ChezGiven

Going for dinner tonight somewhere (s)wanky and again on 15th-ish in London which i think is going to be a karaoke.

I think their approach is just a pragmatic one in terms of what is best for the club. I agree with most of what you say btw. The trouble is, he can't really be forced to sell imo. Not without doing much more damage to NUFC anyway. Agreed alex, no matter what you think of the man personally or as a chairman, whats right for the club in the current circumstances (economic) may not be a continuation of an adversarial relationship between the man with the purse strings and those who desperately want to see the club's current situation improve i.e. fucking everyone else. He wasn't spending money or listening to the fans when everything appeared to be rosey so I don't expect that to change just because NUSC have shown to have no backbone. Bassong, Jonas, Colin Cini, Guthrie have all met with my expectations as transfers. I also think admitting you got some things a bit wrong and endeavouring to find a better way forward is an example of backbone.

Give them a break man, it appears they're trying to reflect the diversity of opinion across the fan base, not an easy task with our lot.

Make sure the eyes move as well. A small bog-eyed Dennis Wise voodoo doll with corner flag stlye pin which means it can double up as a natty broach for the missus.

I think their approach is just a pragmatic one in terms of what is best for the club. I agree with most of what you say btw. The trouble is, he can't really be forced to sell imo. Not without doing much more damage to NUFC anyway. Agreed alex, no matter what you think of the man personally or as a chairman, whats right for the club in the current circumstances (economic) may not be a continuation of an adversarial relationship between the man with the purse strings and those who desperately want to see the club's current situation improve i.e. fucking everyone else.

Made some mistakes, everyone does, its harder the more in the public eye your actions are. I'll be siging up online, will never get many chances to attend any meetings but i see no harm in supporting a group of positive minded people who want the best for the club. The pragmatic approach to Ashley is exactly what we need.

The people who read this board the most intently are the posters so its not like he is spreading the usual shite aboout the club around, as no one pays any attention to his arguments nor would ever be influenced by them. In that sense, he's doing no harm apart from getting on people's nerves. Let him be imo, banning people because you think they are cunts is a bit gay.

So was he right when he said he'd paid off all the debt, meaning he lied about owing on players? Or was he right when he said there was still owing on players, meaning he lied about paying off the all debt? He can't be both. Ashley Statement 14 Sept 2008: But like any business with assets the club has debts. I paid £134 million out of my own pocket for the club. I then poured another £110 million into the club not to pay off the debt but just to reduce it. The club is still in debt. Even worse than that, the club still owes millions of pounds in transfer fees. I shall be paying out many more millions over the coming year to pay for players bought by the club before I arrived. This really is a non story. Written by some Mackem journo looking to deflect attention away from Keane. You lot are too easy. Agreed, amazingly.

Tbf to him, I think he wanted to sell, but the markets have gone against him. Needs to get that price down a tad as well. In principle you'd think that was a good idea. The problem is, the asset has a value that is based on more than market sentiment, it is based on revenue streams, future growth potential, the brand, all sorts of things that are more tangible than 'market turbulence'. If you drop the price low enough, then you open up the market to not just serious investors but anyone who can scrabble together the lowered asking price. Just think what sort of people would put their hat into the ring if the price was a quid. (actually didnt Abramovic buy Chelsea for a quid?). Anyway, you get my point.

Cant be helping any sale if there is a court case as that case would be KK against NUFC rather than Mick Ashley. Whoever buys the club will inherit the case too. Thats got to be a factor in the sale.

Do we know if its going to court then?

Now he's got a 6 month contract you'd think the tight cunt would pay for dinner.

Yes I'm seriously telling you just that. Doesnt make you right though. The LMA released a statement saying more or less that anyway. So the LMA have said it but Keegan cant as he'd get sued? He can say anything he wants to say at any time, his lawyer may advise against him saying anything that would prejudice his case. Thats assuming there is a case? Keegan is suing us i take it, was never sure?

Yes I'm seriously telling you just that. Doesnt make you right though.

The one on Kilburn High st or the one near Liverpool st that Stevie goes to?

is it not too early to be on the drink? Too many negative threads. Look beyond the horizon lads. Thats the spirit, i think this is what they mean by the 'Blitz mentality' or was that 'blitzed mentally' i may be confused.

Crazy fucking bitch, who on earth would stalk Tom?

It's largely the case, often the ground work (which is often unsexy and unpatentable, but vital) is done with public money and the results lead to private pushes and profit (and no private company wants to do the ground work as their competitors can gain from it). Although like I said the black hole this is ends up as results a negative feedback into public research. The political will to change this is almost never there, because of the potential £££'s being wafted around. Name 3.

I must admit you've got good flannel, you're admitting I'm correct, without seeming to do so. I'll agree with the small and not so important point that companies employ some cynical tricks to keep exclusivity to what is theirs from rabid profiteering lawyers who never invest in healthcare. That ignores the bigger picture though and concedes nothing on what i've said on this. Tbf though once the drugs become generics they are much cheaper are they not? Obviously.

YOU brought up an HIV vaccine as an example of something requiring huge investment that only GSK et al are willing to risk. http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=542960 That didn't seem to be the case as far as I could tell. I hope you're right and if somethiong is found, all the profits go to the public coffers that funded the research, but my assumption is that the public R&D money goes to private corporations who retain ownership of what they then find. I'm not sure on that though. What an age we live in. It's brilliant. Now if only we could get the 17th century drug Quinine to the 10 Million people a year that die of malaria. On your first point, agreed in principle, i'm just saying it hasnt happened yet and therefore i'm still looking for those 3 drugs that i asked fop to name. Feel free to have a go too. On your second point, are you advocating free gin'n'tonics for the 3rd world? How very colonial of you.

I must admit you've got good flannel, you're admitting I'm correct, without seeming to do so. I'll agree with the small and not so important point that companies employ some cynical tricks to keep exclusivity to what is theirs from rabid profiteering lawyers who never invest in healthcare. That ignores the bigger picture though and concedes nothing on what i've said on this.

I dealt with it in the post where i called you stupid for thinking we make money by making people sicker. The patent delaying tactics are a bit spurious but without the initial patent, there is no initial drug so the world is worse off without the product in the first place if you dont have a patent. Whether you delay price cuts by 6 months or not doesnt address how you get the products in the first place, which was dealt with by Renton when he asked which government is going to take the risk with 500m investment on something that has a high chance fo failing. I wouldnt disagree that delaying the patent may seem cynical but that ignores these points and the bigger picture.

Who's had a pop? Chez says it's you and him that want to redesign the system. To make it more profitable. Or to make it more available, at least from my pov. To those with the money. So the problem is income inequality then. Well done on getting there

http://www.medaxial.com/downloads/higherhealthcarespend.pdf Apologies withheld.

How you connect the question you pose to the response is anyones guess.