F.A.O Leazesmag

[NJS 3985]

where will the money come from Leazes?

 

Man City have spent about £300m to get to 3rd/4th.

 

Villa and the Mackems have spent millions for almost no return.

 

I think you need a comnbination of money and good management but sadly if Ashley won't invest and discarding a sale, all the increased profits in the viable world won't fund substantial resources.

 

I agree we could and should be up there - practicalities is another thing.

[LeazesMag 0]

where will the money come from Leazes?

 

selling your muslim submarine

Edited May 18, 2011 by LeazesMag

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Would have loved to being on here a few years ago when Leazes was the one defending the board and every fucker else was slagging it off! How surreal.

[LeazesMag 0]

 

Why can't you see the difference between where people want us be based on our stature and in an ideal world versus where they think finishing in the real world given the fact that we have an arsehole owner and limited resources compared with the teams above is reasonable?

 

arsehole owner = correct

limited resources [because of the arsehole owner] = correct

compared to the teams above us = rubbish

 

Which is the entire point.

 

 

Which brings us back to square one.

 

Given that he won't invest his money, where will it come from?

 

Please don't say something about maximum revenues - as I've said before even if we suddenly made £50m profit a year which we never came within a million miles of doing in the past it would still take investment at that level for about 5 years before we'd be where we all want to be.

 

That's why the realists among us think talking as if we are going there is pointless.

 

He won't answer that as his pre prepared copy and paste answers don't fit the question

 

these copy and paste questions. If revenues have been eroded, there's only one man to blame.

 

Ref the stadium debts which are due to finish in 2 years time, do you not think it was a good idea to expand the stadium and further maximise revenue while people were attracted to games etc, if not, why not ? Do you think rather than acquire the money based on ticket sales and revenues, they should have saved the money up first

 

When do you think we will qualify for europe again ?

 

Also as per the topic of this thread, what is your opinion in finishing in the top ten of the league 4 times in 6 years under the hopeless Shepherd and maybe once in 4 years under soopa Mike ?

 

Just so the thread isn't derailed, answer the questions.

 

bump

 

Where is Mad Jock

[LeazesMag 0]

Would have loved to being on here a few years ago when Leazes was the one defending the board and every fucker else was slagging it off! How surreal.

 

and now they realise I was right apart from you and TN that is...

[Toonpack 6874]

Would have loved to being on here a few years ago when Leazes was the one defending the board and every fucker else was slagging it off! How surreal.

 

and now they realise I was right apart from you and TN that is...

 

Just for the record, I don't.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Would have loved to being on here a few years ago when Leazes was the one defending the board and every fucker else was slagging it off! How surreal.

 

and now they realise I was right apart from you and TN that is...

 

Just for the record, I don't.

 

Me neither, not sure if we would still have a club if your uncle was still in charge.

 

 

[LeazesMag 0]

oh well, 2 people who don't go to games don't agree with me

[Toonpack 6874]

oh well, 2 people who don't go to games don't agree with me

 

Yet, MWNN who you hold up as a the paragon of all Skunkers because he does agree with you, doesn't go to games anymore.

 

BTW You're not agreed with, because you are WRONG. Simple really.

[LeazesMag 0]

oh well, 2 people who don't go to games don't agree with me

 

Yet, MWNN who you hold up as a the paragon of all Skunkers because he does agree with you, doesn't go to games anymore.

 

BTW You're not agreed with, because you are WRONG. Simple really.

 

but I'm NOT. Simple really.

 

We will NEVER match the european qualifications of the Halls and Shepherd, under Mike Ashley. We will NOT compete at the levels where Spurs and Liverpool are now doing. We will, by their own statements, become a selling club ie a feeder club for clubs like this again, as we were before the halls and Shepherd, and THAT makes me very much RIGHT.

 

Don't you find it quite sad that you are holding up a message board where only 2 people have any brains, the vast majority of the others actually thought Mike Ashley was a good owner just because he bought pints for everybody in Tiger Tiger ?

Edited May 18, 2011 by LeazesMag

[Christmas Tree 3997]

oh well, 2 people who don't go to games don't agree with me

 

Yet, MWNN who you hold up as a the paragon of all Skunkers because he does agree with you, doesn't go to games anymore.

 

BTW You're not agreed with, because you are WRONG. Simple really.

 

but I'm NOT. Simple really.

