The Andy Carroll Con

[ChezGiven 0]

I can only assume that, even though the financial wizards on here will argue that Ashley is losing money hand over fist, he isn't. Somehow, it's worth his while to keep this going and it certainly is not down to interest in Newcastle or a love of the game.

 

I don't see any need to speculate with regards to club finances when we can turn to Chez for the cold hard facts that exist only in his imagination.

 

Last I heard the club were waiting until they sell some NUFC mugs so they can put some petrol in the lawnmower and give the pitch a good once over.

Which ones?

[ChezGiven 0]

Wait til the end of the window for threads like this man. There'll be a certain few posters with a shitload of egg on their faces when the window closes, but there's no need to try and win the argument now.

Who? No one has predicted much in this thread. There has been some discussion on what is available but not many saying what will happen.

[sniffer 0]

On paper, yes it appears that only the AC money is the difference.

 

But, can anybody believe that Ashley actually shelled out nearly 6 mill on Xisco, for example? I'd be more inclined to think that some of that money found its way into somebody's back pocket as that seemed a dodgy deal. Perhaps Ashley's pocket.

[NJS 3984]

On paper, yes it appears that only the AC money is the difference.

 

But, can anybody believe that Ashley actually shelled out nearly 6 mill on Xisco, for example? I'd be more inclined to think that some of that money found its way into somebody's back pocket as that seemed a dodgy deal. Perhaps Ashley's pocket.

 

Fucking hell, I know Ashley is a cunt but if you want to go down that route you would have to talk about Shepherd and his relationship with Willie McKay.

[LeazesMag 0]

I can only assume that, even though the financial wizards on here will argue that Ashley is losing money hand over fist, he isn't. Somehow, it's worth his while to keep this going and it certainly is not down to interest in Newcastle or a love of the game.

 

 

Please explain, I'd really like to understand that theory. As I guess would HMRC and companies house etc etc

 

Other than Dekka and Mike perfecting Alchemy in the Lab of Cockney Evil in the bowels of SJP, I'm struggling to find an explanation to explain this huge fiddle.

 

I mean the auditors Price Waterhouse Coopers (or some such) sign off the accounts on the basis that the owner underwrites and is subsidising the club as a going concern and yet he's coining it in, fucking outrageous, someone should be told !!!!!!

 

I hesitate to say it as know I'm wasting my breath, but Leazes' argument that football clubs never go 'bust' because someone always comes in to save them (and he does genuinely advocate that approach) does have the intrinsic weakness that the personality of the person who arrives as 'saviour' becomes a key factor. So if you like, ironically, despite everything he says about Ashley, the person who has really got his man is Leazes. You can't have it both ways after all.

 

Ok yeah, it could have been an Arab. But it wasn't.

 

As to sniffer, I imagine it is worth Ashley 'keeping it going' as long theres nobody currently willing to buy it off him. What would be your alternative suggestion for him, like?

 

Exactly.

 

Here's me saying that the club, at the time of the sale, had been transformed into one of the biggest in europe from a 3rd rate tea shop with a cow shed of a ground heading for the 3rd divison which the whole football world had forgotten about including local business and 30000 supporters who didn't even bother to try and raise 2.5m quid to buy the thing.

 

But according to Toonpack, it was a shit business on its knees on the brink of going into administration [despite having the 14th largest turnover in world football]

 

Then Mike Ashley, being an absolute idiot, comes along and was stupid enough to buy it and "save it", according to Toonpack and other members of his band of merry football accountants.

 

When he leaves us in at a certain point of the decline, someone else will - hopefully - come along and buy those despicable "trophy players" again, much to everyone's relief, who slated it all when it happened the last time....

Edited June 24, 2011 by LeazesMag

[sniffer 0]

On paper, yes it appears that only the AC money is the difference.

 

But, can anybody believe that Ashley actually shelled out nearly 6 mill on Xisco, for example? I'd be more inclined to think that some of that money found its way into somebody's back pocket as that seemed a dodgy deal. Perhaps Ashley's pocket.

 

Fucking hell, I know Ashley is a cunt but if you want to go down that route you would have to talk about Shepherd and his relationship with Willie McKay.

 

I have absolutely no doubt at all that FS made money out of NUFC. I also have no doubt that he made more than is reported.

 

That doesn't mean that Ashley is squeaky clean.

[LeazesMag 0]

On paper, yes it appears that only the AC money is the difference.

 

But, can anybody believe that Ashley actually shelled out nearly 6 mill on Xisco, for example? I'd be more inclined to think that some of that money found its way into somebody's back pocket as that seemed a dodgy deal. Perhaps Ashley's pocket.

