5 minutes he had at NUFC under the worst of circumstances. I expect after 8 games there were people who thought Brian Clough was a bit shit. They probably drove taxis too

So you have no experience of Shearer the man, just the footballer. You stick to playing with your Shearer dolly. Whereas you're a close personal friend?

I don't see how you can say that. 8 games in charge, with no experience behind him, a bunch of senior players like Owen and Martins who didn't give a fuck, at a club in crisis. The ship wasn't taking on water, it was smashed below the waterline with the crew already in the lifeboats. Alec Ferguson would have struggled. He may well be a crap manager but imo you can't conclude that from his time with us.

Just wait till he sees our new No 9 signing: "Alain, Alain. Allo' ees Johan. Oo ees zis Dean Windass you sign? You promised top top players, no? Oo is Dean Windass?"

That Chronicle article is pitiful. My guess is that we put in a bid for the player some time ago which he wasn't the least bit interested in. The rest is window dressing. We turned him down - yeah, right.

I wonder how many strikers we're going to buy. We're surely after more than one....maybe Ba plus a new No 9? Presumably Ba would be second striker but that presumes Ba and first choice striker stay fit. Faced with the alternative of Best, Shola or Lovenkrands, I'd send Ba onto the pitch even if he wasn't fit. Fuck it, I'd send him on in a moon boot and crutches .

Not so Ant. OK we can't compete in terms of European football, trophies, wages, glamour, ambition and location. But apart from that we've as much chance as the big teams to sign these players. Now, do I play Gervinho on the wing, or have him up front with Huntelaar? Depends, has Roeder finished scouting Kuyt for you yet? Glenn's been a little quiet of late....

Not so Ant. OK we can't compete in terms of European football, trophies, wages, glamour, ambition and location. But apart from that we've as much chance as the big teams to sign these players. Now, do I play Gervinho on the wing, or have him up front with Huntelaar?

I like the way you comment on speculation as if it's fact Just read on twitter some shit a bored teenager made up about Nolan renting a house in Essex. Hmmmm. If he's renting in Essex it suggests he's lining up a move to West Ham. However if he's renting rather than buying it might suggest a loan to buy deal? The plot thickens!

On paper he sounds pretty underwhelming. Mind you there might be more to his game than goals. We're probably not in for him anyway.

If a key criterion is re-sale value, it seems unlikely we'd sign someone who's going to fail a medical in the future cos his knee's fucked. Innit.

Are you doing your West Indian accent again?

Was the text from Enrique or his agent? Otherwise it doesn't count.

I don't believe he's ever run the club as anything other than a business. I suspect he didn't appreciate the economics of football when he took over, and trusted the advice of other people.....now he's pulling the strings personally. I also think he would be delighted to win something as he'll make more money that way. I don't think Ashley and businessmen of his ilk give a rat's arse what people think unless it hits them in the pocket. Winning something would also appeal to his ego I reckon.

I think it's lovely she'll have mementos of these treasured moments to look back on. Especially when he's next in the papers with some orange skinned strumpet from Essex who claims he took her up the arse in a nightclub toilet.

Why have we never heard of this shop selling champion's league football before? Is it because it's a totally shit metaphor that doesn't work?

omg, if it's on twitter it must be true If he has been sold to Brighton, maybe he's not good enough to make it with us?

If Ashley's up to his nuts to the tune of 156 mill, it must be bloody tempting to use the Carroll cash to pay off some debt. Edit: in fact it must be overwhelming, like a fat kid with a free run on the cookie jar

I agree with you Manc Mag, a lot of this is ancient history and relatively uninteresting. And if I'd shovelled 156 mill of my own money in loans into a business that I had little sentimental attachment to, I'd be hard arsed about it too. But I wouldn't expect people to feel sorry for me and kiss my arse either, and that's how I feel about it tbh. Hence why I was interested in the difference between what he's paid to acquire the club and what he's put in to subsidise losses (capital funds vs operating funds I guess). FWIW, I think he can put the mistakes behind him to a certain extent if we build instead of dismantle, and kick on from a good first season back. We'll see, we've seen him fumble the ball before so I'm reserving judgement till August.

Hmmm. I agree about the 132 mill - it's not money he's put in. I'm not sure I agree about the 70 mill though. Firstly he must have known that 70 mill was due and had to be refinanced when he bought the company. So I'd see that as part of the purchase cost to him, the total cost being being partly equity (132 mill) and partly debt (70 mill). Secondly I assume he chose to put the money in that way, to save interest and to lower his tax bill when he sells his shares (and personally I believe he was intending to make a quickish re-sale when he bought them). I'd guess there were other options for that 70 mill - refinance the debt with a bank vs the clubs assets or put in new equity for instance. I admit I'm not up with the accounting nuances though. What I was really getting at was the difference between what he paid to buy the club at the outset - let's call it 132 + 70 = 202 mill and what he has stumped up in total = 288 mill. I make that 86 mill (a lot less than is banded around in the press I think). Still a lot of cash, but as I've said a lot of that must be down to mistakes made. The interesting thing for me will be to see what the club spends from here if it is at break even point, which was the plan after 2010/11 iirc. Will transfer profits still be used to subsidise operating expenses, invest in new players or pay down shareholder debt?

So 288 - 132 - 70 - 27 = 59 million that Mike Ashley's put into the club since 2007? Not an inconsiderable amount of money but some of that is presumably for a) paying compo to managers and their staff that have been sacked/forced out paying the cost of getting relegated from the PL c) paying high wages of players which were signed under his ownership (Smith, Collo, Gutti, etc) I'm not including transfer errors here like having to pay compo for Gutti's Bosman or the Xisco signing. So 229 to buy the club and 59 mill to keep it solvent? With a chunk of the 59 mill needed because of Ashley's own errors. Or is that just too simplistic? 59 mill sounds less impressive than 288 mill, although obviously it's 59 mill of his own money not a bank's, so good on him. I expect he'll want that back at some point....

nice to see you back. Thanks

HF, how much of that $288m is the purchase cost (which to me is the cost of the shares plus the stadium mortgage?). To my simplistic way of thinking, there's 1) what it cost him to buy us and 2) what he's invested in new funds into the club since then. The first I don't see as money put into the club, it's what he willingly paid to acquire it, which was up to him. If we've made a massive net profit on transfer dealings, and that's all gone to fund operating losses rather than repay debt, it suggests either the club is completely financially screwed or he's made a big mess of running it. Or possibly both, who knows.