 

We will NEVER match the european qualifications of the Halls and Shepherd, under Mike Ashley. We will NOT compete at the levels where Spurs and Liverpool are now doing. We will, by their own statements, become a selling club ie a feeder club for clubs like this again, as we were before the halls and Shepherd, and THAT makes me very much RIGHT.

 

Don't you find it quite sad that you are holding up a message board where only 2 people have any brains, the vast majority of the others actually thought Mike Ashley was a good owner just because he bought pints for everybody in Tiger Tiger ?

 

 

[LeazesMag 0]

oh well, 2 people who don't go to games don't agree with me

 

Yet, MWNN who you hold up as a the paragon of all Skunkers because he does agree with you, doesn't go to games anymore.

 

BTW You're not agreed with, because you are WRONG. Simple really.

 

but I'm NOT. Simple really.

 

We will NEVER match the european qualifications of the Halls and Shepherd, under Mike Ashley. We will NOT compete at the levels where Spurs and Liverpool are now doing. We will, by their own statements, become a selling club ie a feeder club for clubs like this again, as we were before the halls and Shepherd, and THAT makes me very much RIGHT.

 

Don't you find it quite sad that you are holding up a message board where only 2 people have any brains, the vast majority of the others actually thought Mike Ashley was a good owner just because he bought pints for everybody in Tiger Tiger ?

 

 

 

just answering questions. Take note.

 

Where is Mad Jock ? Is he waiting to see if we manage to get into the top 10 for the first time under his man Ashley ?

[Toonpack 6874]

We will NEVER match the european qualifications of the Halls and Shepherd, under Mike Ashley. We will NOT compete at the levels where Spurs and Liverpool are now doing. We will, by their own statements, become a selling club ie a feeder club for clubs like this again, as we were before the halls and Shepherd, and THAT makes me very much RIGHT.

 

But you're not "right", because the thing you incessantly miss, is, the points you make in that statement were equally true in the latter years of the previous regime and we would never have matched the European qualifications of the Robson/Keegan era's under the continued stewardship of Halls/Shepherd either.

 

Why, because of the simple fact that neither the Halls nor Shepherd were rich enough to subsidise the club to be able to compete in the changed landscape of the modern game. (even if they wanted to).

 

The game has constantly changed, for example, if the game had been the same in the Robson era as it was under Keegan, we wouldn't have seen CL football under SBR either, because 3rd and 4th wouldn't have been enough. Basically our "golden period" was pre 97 we've been falling behind ever since.

Edited May 19, 2011 by Toonpack

[Happy Face 29]

[Toonpack 6874]

 

Aye I know, even if all I can see is a red cross. (Properties is usefull though).

 

It's like a bad itch, cannit help meself.

Edited May 19, 2011 by Toonpack

[NJS 3985]

You could of course point out the logical fallacy of being "right" based on future predictions.

 

I agree its unlikely we'll see success under Ashley but until his reign of terror is actually over you can't judge it in its entirety.

[Toonpack 6874]

You could of course point out the logical fallacy of being "right" based on future predictions.

 

I agree its unlikely we'll see success under Ashley but until his reign of terror is actually over you can't judge it in its entirety.

 

True enough, it's just I can't help myself taking issue with the incessant portrayal that the club as akin to a world of permanent sunshine, sweet smelling flowers, butterflies and unicorns then overnight the landscape became the worst of the industrial revolution.

[Guest alex]

Ok, TP. You've made your point

[ChezGiven 0]

You could of course point out the logical fallacy of being "right" based on future predictions.

 

I agree its unlikely we'll see success under Ashley but until his reign of terror is actually over you can't judge it in its entirety.

 

True enough, it's just I can't help myself taking issue with the incessant portrayal that the club as akin to a world of permanent sunshine, sweet smelling flowers, butterflies and unicorns then overnight the landscape became the worst of the industrial revolution.

I honestly think that by the age of 12 or maybe 13, a young fairly intelligent schoolkid could grasp this point. The Shepherd and Halls sold because they are small fry in the world of international business which is now dominating football finance. There is no way that they could have bankrolled the club with personal money like Lerner at Villa (£38m of his own cash), the Bet365 owning Coates family at Stoke (£43m), Edwin Davies at Bolton (£85m) or even Al Fayed at Fulham (£187m). All of these clubs have been personally subsidised by enormous wealth which is 2 or 3 leagues above our previous owners.

