NUFC Debt

[LeazesMag 0]

Not ignoring it Leazes and wish we were doing it with either Ashley or anyone. I just cant see how it can be done without throwing a couple of hundred mill at it. (which would still be a gamble given who is already up there).

 

I think football in general is less enjoyable because the top four is so out of reach (not just us of course), but I think you always come across as making it sound as though bish bash bosh, we could be there so easily and without jeopardising the future existence of the club.

 

I still hope an arab etc comes in some day.

 

everybody wants that man. But we don't need it to act bigger than competing with the relegation candidates in the premiership.

 

I agree with that bit Leazes, but there's the ocean and the big blue sea between " competing with relegation candidates" and breaking the top four.

 

Bit more realism in your posts (kettle pot btw) would lead to less arguments, particularly given you were once an Ashley Fan.

 

bugger off. I didn't even want to sell my shares to the cunt

[peasepud 59]

Not ignoring it Leazes and wish we were doing it with either Ashley or anyone. I just cant see how it can be done without throwing a couple of hundred mill at it. (which would still be a gamble given who is already up there).

 

I think football in general is less enjoyable because the top four is so out of reach (not just us of course), but I think you always come across as making it sound as though bish bash bosh, we could be there so easily and without jeopardising the future existence of the club.

 

I still hope an arab etc comes in some day.

 

everybody wants that man. But we don't need it to act bigger than competing with the relegation candidates in the premiership.

 

I agree with that bit Leazes, but there's the ocean and the big blue sea between " competing with relegation candidates" and breaking the top four.

 

Bit more realism in your posts (kettle pot btw) would lead to less arguments, particularly given you were once an Ashley Fan.

Absolute bollocks, you know, but choose to ignore the fact that LM isnt talking about us suddenly chasing Man U, hes talking about competing for anything. Making a push onwards and upwards, be that over 2, 3, 4 or more years. Putting in the hard work to increase the clubs profits not just decrease its outgoings and spend on players of the required calibre needed to do just that.

[peasepud 59]

I see no difference in Ashley lending the money or a bank lending the money other than it being interest free. At the end of the day the clubs still owes money be it to Ashley or the bank.

 

Presumably with Ashley's debt the club has a bit less control over when it gets paid off. For instance if there was 35 mill lying around in a bank account, Ashley could demand the cash rather than it being used say to buy a new striker. Assuming his debt was repayable on demand of course.

 

Nope, a bank could take all of the money at any time it liked (as Barclays all but did once in the late 80's) if Ashley increases the debt in the club to pay himself back all he would be doing is creating losses which he himself would be liable for or at least have to cover. Your statement forgets that Ashley as the single owner with no shareholders, to all intents and purposes, is the club.

 

If he's recovering money, it would be by reducing the debt the club owes to him from the operating subsidies he's put in, which based upon the lack of spend this window, may be exactly what he's doing.

 

Recovery of the £130-odd Million would come when and if the club is sold again.

 

I'm sorry I don't understand this. If you have a loan agreement with a bank, and are honouring the terms of it, why can the bank take all of the money any time they like? And why would they want to?

 

In addition, I never said anything about increasing debt to pay himself back. Your last point is exactly what I was saying - if the club is cash positive, and does not require subsidising anymore, then he can use surplus cash to repay all his debts. Which a bank couldn't demand if the terms of the bank loan are being honoured.

 

Maybe I've got this wrong. Happy to be corrected, try not to be a patronising twat in the process, eh?

Exactly, different thread but thats why the club was never in danger of going bust, we had manageable debts and a good level of income.

 

Man U prove it perfectly, debts of over £600m yet they are one of the most successful clubs in the world and produce a £100m+ profit.

[LeazesMag 0]

However, there is no excuse whatsoever, none, for the sales of Enrique and Nolan. The heart has been ripped out of this club now. Our 2 leaders, and main dressing room "captains", have left. This will become obvious as the season goes on.

surely with enrique it was sell him when we did or lose him for nowt due to his contract??

 

as for nolan - ive argued in another thread he was pretty much sold for footballing reasons ie cabaye brought in with ben arfa to play the withdrawn striker role. as there was effectively no place in the starting 11 for him he was sold.

 

what irks me about Enrique [and Barton] is that if the club had shown itself to be progressive and seriously aiming to go higher and stay there, they maybe would have been happy to sign new contracts and be part of it.

 

 

Thats all you have to do to keep these sort of players, but we chose to piss them off and fuck them around.

