Toonpack

If SD paid for the sponsorship, would that change your opinion (I'm not asking/speculating whether they will or not) just asking on the basis IF they did pay.

On the Nike thing, (which I personally doubt/ed) was looking at SD's last financial report, to try and find their marketing budget, and the Nike Swoosh is plastered all over it (strikingly visible in most of the pictures) and................: The Nike Training Academy at our Shirebrook Headquarters has provided extensive specialist training in the Nike range as well as future developments in that range. To date 997 employees have attended over 16 days training. All 997 attained Nike undergraduate level and 227 attained graduate status. This is the first time Nike has joined with a retail partner in such a facility anywhere in the world. 2 + 2 = 7 and 3/4

The lease wouldn't be an issue. I'm guessing they'd need approval from the FA though for a name change, which of course would never be given. I would guess the Council could/would make it an issue. The council could/would do fuck all. Explain please ??

The lease wouldn't be an issue. I'm guessing they'd need approval from the FA though for a name change, which of course would never be given. I would guess the Council could/would make it an issue.

Virgin @ St James' Park, a rarity indeed

Won't happen, I would suspect the lease on the ground is to Newcastle United (or NUFC Ltd or some such) can't see the council agreeing to continue the lease for what would be a totally new "entity"

Tidied just a smidge Blindly, backing the manager, is all well and good it's just a shame we never found a manager to back (with his young players for the future) who wasn't sacked before the future even appeared on the horizon. Borrow,Back'n'Sack (usually in September)

Superb

I apologise Leazes but I was on a plane (nowhere exotic sadly and work not play). Regarding your question, I believe I do understand, here goes: Taking money out whilst in charge is bad but making money on a profit from sale is fine, yes ?? Well that's how I see it. How do you see it ?? most supporters would be happy to see the club win on the pitch, at the time. Your chums on skunkers, and the massively expanded fanbase tapped by the previous regime, were quite happy to make their trips to the San Siro, Nou Camp etc. Of course, they only said so at the time, but may have been telling porkies I believe I asked you a few weeks ago, if you sell your house [or a business] would you sell it for the same price you paid for it ? Sammynb has also asked you a question which you have ignored [ I think] You also said you would "review Mike Ashley after the 1st September deadline", and now say he is "recouping" . So, what exactly did you think he was doing before 1st September ? All it needed was a yes or no On the house/business you try and make a profit, and as I said, that's absolutely fine, in my opinion. all I asked for was your opinion before September 1st. I don't disagree that when you sell a house you aim to make a profit, so why do you think a business is any different ? Before you reply, with your words of wisdom laced with irrational hatred, consider what price they would have got for a 3rd division club that had spent years in the doldrums, which is where they found it, and a recent history similar to that of Sheff Wed rather than an expanded stadium being one of the best in europe, years of regular european football, a tapped fanbase and one of the biggest turnovers in world football ? Somehow, I think all this will continue to pass you by... I don't !?!?!?! Profit from sale is perfectly fine as I've said. What about taking money out while in charge though ??? I think that's generally bad(unless it's allocation of profit or the like), what about you ??? they backed their managers man, with all those despicable "trophy players" of course, who brought european football, trips to the Nou Camp, San Siro. Consider this : if they pocketed as much as you make out they did, it only escalates the calibre of player and rise of the club even more. Understand ? That's some job they did, doing all that without backing their managers and pocketing the money from sales [like your man is doing]. So. What was your opinion of your man before September 1st, before you "revised your opinion" ? Don;t take too long to answer this, my other points, and sammynb question he posed to you . I've said I can't find Sammy's question(s), if you quote it, I'll answer.