 

If you dont address this issue, you'll forever think it would have been better if the previous board had stayed. It wouldnt have been. The facts are

 

1. Life was better under the previous board and it doesnt look like being surpassed by the current lot.

2. If the previous board had remained our trajectory would have been worse financially, as the cost of debt would have been transferred to the club and total debt would have soared.

 

Any other reading is just wrong.

[NJS 3985]

I think it's LM's suggestion that there's nothing stopping Ashley (without using his personal wealth) from running the club the same way as previously and achieviing any kind of similar success in 2011 that is the most flabbergasting.

 

I'm not sure what the maximum profit figure ever achieved was but I'm pretty sure whatever it was repeated over even 5 years wouldn't fund the squad improvement necessary.

[LeazesMag 0]

We will NEVER match the european qualifications of the Halls and Shepherd, under Mike Ashley. We will NOT compete at the levels where Spurs and Liverpool are now doing. We will, by their own statements, become a selling club ie a feeder club for clubs like this again, as we were before the halls and Shepherd, and THAT makes me very much RIGHT.

 

But you're not "right", because the thing you incessantly miss, is, the points you make in that statement were equally true in the latter years of the previous regime and we would never have matched the European qualifications of the Robson/Keegan era's under the continued stewardship of Halls/Shepherd either.

 

Why, because of the simple fact that neither the Halls nor Shepherd were rich enough to subsidise the club to be able to compete in the changed landscape of the modern game. (even if they wanted to).

 

The game has constantly changed, for example, if the game had been the same in the Robson era as it was under Keegan, we wouldn't have seen CL football under SBR either, because 3rd and 4th wouldn't have been enough. Basically our "golden period" was pre 97 we've been falling behind ever since.

 

Listen, like all the idiots on skunkers etc, you have allowed your expectations to dive. Nobody has EVER said we should be competing financially with Chelsea, Man City and ManU because of their global appeal. You show me a post where I've ever said this.

 

You can't speculate what WOULD have happened under the previous regime, because nobody knows. The point is what DID happen. They did great for the club, and even when we were in europe, idiots were complainnig about "trophy signings" [mind boggling this], and how "anybody but Fred would be better". I said they were talking bollocks, and they have been proved to have been talking bollocks, because the "trophy signngs" stopped and with it stopped europe, capacity stadiums, sponsors, and revenues put against our rivals. So that means I was right. This is what HAS happened. What HAS happened under Mike Ashley is that the club has been relegated, and is now a selling club again, and supporters are being brainwashed into thinking that we have to compete at the levels of Blackburn and Bolton and have no chance of keeping our best players anymore, just like those clubs. This is bollocks, absolute bollocks.

 

The first post of this very thread encompasses how the irrational hatred for Shepherd and the belief that "anyone could do better" took over any logical thought process, Mad Jock doesn't even see his own stupidity when he is trying to say that "Shepherd finishing in the top 10 on 4 occasions in 6 years is inferior to Mike Ashleys [possible at best, we will see on Sunday] 1 time out of 4". YOU defend and agree with such warped logic ? What planet do you live in ?

 

Does anybody think the stadium expansion was a bad idea, surely NOBODY is THAT stupid, but that is how people come across. Structuring the repayments in the way they were was a good scheme, if revenues have gone down, there is only one person to blame. It's incredible that it appears people are so warped they are probably trying to blame [the Halls] and Shepherd for this, 4 years after they sold and 2 years before the loan is finished [according to Mad Jock] the foresight of which will actually put us in a great position....

 

A 12 year old can understand this.

Edited May 19, 2011 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

You could of course point out the logical fallacy of being "right" based on future predictions.

 

I agree its unlikely we'll see success under Ashley but until his reign of terror is actually over you can't judge it in its entirety.

 

True enough, it's just I can't help myself taking issue with the incessant portrayal that the club as akin to a world of permanent sunshine, sweet smelling flowers, butterflies and unicorns then overnight the landscape became the worst of the industrial revolution.

I honestly think that by the age of 12 or maybe 13, a young fairly intelligent schoolkid could grasp this point. The Shepherd and Halls sold because they are small fry in the world of international business which is now dominating football finance. There is no way that they could have bankrolled the club with personal money like Lerner at Villa (£38m of his own cash), the Bet365 owning Coates family at Stoke (£43m), Edwin Davies at Bolton (£85m) or even Al Fayed at Fulham (£187m). All of these clubs have been personally subsidised by enormous wealth which is 2 or 3 leagues above our previous owners.