[peasepud 59]

However, there is no excuse whatsoever, none, for the sales of Enrique and Nolan. The heart has been ripped out of this club now. Our 2 leaders, and main dressing room "captains", have left. This will become obvious as the season goes on.

surely with enrique it was sell him when we did or lose him for nowt due to his contract??

 

as for nolan - ive argued in another thread he was pretty much sold for footballing reasons ie cabaye brought in with ben arfa to play the withdrawn striker role. as there was effectively no place in the starting 11 for him he was sold.

 

what irks me about Enrique [and Barton] is that if the club had shown itself to be progressive and seriously aiming to go higher and stay there, they maybe would have been happy to sign new contracts and be part of it.

 

 

Thats all you have to do to keep these sort of players, but we chose to piss them off and fuck them around.

Add Given to that list, the loss of him resulted in relegation, simple as.

[Guest alex]

Think people have highlighted the biggest problem here. I seem to recall certain people in this thread ( ) advocating a steady gradual building towards getting back into Europe, then possibly knocking on the door of the back four. But we're barely standing still tbh. I think we have a worse first XI than we did before we sold Carroll. Given the window is now shut that's regression rather than progress.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Not ignoring it Leazes and wish we were doing it with either Ashley or anyone. I just cant see how it can be done without throwing a couple of hundred mill at it. (which would still be a gamble given who is already up there).

 

I think football in general is less enjoyable because the top four is so out of reach (not just us of course), but I think you always come across as making it sound as though bish bash bosh, we could be there so easily and without jeopardising the future existence of the club.

 

I still hope an arab etc comes in some day.

 

Mr Your Name answered your post perfectly tbh just a shame he hadnt quoted you.

 

Hes spot on though, most of us (Leazes clearly included) dont expect to sign £20m strikers or overhaul the playing staff each season by clearing out and bringing in all the latest and greatest players from round the world

What we do expect is sensible use of the resources available and honest answers from the club. Selling our best striker and leaving us short in January was mental to say the least but to then ignore the fact in August and still carry on is just disgraceful.

 

We have clearly set our stall out now that no player can be purchased unless funded by the sale of an existing one, where does that put us next January then?

 

Theres a whole thread to be had on this which should be seperate and its something Ive talked about for a while now but this clear out of high earners isnt a short term measure, its the whole future plan of the club and one that if followed will see us cease to exist as a Premiership club within 2 seasons and possibly be a lot worse.

 

He didnt answer my question because I was referring to Leazes CL constant claims without a plan or major investment not the genarlised lets build each year stuff that No Name refers to and which I agree most of us would like to see.

 

I do agree with you however that good sensible debate can be had about how you do live in this two tiered league and whether you think our "business model" can achieve that or whether it will lead to our demise as you suggest.

 

Its wishful thinking though in this current climate imo to think you can simply hold on to your best players, and keep adding more quality to it. Sound simple and ideal but falls down on many fronts if you dont have an owner prepared to chuchk in out of his own pocket every year.

 

Theres a blog from some Guardian chap here today which is entitled a cause for optimism about NUFC

 

http://www.thefootballramble.com/blog/entr...ism-on-tyneside

 

The bottom line is had we bought a striker, most would have been fairly happy.

 

I agree though, a good debate to be had, particularly if the extremist views are put on hold and a sense of reality is brought to it.

[Craig 6308]

However, there is no excuse whatsoever, none, for the sales of Enrique and Nolan. The heart has been ripped out of this club now. Our 2 leaders, and main dressing room "captains", have left. This will become obvious as the season goes on.

surely with enrique it was sell him when we did or lose him for nowt due to his contract??

 

as for nolan - ive argued in another thread he was pretty much sold for footballing reasons ie cabaye brought in with ben arfa to play the withdrawn striker role. as there was effectively no place in the starting 11 for him he was sold.

 

what irks me about Enrique [and Barton] is that if the club had shown itself to be progressive and seriously aiming to go higher and stay there, they maybe would have been happy to sign new contracts and be part of it.

 

 

Thats all you have to do to keep these sort of players, but we chose to piss them off and fuck them around.

Add Given to that list, the loss of him resulted in relegation, simple as.

 

Indeed. From what I was told they had to do some serious mileage to piss Shay off. He was happy to commit himself to NUFC for life yet somehow they managed to drive him out. Lets not forget he'd been through some shitty periods before as well.