I apologise Leazes but I was on a plane (nowhere exotic sadly and work not play). Regarding your question, I believe I do understand, here goes: Taking money out whilst in charge is bad but making money on a profit from sale is fine, yes ?? Well that's how I see it. How do you see it ?? most supporters would be happy to see the club win on the pitch, at the time. Your chums on skunkers, and the massively expanded fanbase tapped by the previous regime, were quite happy to make their trips to the San Siro, Nou Camp etc. Of course, they only said so at the time, but may have been telling porkies I believe I asked you a few weeks ago, if you sell your house [or a business] would you sell it for the same price you paid for it ? Sammynb has also asked you a question which you have ignored [ I think] You also said you would "review Mike Ashley after the 1st September deadline", and now say he is "recouping" . So, what exactly did you think he was doing before 1st September ? All it needed was a yes or no On the house/business you try and make a profit, and as I said, that's absolutely fine, in my opinion. all I asked for was your opinion before September 1st. I don't disagree that when you sell a house you aim to make a profit, so why do you think a business is any different ? Before you reply, with your words of wisdom laced with irrational hatred, consider what price they would have got for a 3rd division club that had spent years in the doldrums, which is where they found it, and a recent history similar to that of Sheff Wed rather than an expanded stadium being one of the best in europe, years of regular european football, a tapped fanbase and one of the biggest turnovers in world football ? Somehow, I think all this will continue to pass you by... I don't !?!?!?! Profit from sale is perfectly fine as I've said. What about taking money out while in charge though ??? I think that's generally bad(unless it's allocation of profit or the like), what about you ???

I apologise Leazes but I was on a plane (nowhere exotic sadly and work not play). Regarding your question, I believe I do understand, here goes: Taking money out whilst in charge is bad but making money on a profit from sale is fine, yes ?? Well that's how I see it. How do you see it ?? most supporters would be happy to see the club win on the pitch, at the time. Your chums on skunkers, and the massively expanded fanbase tapped by the previous regime, were quite happy to make their trips to the San Siro, Nou Camp etc. Of course, they only said so at the time, but may have been telling porkies I believe I asked you a few weeks ago, if you sell your house [or a business] would you sell it for the same price you paid for it ? Sammynb has also asked you a question which you have ignored [ I think] You also said you would "review Mike Ashley after the 1st September deadline", and now say he is "recouping" . So, what exactly did you think he was doing before 1st September ? All it needed was a yes or no On the house/business you try and make a profit, and as I said, that's absolutely fine, in my opinion.

I apologise Leazes but I was on a plane (nowhere exotic sadly and work not play). Regarding your question, I believe I do understand, here goes: Taking money out whilst in charge is bad but making money on a profit from sale is fine, yes ?? Well that's how I see it. How do you see it ??

They milked for all they were worth, club was like a family jewel. What they made was paltry mind, given what came later and the money that came into the game.

Yeah Steve chairs them but its frankly open forum, all fans can have their say and nobody is derided for it. Open discussion and an attempt to gain a concewrted view. I'll be hopefully going with a general view of toontastic, I cant capture every view but give an overall "almost everybody (well all but Toonpack) think the renaming is shit". etc I never said it wasn't btw, for the record, I do not agree with it, I simply don't think it's that big a deal in the grand scheme of things and it is utterly predictable.

That's not what he said Contrary twat. Not contrary at all, I asked a simple question based upon a statement made by a fellow poster. Renton said he'd rather see us relegated than win anything under this regime (paraphrased), Pud stated it's easier for a newspaper to harm a club than visa versa. Appears to me there's a groundswell that would rather have the club damaged/fail than have it succesfull because of the personality in charge. Which I find particularly sad. If Vlad the Impaler could turn us into the next Man U, I'd welcome him with open arms. (That's an analogy not an expectation of where we could be taken by anyone btw). We can do fuck all to effect the ownership, hit him in the pocket?, where do you think the shortfall be will made up ?? It would be the club "hit in the pocket" all he'd do is prune so the club remains within its means, however frugal they become. I happen to believe that NUFC living within it's means is a good thing, because of our size it gives us an advantage over most. IF that size diminishes we'll sink like a stone. The BEST we can do or hope for is to ride the punches, hope he makes us succesfull/profitable (whichever comes first) and then (and only then) is there a chance he'll go, but you can rest assured, that even then, he will ONLY go on his terms. It is what it is, no amount of anguish is going to change that. Therefore I don't do "anguish", maybe I am a shit fan (I probably am) but I just hope for the best, I would NEVER wish for the worst even from the depths of my shitfanness, contraryness, or tiresome prickishness.