 

Fucking hell, I know Ashley is a cunt but if you want to go down that route you would have to talk about Shepherd and his relationship with Willie McKay.

 

I have absolutely no doubt at all that FS made money out of NUFC. I also have no doubt that he made more than is reported.

 

That doesn't mean that Ashley is squeaky clean.

 

See, this is something I can't really see the point of disputing, everybody wants to make money out of something, it's not a crime, it's just life. I don't care if the Halls and Shepherd made money, they saved the club and took risks, however minimal in proportion to what came later, in fact what came later came because it was a success. They took their financial rewards like people do, but as supporters, they gave us a good 15 years, shame we didn't win a trophy or two, but we came close a lot of times and it was by far the best years in half a century.

 

If Mike Ashley does the same I wouldn't begrude him selling on and making money either.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

[LeazesMag 0]

 

it's all about "The Andy Carroll con" mate. We are waiting for him to stop conning us and see the money invested in good footballers again.

[sammynb 2929]

I can only assume that, even though the financial wizards on here will argue that Ashley is losing money hand over fist, he isn't. Somehow, it's worth his while to keep this going and it certainly is not down to interest in Newcastle or a love of the game.

 

 

Please explain, I'd really like to understand that theory. As I guess would HMRC and companies house etc etc

 

Other than Dekka and Mike perfecting Alchemy in the Lab of Cockney Evil in the bowels of SJP, I'm struggling to find an explanation to explain this huge fiddle.

 

I mean the auditors Price Waterhouse Coopers (or some such) sign off the accounts on the basis that the owner underwrites and is subsidising the club as a going concern and yet he's coining it in, fucking outrageous, someone should be told !!!!!!

 

I hesitate to say it as know I'm wasting my breath, but Leazes' argument that football clubs never go 'bust' because someone always comes in to save them (and he does genuinely advocate that approach) does have the intrinsic weakness that the personality of the person who arrives as 'saviour' becomes a key factor. So if you like, ironically, despite everything he says about Ashley, the person who has really got his man is Leazes. You can't have it both ways after all.

 

Ok yeah, it could have been an Arab. But it wasn't.

 

As to sniffer, I imagine it is worth Ashley 'keeping it going' as long theres nobody currently willing to buy it off him. What would be your alternative suggestion for him, like?

 

I have no idea.

I don't know Ashley, same as everybody on here, other than what I read about him but he doesn't appear to be the type who'll just continue to lose money in an investment. He doesn't appear to have any great love for football, has no connections with the area, doesn't live here and and employs a cunt like lambias who is hated by everybody. I don't have the confidence that you seem to have in everything being above board in the finances because I don't believe he'd still be here if he wasn't making money somehow.

 

I reckon he'd sell if he could find a buyer but he can't. That's why I think he's staying.

 

If he honestly has made any money out of the club (ie drawings and/or capital gain (appreciation of the asset) being greater than what he's spent (cost of acquisition and additional finances put in (even if they are 'loans')) I would be utterly astonished.

 

I'm seriously amazed how much people write off the dollar value NUFC has as an international billboard for Sports Direct.

For me it's one of Ashley's biggest motivations for owning the club.

Just look at how much of his signage has crept into the stadium and think of what that would cost as a sponsorship?

If Spuds are getting 20m for a two year shirt sponsorship deal, what's SJP worth as one large S-P.com ad?

What will it be worth once it appears on the front of our shirt?

[sniffer 0]

On paper, yes it appears that only the AC money is the difference.

 

But, can anybody believe that Ashley actually shelled out nearly 6 mill on Xisco, for example? I'd be more inclined to think that some of that money found its way into somebody's back pocket as that seemed a dodgy deal. Perhaps Ashley's pocket.

 

Fucking hell, I know Ashley is a cunt but if you want to go down that route you would have to talk about Shepherd and his relationship with Willie McKay.

 

I have absolutely no doubt at all that FS made money out of NUFC. I also have no doubt that he made more than is reported.

 

That doesn't mean that Ashley is squeaky clean.

 

See, this is something I can't really see the point of disputing, everybody wants to make money out of something, it's not a crime, it's just life. I don't care if the Halls and Shepherd made money, they saved the club and took risks, however minimal in proportion to what came later, in fact what came later came because it was a success. They took their financial rewards like people do, but as supporters, they gave us a good 15 years, shame we didn't win a trophy or two, but we came close a lot of times and it was by far the best years in half a century.

 

If Mike Ashley does the same I wouldn't begrude him selling on and making money either.

 

That's the point I'm making. There may be a few owners who are losing money running premier league clubs, some of them because they love the game and are rich enough to indulge themselves. I don't think Ashley is one of them despite what the accountants say.

 

I'm with you in that the FCB could make as much as he wants if his ambition matched it.