 

Again I state the biggest problem is lack of respect and complete show of contempt towards the fans. They tell us nowt, almost imply it's none of our fucking business and then wonder why they're not held in high regard.

 

I wasn't particularly enamoured by Freddy Shepherd or his methods of running the club but at least you knew where you stood with him.

[peasepud 59]

Not ignoring it Leazes and wish we were doing it with either Ashley or anyone. I just cant see how it can be done without throwing a couple of hundred mill at it. (which would still be a gamble given who is already up there).

 

I think football in general is less enjoyable because the top four is so out of reach (not just us of course), but I think you always come across as making it sound as though bish bash bosh, we could be there so easily and without jeopardising the future existence of the club.

 

I still hope an arab etc comes in some day.

 

Mr Your Name answered your post perfectly tbh just a shame he hadnt quoted you.

 

Hes spot on though, most of us (Leazes clearly included) dont expect to sign £20m strikers or overhaul the playing staff each season by clearing out and bringing in all the latest and greatest players from round the world

What we do expect is sensible use of the resources available and honest answers from the club. Selling our best striker and leaving us short in January was mental to say the least but to then ignore the fact in August and still carry on is just disgraceful.

 

We have clearly set our stall out now that no player can be purchased unless funded by the sale of an existing one, where does that put us next January then?

 

Theres a whole thread to be had on this which should be seperate and its something Ive talked about for a while now but this clear out of high earners isnt a short term measure, its the whole future plan of the club and one that if followed will see us cease to exist as a Premiership club within 2 seasons and possibly be a lot worse.

 

He didnt answer my question because I was referring to Leazes CL constant claims without a plan or major investment not the genarlised lets build each year stuff that No Name refers to and which I agree most of us would like to see.

 

I do agree with you however that good sensible debate can be had about how you do live in this two tiered league and whether you think our "business model" can achieve that or whether it will lead to our demise as you suggest.

 

Its wishful thinking though in this current climate imo to think you can simply hold on to your best players, and keep adding more quality to it. Sound simple and ideal but falls down on many fronts if you dont have an owner prepared to chuchk in out of his own pocket every year.

 

Theres a blog from some Guardian chap here today which is entitled a cause for optimism about NUFC

 

http://www.thefootballramble.com/blog/entr...ism-on-tyneside

 

The bottom line is had we bought a striker, most would have been fairly happy.

 

I agree though, a good debate to be had, particularly if the extremist views are put on hold and a sense of reality is brought to it.

The problem is that you see the likes of mine and Leazes views as extremist, I see it as perfectly sensible. Thats why we never agree because you go into "Team nasty are picking on me" mode.

 

I'll create the thread later detailing my vision of the future under Ashley, before you dive into it and dispute though, check it back against the history of the last 4 years if you're wanting to ensure the extremist views are put on hold.

[Gemmill 34621]

What sort of a cunt calls himself a "possy"?

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Not ignoring it Leazes and wish we were doing it with either Ashley or anyone. I just cant see how it can be done without throwing a couple of hundred mill at it. (which would still be a gamble given who is already up there).

 

I think football in general is less enjoyable because the top four is so out of reach (not just us of course), but I think you always come across as making it sound as though bish bash bosh, we could be there so easily and without jeopardising the future existence of the club.

 

I still hope an arab etc comes in some day.

 

everybody wants that man. But we don't need it to act bigger than competing with the relegation candidates in the premiership.

 

I agree with that bit Leazes, but there's the ocean and the big blue sea between " competing with relegation candidates" and breaking the top four.

 

Bit more realism in your posts (kettle pot btw) would lead to less arguments, particularly given you were once an Ashley Fan.

Absolute bollocks, you know, but choose to ignore the fact that LM isnt talking about us suddenly chasing Man U, hes talking about competing for anything. Making a push onwards and upwards, be that over 2, 3, 4 or more years. Putting in the hard work to increase the clubs profits not just decrease its outgoings and spend on players of the required calibre needed to do just that.

 

Rubbish, you show me a leazes post where he hopes we push on and finish 9th or 8th next year. Theres not a drop of realism brought virtually any of his posts.

[Guest alex]

What 'extremist' views have been expressed in this thread? I must have missed them.

[Guest alex]

However, there is no excuse whatsoever, none, for the sales of Enrique and Nolan. The heart has been ripped out of this club now. Our 2 leaders, and main dressing room "captains", have left. This will become obvious as the season goes on.

surely with enrique it was sell him when we did or lose him for nowt due to his contract??