That's not what he said re-read the whole post and not just the bit you bolded up. he's talking about the paper reporting what's in the best interests of the club and the fans. remember, you in a minority of one with your views on here over the renaming. the majority of us want the chronicle to publish pieces that reflect the voice of the true supporters over this issue - fury with the owner's decision-making in other words. I read the whole post, the conclusion was what I asked for clarification of. As for the minority of one, how come ??? I don't agree with the renaming but it is/was utterly predicatable, what I took issue with was the amount of "damage" it actually would/could do, and its place in the greater scheme of things, in terms of damage/taking the piss out of fans. How many ever called the Exhibition Stand by it's changed name ? you are the minority of one because you seem to think it isn't a big deal. it is a big deal to everyone else. all real fans are spitting feathers over this move. the damage is permanent. he has shown complete disregard for the supporters by attempting to destroy a piece of our history. that will never be forgiven or forgotten by the real supporters. and pp is right to suggest the chronicle shares that line. renaming a stand is hardly the same as renaming the whole stadium. Both factually incorrect

That's not what he said re-read the whole post and not just the bit you bolded up. he's talking about the paper reporting what's in the best interests of the club and the fans. remember, you in a minority of one with your views on here over the renaming. the majority of us want the chronicle to publish pieces that reflect the voice of the true supporters over this issue - fury with the owner's decision-making in other words. I read the whole post, the conclusion was what I asked for clarification of. As for the minority of one, how come ??? I don't agree with the renaming but it is/was utterly predicatable, what I took issue with was the amount of "damage" it actually would/could do, and its place in the greater scheme of things, in terms of damage/taking the piss out of fans. How many ever called the Exhibition Stand by it's changed name ?

That's not what he said

Is that what you want ??

Can't see it being Nike (and thus it's likely a fluff piece), they don't need to sponsor shirts, they get their logo all over the shop anyway (irrespective of shirt sponsor) with the strips they manufacture for other teams, and they also do the current ball.

All comes out of one pot tbh, the bigger the pot the better. Am somewhat doubtfull it'll come off. Breathes new life into HF's recanted theory

Hmmmmm The Express: NEWCASTLE UNITED’s Sports Direct Arena could be shortlived with owner Mike Ashley closing in on a naming rights deal with an American company. Ashley provoked a storm of fans’ protest by renaming St James’ Park after his own sportswear emporium. Now he is searching for a £10 million-a-season sponsorship deal including stadium naming rights and shirt advertising. Sunday Express Sport can reveal that Ashley is in talks with interested parties, most in the USA, including Nike. He believes that selling stadium naming rights is vital if Newcastle are going to have any chance of competing with the Premier League big boys. And he has told friends he is not bothered if the fans continue to call the stadium St James’ Park. He doesn’t expect the Sports Direct Arena – or whatever name replaces it – to be part of their every day football talk. He has officially renamed it to try to push through further investment for the club and is hurt by suggestions that he doesn’t have Newcastle’s interests at heart. Ashley insists that he won’t undermine manager Alan Pardew by selling his best players and that selling the naming rights is a step in this direction. He says he only sold Andy Carroll because Liverpool made an offer no club could have refused.

Funnily enough you can picture him sat there with an audience giving it the Billy Big Bollocks I picture Rab C holding court to Jamsey in a cockney accent with glasses all askew sliding down the bar "And I will tell you this................. Carroll's worth FUCK ALL"

How is it? Hate to say it, but maybe what he's supposedly said has an element of truth in it? He doesn't attack the fans, Shepherd did. Saying that Hughton struggled with decisions for example is not as bad as saying that all Geordie women are dogs. Nothing hes supposedly said comes close to be perfectly honest, that "horrible" remark aside. Again, I have to encourage people not to take this too seriously since it could well be fabricated. The Shepherd/Hall thing was done by one man, a journalist, who recorded the conversation. This was supposedly said to a bunch of fans, all of whom have something against the guy I'm sure, and I've yet to hear of any recordings existing. Or photos of the encounter. Because MA's man said it. Wonder when this stupid pissed rant took place, surprised there's no mention of Barton and by all accounts he fucking hated Barton.

How professional What a prick Did anyone else read that with a slur, or was that just me ?