 

If you dont address this issue, you'll forever think it would have been better if the previous board had stayed. It wouldnt have been. The facts are

 

1. Life was better under the previous board and it doesnt look like being surpassed by the current lot.

2. If the previous board had remained our trajectory would have been worse financially, as the cost of debt would have been transferred to the club and total debt would have soared.

 

Any other reading is just wrong.

 

I've answered the post by TP, again. I'm surprised at you. My points have been made fairly clear, but I've done it again. If you can't seriously see by now, how Mike Ashley is taking this club downwards, I don't know how else I can say it.

[ChezGiven 0]

I can see it but i can also not see any feasible way a board as relatively poor as the previous one would have survived. Did you not read the list of personal wealth invested into Bolton, Stoke, Fulham etc? Its right across the board. Wigan's chairman had to invest his own money too. He is 10 to 15 times richer than the Hall and Shepherd family put together. Take it from an professional economist of 15 years, the bank would have been a bad, temporary and inadequate solution. Increasing commercial revenues by 10 to 15m is neither here nor there, it would have hardly paid for the accumulated debt.

 

With the amount of subsidised wealth in the premiership now (paying for the overall debt), its not hard to draw these conclusions. The model has changed, i thank the previous board for giving us the platform, i castigate the current lot for not taking advantage of that platform. The reason why they havent is because the investment required now is absurd and they are tight arses. Its not a one dimensional argument though, he has used personal wealth, just lower levels of it than at Bolton and Stoke. That personal wealth didnt exist for the previous board. Well it does now, after Ashley paid them 136m for the club they bought for 3m but even that is peanuts am afraid.

[LeazesMag 0]

I can see it but i can also not see any feasible way a board as relatively poor as the previous one would have survived. Did you not read the list of personal wealth invested into Bolton, Stoke, Fulham etc? Its right across the board. Wigan's chairman had to invest his own money too. He is 10 to 15 times richer than the Hall and Shepherd family put together. Take it from an professional economist of 15 years, the bank would have been a bad, temporary and inadequate solution. Increasing commercial revenues by 10 to 15m is neither here nor there, it would have hardly paid for the accumulated debt.

 

With the amount of subsidised wealth in the premiership now (paying for the overall debt), its not hard to draw these conclusions. The model has changed, i thank the previous board for giving us the platform, i castigate the current lot for not taking advantage of that platform. The reason why they havent is because the investment required now is absurd and they are tight arses. Its not a one dimensional argument though, he has used personal wealth, just lower levels of it than at Bolton and Stoke. That personal wealth didnt exist for the previous board. Well it does now, after Ashley paid them 136m for the club they bought for 3m but even that is peanuts am afraid.

 

thats as may be, but the notion that "anybody but Fred" was bollocks, the constant harping on about "trophy signings" was bollocks, the point is that in their time they had the club competing where they ought to be. What you say is like saying Jackie Milburn wouldn't be as good as a modern centre forward because he played with a heavier ball and wore heavier boots. Its bollocks, you can only perform against your competitors. The next time someone buys "trophy players" and plays in europe, these fools will be wanking themselves stupid. The truth, the absolute truth, is that the Halls and Shepherd were victims of their own higher expectations, why else would idiots boo a team for only finishing 5th in the premiership, and the truth again is even then, idiots were starting to complain about how anybody else could have done better etc, because of the PR gaffes, the mock embarrassment about the "dogs", "cheap shirts", the comments about Stevenage etc, THIS is what the hatred is all about. People were so stupid they thought anybody would come in, eliminate the PR gaffes [didn't embarrass me in the slightest by the way] and thought the ambition would be automatic.

 

They have now been shown the ambition is NOT automatic.

 

Young lads I can understand, but people who witnessed the McKeag, Seymour etc era's, such ignorance is mind boggling. Quite simply, they have been shown to be idiotic and wrong, and the simple fact is that they won't bring themselves to admit it.

 

There is NO excuse for this football selling its best players behind the managers back for record fees and looking for cheap [much cheaper] 2nd rate replacements. THIS is what this club has became, this is what is going to happen, and YOU know it.

Edited May 19, 2011 by LeazesMag

[NJS 3985]

Why can't you realise that most people know and accept that the previous regime ran the club well but:

 

1. Their methods wouldn't work now - just an acknowledgment would be good.

2. How would you raise the money to mount the challenge we all agree we should make?

Edited May 19, 2011 by NJS