Jump to content

U_V

Members
  • Content Count

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by U_V

  1. The previous accounts would only have included 2-3 months of the Jan 13 panic signings.
  2. The MASH accounts are available for download. They are made up to 30/4/14, so not quite in sync with the club's. This is the main bit specific to us: Also mentions elsewhere that amortisation and impairment on player registrations was only up £4m.
  3. Points-wise rather than positionally, we only finished below last season's total in 3 out of those 10 years, in fact its 3 out of the 14 we were in the PL. The worst we ever did was only 3 points below last season, and in each of those years we were competing in Europe and having a decent run in one or other of the domestic cups, either of which is now seen as a relegation risk and to be avoided. In Ashley's 7 years, last year has only been bettered twice of course (once only on GD), so you're right we shouldn't be expecting such a high level of performance again this year.
  4. Would be the best move Ashley could make but it wont happen. The cock ups of the striker situation may force a re-think in transfer negotiation or personnel but I would be surprised if that but Llambias under threat. This is who we should be directing any protest at. Wonder how happy Llambias is getting all the stick he does for £100k a year or whatever paltry sum he's on. Wouldn't be surprised to see him say he's had enough before Ashley pushes him. 54 year old now, hoping at the end of the season he just kicks back and enjoys the Casino business....or retires early.
  5. Err, yes, that's all the club's Commercial, Catering & Sponsorship Revenue which understandably fell when we were in the Championship. Generously the money from SD didn't fall while we were in the Championship, it remained at £0.00. The article also mentions the new sponsorship deals with Puma and NR. Strangely it doesn't mention the great new club branding deal with SD. I wonder why.
  6. The club received no money from SD in 2008 & 2009, in fact we paid the costs for the privilege. If that wasn't happening to us it would be comical. I think you've both misunderstood the statement (I'm also pretty sure that SD branding at SJP arrived in 2010?). Anyway, that fee is for services promoting Newcastle, not SD. A statement on SD's promotions isnt relevant to our accounts. Its basically saying that we got assistance in selecting e.g. promotional channels and refining brand messages for NUFC from the enormously powerful and successful marketing department at SD. It doe
  7. From the 2009 accounts: The club received no money from SD in 2008 & 2009, in fact we paid the costs for the privilege.
  8. This isnt right, basically theyve punished the non members due to what they assume is trouble caused by people who are not members. Aye its not fair for the majority but thats how it goes. As for ST holders theres nee difference other than you know if your a ST holder you could be traced Following your previous logic, do you now think it is all long standing ST holders who should take the responsibility and be punished financially for the trouble? It's not fair for the majority but that's how it goes.
  9. You're going to have to explain that one to me. How did the debt increase because it was transferred from an external creditor to Ashley? These clauses are usually at the insistence of the creditor btw. The debts mainly increased firstly because we started to pay for players up front while selling the same net worth of players but with payments coming in over a number of years, and secondly of course due to the revenue drops due to relegation and lower sponsorship, advertising, and ticket sales.
  10. In 06-07, I can't remember the exact number, but the cash flow loss was < £10m In 07-08 Premiership TV revenue went up by £18m
  11. I wonder where U V thinks the money could come from, maybe he'll answer the question. I'm too busy with the conundrum of where the money we used to generate with a terrible chairman has gone such that now we're run by such a great businessman we managed to double the club debt in 3 years even though TV revenues shot up when he bought the club and we've made £50m+ profit on selling players. It's completely bizarre and unexplainable how revenues have dropped when everyone can see how well Mike is doing by putting the best possible people in charge, selling players and cutting costs.
  12. I wonder where U V thinks the money could come from, maybe he'll answer the question. I'm too busy with the conundrum of where the money we used to generate with a terrible chairman has gone such that now we're run by such a great businessman we managed to double the club debt in 3 years even though TV revenues shot up when he bought the club and we've made £50m+ profit on selling players. It's completely bizarre and unexplainable how revenues have dropped when everyone can see how well Mike is doing by putting the best possible people in charge, selling players and cutting costs.
  13. "Mike Ashley didn't take a penny of the money from the sale of Andy Carroll out of the football club, is has been pumped into keeping the club afloat. Without the sale of Andy Carroll Newcastle United would not be here today, its as simple as that. We have learned from our mistakes, our vision for the next 5 years is blah blah blah..." "Enrique is not going anywhere." "Once Jose handed in a transfer request the club had no option but to let him go. I can assure supporters that every penny will go straight back into the team."