[Toonpack 6872]

On paper, yes it appears that only the AC money is the difference.

 

But, can anybody believe that Ashley actually shelled out nearly 6 mill on Xisco, for example? I'd be more inclined to think that some of that money found its way into somebody's back pocket as that seemed a dodgy deal. Perhaps Ashley's pocket.

 

Fucking hell, I know Ashley is a cunt but if you want to go down that route you would have to talk about Shepherd and his relationship with Willie McKay.

 

I have absolutely no doubt at all that FS made money out of NUFC. I also have no doubt that he made more than is reported.

 

That doesn't mean that Ashley is squeaky clean.

 

See, this is something I can't really see the point of disputing, everybody wants to make money out of something, it's not a crime, it's just life. I don't care if the Halls and Shepherd made money, they saved the club and took risks, however minimal in proportion to what came later, in fact what came later came because it was a success. They took their financial rewards like people do, but as supporters, they gave us a good 15 years, shame we didn't win a trophy or two, but we came close a lot of times and it was by far the best years in half a century.

 

If Mike Ashley does the same I wouldn't begrude him selling on and making money either.

 

That's the point I'm making. There may be a few owners who are losing money running premier league clubs, some of them because they love the game and are rich enough to indulge themselves. I don't think Ashley is one of them despite what the accountants say.

 

I'm with you in that the FCB could make as much as he wants if his ambition matched it.

 

The only owners who are making money are those who charge interest on their loans to their clubs, even terming that as "making money" is a bit of a stretch. (the owners who charge interest is basically all of them btw, except Ashley and Al Fayed, last I looked, and maybe the Stoke guy but he's in for less than £10Mill).

 

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

[OTF 6188]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

[LeazesMag 0]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

[jaythesouthernmag 0]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

When Man U sold Ronaldo did Fergie go on a 60/70 mil spending spree??

 

I doubt the 35mil will be used solely on transfers but I will be disappointed if we don't sign more quality players, its not all down to fees if we do smart business. Look at Hernandez, 7 mil?? There must be more out there like him

[Toonpack 6872]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

Has anyone said different ???

 

The lies Grow up FFS

[Toonpack 6872]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

When Man U sold Ronaldo did Fergie go on a 60/70 mil spending spree??

 

I doubt the 35mil will be used solely on transfers but I will be disappointed if we don't sign more quality players, its not all down to fees if we do smart business. Look at Hernandez, 7 mil?? There must be more out there like him

 

That's the bit I can't comprehend that people don't get. Apart from City and Chelsea none of the "succesfull" clubs spend what they don't have.

[LeazesMag 0]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

When Man U sold Ronaldo did Fergie go on a 60/70 mil spending spree??

 

I doubt the 35mil will be used solely on transfers but I will be disappointed if we don't sign more quality players, its not all down to fees if we do smart business. Look at Hernandez, 7 mil?? There must be more out there like him

 

We've been down this road. What a shame he spent 30m quid on Rooney, if he'd been a bit sharper he could have got him for nowt when he was 15.

 

Not being funny like, but this has been explained numerous times. nobody is successful purely 100% on the back of finding these players for peanuts before anybody else, it's never happened in the history of the game, and isn't about to start happening now.

 

Like it or not, big transfers are part of the game, they raise a clubs profile, they sell shirts, they motivate other players at the club, they motivate supporters, they give you publicity, TV exposure, everything.

 

Newcastle United are one of the few clubs in the UK with the fanbase and potential to be able to compete for these sort of players, and people like you say they shouldn't do it ? You don't realise how lucky it is to have a club like this [but unlucky when the twats in charge don't see it or attempt to exploit it, as is the case]

 

Can you just try and absorb this, accept it, and stop belittling the club and realise that this is one of the biggest clubs in europe we are talking about here ?

 

ManU would not get 52,000 crowds if they had gone over 50 years without winning a domestic trophy, and Liverpool certainly wouldn't get anywhere near it.

[LeazesMag 0]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

When Man U sold Ronaldo did Fergie go on a 60/70 mil spending spree??

 

I doubt the 35mil will be used solely on transfers but I will be disappointed if we don't sign more quality players, its not all down to fees if we do smart business. Look at Hernandez, 7 mil?? There must be more out there like him

 

That's the bit I can't comprehend that people don't get. Apart from City and Chelsea none of the "succesfull" clubs spend what they don't have.

 

quite amazing to claim that ManU would not back Alex Ferguson if he sees a footballer he wants to buy, after all these years and success.

[jaythesouthernmag 0]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

When Man U sold Ronaldo did Fergie go on a 60/70 mil spending spree??

