What would it take to end the cynicism?

[Guest You FCB Get Out Of Our Club]

I've said this and I mean it. Nothing less than a title challenge, and an apology with a mic in his hand on the pitch at 5 to 3 in all 19 home games, with a catchphrase at the end of each apology "sorry for taking the piss and being a mug". I'll never accept him.

[manc-mag 1]

I've said this and I mean it. Nothing less than a title challenge, and an apology with a mic in his hand on the pitch at 5 to 3 in all 19 home games, with a catchphrase at the end of each apology "sorry for taking the piss and being a mug". I'll never accept him.

 

 

With you ceremonially walking onto the pitch, arms folded and shaking your head each time, until the 19th game.

[Happy Face 29]

When have Newcastle fans ever been less than cynical about an owner/chairman?

 

Don't see why we worry about Ashley being back on good terms.

[tinofbeans 86]

i don't want him at my club. he's a cockney spurs supporting chancer mug.

 

hope that makes my views clear.

[Asprilla 96]

I've said this and I mean it. Nothing less than a title challenge, and an apology with a mic in his hand on the pitch at 5 to 3 in all 19 home games, with a catchphrase at the end of each apology "sorry for taking the piss and being a mug". I'll never accept him.

 

 

With you ceremonially walking onto the pitch, arms folded and shaking your head each time, until the 19th game.

[Dolly Potter MD 0]

Too late, damage is done. Get to fuck and watch your arse on the door as you leave.

 

This.

 

Seriously will never ever trust the bloke. He wants to make a statement of intent? Accept a reasonable offer for the club, cut your losses and accept failure to win us over. Oh aye and take your fucking SD ads with you too. I used to think Shepherd Offshore and Cameron Hall took the piss but it's nowt compared to this clown's outfit.

 

This.

 

In reality though, and this is testament to the man's character. The man is a reckless gambler who has refused to underwrite his own losses as well.

 

This is a pretty recent story. After England lost to the Croats in the European Cup qualifier he/SD tried weasel out of a contract by refusing to accept delivery [and thus not pay, i think it was Umbro - i can't remember if it was them, or Adidas after they bought out Umbro] of a bulk sized amount of replica shirts. Over 10 000 were to go Lillywhites alone. He simply got in early [before his competition did], ordered a massive quantity in bulk at a bulk/cut-price deal before England actually qualified. Basically it was his intention to saturate the market while savagely undercutting the oppositon.

 

His problem was [and he is a gambler] the fact they he failed to carry out due diligence, re: ordering up before the qualifiers had run their ourse. The gamble blew up in his face, and he was determined to not to bear any financial losses relating to his flawed judgment/gamble in this instance. He refused to take delivery [as mentioned] and Umbro threatened to sue for breach of contract, for which they had an iron clad case. Ashley [shite Direct] reluctantly took delivery, but still had the cheek to demand credit notes for each unit/replica that were to be eventually unsold.

 

The point being when in comes the ramifications of his poor business related decisions [where poor judgement is involved, thanks to a lack of due diligence] and the idea of accepting responsibility & accepting a financial loss [reluctantly taking a blow on the chin like a man of honour] doesn't compute where this man involved.

 

 

I dunno you'd characterise that as a 'failure to do due diligence' like. That's just a commercial gamble.

 

FWIW I imagine he doesn't ever do due diligence in his acquisitions. He probably can't see the benefit given the cost involved in doing due diligence checks only to be warned against a purchase. It wouldn't appeal to the gambler in him at all and tbf by and large the acquisitions he's made (I suspect without dd or with only the most cursory of checks) have made him an absolute fortune.

 

We are obviously the noteable exception.

 

He made his fortune through stockpiling of cheap brands during an economic boom period, and paraded them in what amounted to a market stall masquerading itself as a reputable alternative to classier establishments like JJB, and of course resorting to other unethical business practices. Fair play to him re: the piece placed in bold.

 

As previously pointed out, and we are not are notable exception in his track record [via the scenario/case stated]. Where 'commercial gambles' are concerned there's risk involved, from the top end of end of town right down the mum & dad investor dabbling in the sharemarket. At all levels on the playing field they're betting on fluctuating markets, taking a shot based on a hunch where potential losses can be mimimised with a degree of due diligence as per the post above. When you're betting & playing with largescale amounts of money [where there is a 49% shareholding attributed to other parties, as Ashley's was a only a majority shareholder at the time] some degree of due diligence was warranted, a play-it-safe policy of some sort.

 

It's all good & well to ride the highs, but the man is hesistant to cop a loss on the chin [by attempting to rip off his supplier - in effect forcing them to subsidise his poor judgement, and his company's paper loss]. By holding his early AGM's in a storage warehouse, away from the major metro centres & an hour away from any type of public transport, the man wasn't even brave enough to face up to the potential wrath of his shareholders in the wake of the company's drop in value & subequent failed gambles. This man has little regard to facing up to one's failings, even acting with a hint of transparency and being held accountable to the everyday punter.

 

As inferred in the earlier post this is a man without honour, and acts with blatant disregard to facing any type of, or accepting accountability. He won't [as he should] admitt to his spectacular failings as the club's owner & primary string-puller, and hence not force any potential buyer of the club to subsidise his paper loss & poor judgment by slapping down a ridicilous figure re: his asking price. As another poster intimated, 'accept a reasonable bid & walk away'.

 

On a different level playing field, and it relates to the football management caper. Once again it is a question of honour, argument holds water. Even Gullit knew when to walk away [on the back of a series of decisions, which apply to the transfer market and how footballers were/or were not treated with respect losing the support of dressing room in the process - decisions by which managers live & die by] at his own expense. For that Gullit deserves respect.

Edited January 7, 2011 by Year Zero