  14. I think we'll be getting something, but it will be well below market value. Despite people saying Ashley doesn't care what we think, he has always gone out of his way to try to put as much of a positive spin on what he does out to the media as is possible. For the first couple of years we never stopped hearing about how he saved the club from near-extinction and how we'd soon be competing for everything. When he's been trying to sell the club, we hear about how he wont just sell to anyone, he wants us in safe hands. When we sacked Hughton for no good reason, it was so we could get someone
  15. I wonder if letting multi-million pound business decisions rest in the hands of a 22 year old footballer and his agent is the kind of business acumen that made Mike all his money? Its the simplest explanation.
  16. I can't pick out the £107m spend from that article but it looks about right (looks like it should be 98.2 expenses + 6.4 interest + net cash spent on transfers) so I guess you've got that figure straight from the accounts (I've not seen the 2008 accounts myself). If that's right though, have you any idea why the net debt jumped from £67m to £107m (according to that article). Where's the money gone to account for that debt? Why did it not just rise by the overspend amount, ie £8m? Was our debt any worse than most other clubs though? The stadium debt was secure and it was only the £25m
  17. Yeah, well obviously revenues are going to drop from a year when you're in the CL to not being in it. But I don't think we ever budgeted expecting to be in the CL (despite a lot of people now claiming financial recklessness from Shepherd demanding we spend even more than the budgeted amount we'd pre-spent on Woodgate before we were assured of getting in in Summer '03). The falls after that were not massive, and were not irrevocably on the way down either. Two of the revenue streams were up in the year prior to Ashley taking over, and the one which is least impacted by the immediate performance
  18. Income: http://www.football-finances.org.uk/newcas...008/income3.htm It's up & down due to yearly variations in how well we do in cups/europe or the league, but I don't see a major significant downward trend there, and due to UEFA cup in 07 & increased TV money in 08 it was on the up. Costs were up year on year of course, mainly down to wages, but that was not an inevitable rise, it could have been stabilised. That will usually be to the detriment of the squad as we are now seeing, but we've had to cut back and rebuild before, there's nothing to say we wouldn't have done it again
  19. Is that really true though? Which decisions specifically do you mean? Of course player wages in contracts negotiated prior to Ashley's arrival will contribute to outgoings and were somewhat beyond Ashley's control (unless those players were sold - I'm sure we could have got some money for Owen and his wages off the books if we were THAT desperate). However these amounts were also outgoings in FY06-07, so why did they not add so significantly to the debt then too. The £30m+ loss figure is thrown around a lot, and I'm sure a lot of people take that to mean we spent over £30m more than we too
  20. People will still have a need for cheap tracksuits. If Sports Defect don't get the business, then JJB, JD Sports or local independents will get it, and maybe save jobs at places that Sports Defect are trying to squeeze out of the market with their unethical trading practices. If a Sports Defect store closes, something else will open in it's place.
  21. Target Sports Defect, not the club. Make it known that any true Newcastle supporter should not buy anything from his stores until he sells up. Set up pickets outside the shops (at least at first) to publicise it. At the very least stores in the North East should suffer if support for the club amongst the general population is anything like claimed. Use negative publicity about Sports Defect practices - they're probably no worse than anyone else, but a cheap tat merchant like that is bound to source a lot of it's merchandise from sweat shops, and treat it's staff poorly. If we make sure that Sp
  22. 5 month BUMP "Fancy" new website which stops you copying content, but still no change. Is it a concious decision not to have a message board and only canvas opinion from the roadshows and random emails? As a member I really have no idea what the current position of NUSC/T is and what action if any they are thinking of taking should Ashley announce the club is off the market, or the sale just remains ongoing like a Sports Direct store closing down sale. I certainly have no input into it or vote on it. Patience with the imminent takeover pretence will come to an end soon and there's goin
  23. So in fact even the pre-Ashley accounts were worse off due to Ashley's takeover. Around £10m, or less if you take off the up front costs of the aborted refinancing due to Ashley's takeover. Yes it was http://soccerlens.com/20072008-premier-lea...v-revenue/7415/ Television revenue for 2007-08 season (2006-07 in brackets) Manchester United £49.3m (£32m) Chelsea £45.6m (£30.9m) Arsenal £47m (£29m) Liverpool £45.4m (£28.4m) Everton £42.1m (£25.3m) Aston Villa £42.3m (£22m) Blackburn Rovers £40.2m (£22m) Portsmouth £40.4m (£23m) Manchester City £39.7m (£21m) West Ha
  24. You were obviously on the "right" side of the argument to avoid the formal warnings for lowering the level of debate on there then.
×
×
  • Create New...