 

I doubt the 35mil will be used solely on transfers but I will be disappointed if we don't sign more quality players, its not all down to fees if we do smart business. Look at Hernandez, 7 mil?? There must be more out there like him

 

That's the bit I can't comprehend that people don't get. Apart from City and Chelsea none of the "succesfull" clubs spend what they don't have.

 

quite amazing to claim that ManU would not back Alex Ferguson if he sees a footballer he wants to buy, after all these years and success.

Did I??

 

When did I do that??

[Toonpack 6872]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

When Man U sold Ronaldo did Fergie go on a 60/70 mil spending spree??

 

I doubt the 35mil will be used solely on transfers but I will be disappointed if we don't sign more quality players, its not all down to fees if we do smart business. Look at Hernandez, 7 mil?? There must be more out there like him

 

That's the bit I can't comprehend that people don't get. Apart from City and Chelsea none of the "succesfull" clubs spend what they don't have.

 

quite amazing to claim that ManU would not back Alex Ferguson if he sees a footballer he wants to buy, after all these years and success.

 

I never claimed that, they've never had to "dig that deep", you're making shite up again.

[LeazesMag 0]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

When Man U sold Ronaldo did Fergie go on a 60/70 mil spending spree??

 

I doubt the 35mil will be used solely on transfers but I will be disappointed if we don't sign more quality players, its not all down to fees if we do smart business. Look at Hernandez, 7 mil?? There must be more out there like him

 

That's the bit I can't comprehend that people don't get. Apart from City and Chelsea none of the "succesfull" clubs spend what they don't have.

 

quite amazing to claim that ManU would not back Alex Ferguson if he sees a footballer he wants to buy, after all these years and success.

Did I??

 

When did I do that??

 

I give up.

[LeazesMag 0]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

When Man U sold Ronaldo did Fergie go on a 60/70 mil spending spree??

 

I doubt the 35mil will be used solely on transfers but I will be disappointed if we don't sign more quality players, its not all down to fees if we do smart business. Look at Hernandez, 7 mil?? There must be more out there like him

 

That's the bit I can't comprehend that people don't get. Apart from City and Chelsea none of the "succesfull" clubs spend what they don't have.

 

quite amazing to claim that ManU would not back Alex Ferguson if he sees a footballer he wants to buy, after all these years and success.

 

I never claimed that, they've never had to "dig that deep", you're making shite up again.

 

ManU have backed Alex Ferguson for 25 years man, they have bought top footballers from all over the world. Ronaldo went to Real because he had won everything at Man U, they have just reached the European Cup Final without him, how many footballers can replace Ronaldo ? Do you expect him to go to Barcelona and buy Messi just to prove to you that "they aren't a selling club" or something ? What exactly is your absurd point ?

[Happy Face 29]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

When Man U sold Ronaldo did Fergie go on a 60/70 mil spending spree??

 

I doubt the 35mil will be used solely on transfers but I will be disappointed if we don't sign more quality players, its not all down to fees if we do smart business. Look at Hernandez, 7 mil?? There must be more out there like him

 

That's the bit I can't comprehend that people don't get. Apart from City and Chelsea none of the "succesfull" clubs spend what they don't have.

 

Man U have debts of £478m

 

They've spent over £44m this year (so far), they're after a keeper next.

 

http://www.soccerbase.com/teams/team.sd?te...mTabs=transfers

Edited June 25, 2011 by Happy Face

[ChezGiven 0]

Said it before, there's plenty of sticks to beat Ashley up with, but money isn't one of them, seriously it's not.

 

Mismanagement of money.

 

The sale of Andy Carroll for 35M is only a good sale if we end up with a better team as a result.

 

We've been lied to over and over again, about money, player retention, you name it. This is just another one of the lies, another con that the gullible will seemingly gulp down eagerly. If the core of the supporters stopped acting like mugs then they'd have to stop treating them like mugs.

 

in a nutshell. Instead of going round in circles and instead of the football accountants trotting out all the excuses, that is the bottom line, and the record of Mike Ashley so far suggests that this is most definitely NOT going to happen and this money is NOT going to be re-invested in purchases by his appointed manager.

When Man U sold Ronaldo did Fergie go on a 60/70 mil spending spree??

 

I doubt the 35mil will be used solely on transfers but I will be disappointed if we don't sign more quality players, its not all down to fees if we do smart business. Look at Hernandez, 7 mil?? There must be more out there like him

 

That's the bit I can't comprehend that people don't get. Apart from City and Chelsea none of the "succesfull" clubs spend what they don't have.

 

Man U have debts of £478m

 

They've spent over £44m this year (so far), they're after a keeper next.

 

http://www.soccerbase.com/teams/team.sd?te...mTabs=transfers

Therefore we should too?

 

Seriously?