 

as for nolan - ive argued in another thread he was pretty much sold for footballing reasons ie cabaye brought in with ben arfa to play the withdrawn striker role. as there was effectively no place in the starting 11 for him he was sold.

 

what irks me about Enrique [and Barton] is that if the club had shown itself to be progressive and seriously aiming to go higher and stay there, they maybe would have been happy to sign new contracts and be part of it.

 

 

Thats all you have to do to keep these sort of players, but we chose to piss them off and fuck them around.

Add Given to that list, the loss of him resulted in relegation, simple as.

 

Indeed. From what I was told they had to do some serious mileage to piss Shay off. He was happy to commit himself to NUFC for life yet somehow they managed to drive him out. Lets not forget he'd been through some shitty periods before as well.

 

Again I state the biggest problem is lack of respect and complete show of contempt towards the fans. They tell us nowt, almost imply it's none of our fucking business and then wonder why they're not held in high regard.

 

I wasn't particularly enamoured by Freddy Shepherd or his methods of running the club but at least you knew where you stood with him.

Given was on comparatively low wages, loved the area and was having a house built here (or recently had done so). Apparently he intends to move back here when he's finished playing.

[Craig 6308]

However, there is no excuse whatsoever, none, for the sales of Enrique and Nolan. The heart has been ripped out of this club now. Our 2 leaders, and main dressing room "captains", have left. This will become obvious as the season goes on.

surely with enrique it was sell him when we did or lose him for nowt due to his contract??

 

as for nolan - ive argued in another thread he was pretty much sold for footballing reasons ie cabaye brought in with ben arfa to play the withdrawn striker role. as there was effectively no place in the starting 11 for him he was sold.

 

what irks me about Enrique [and Barton] is that if the club had shown itself to be progressive and seriously aiming to go higher and stay there, they maybe would have been happy to sign new contracts and be part of it.

 

 

Thats all you have to do to keep these sort of players, but we chose to piss them off and fuck them around.

Add Given to that list, the loss of him resulted in relegation, simple as.

 

Indeed. From what I was told they had to do some serious mileage to piss Shay off. He was happy to commit himself to NUFC for life yet somehow they managed to drive him out. Lets not forget he'd been through some shitty periods before as well.

 

Again I state the biggest problem is lack of respect and complete show of contempt towards the fans. They tell us nowt, almost imply it's none of our fucking business and then wonder why they're not held in high regard.

 

I wasn't particularly enamoured by Freddy Shepherd or his methods of running the club but at least you knew where you stood with him.

Given was on comparatively low wages, loved the area and was having a house built here (or recently had done so). Apparently he intends to move back here when he's finished playing.

 

Aye, that's what I've been told too. Was also told that when it was clear he was being frozen out at Citeh, he made it known that he'd love to come back to the NE but would only consider NUFC if Ashley had sold up. Apparently had told Sunderland that he'd talk to them if they were interested.

[Craig 6308]

Not ignoring it Leazes and wish we were doing it with either Ashley or anyone. I just cant see how it can be done without throwing a couple of hundred mill at it. (which would still be a gamble given who is already up there).

 

I think football in general is less enjoyable because the top four is so out of reach (not just us of course), but I think you always come across as making it sound as though bish bash bosh, we could be there so easily and without jeopardising the future existence of the club.

 

I still hope an arab etc comes in some day.

 

Mr Your Name answered your post perfectly tbh just a shame he hadnt quoted you.

 

Hes spot on though, most of us (Leazes clearly included) dont expect to sign £20m strikers or overhaul the playing staff each season by clearing out and bringing in all the latest and greatest players from round the world

What we do expect is sensible use of the resources available and honest answers from the club. Selling our best striker and leaving us short in January was mental to say the least but to then ignore the fact in August and still carry on is just disgraceful.

 

We have clearly set our stall out now that no player can be purchased unless funded by the sale of an existing one, where does that put us next January then?

 

Theres a whole thread to be had on this which should be seperate and its something Ive talked about for a while now but this clear out of high earners isnt a short term measure, its the whole future plan of the club and one that if followed will see us cease to exist as a Premiership club within 2 seasons and possibly be a lot worse.

 

He didnt answer my question because I was referring to Leazes CL constant claims without a plan or major investment not the genarlised lets build each year stuff that No Name refers to and which I agree most of us would like to see.

 

I do agree with you however that good sensible debate can be had about how you do live in this two tiered league and whether you think our "business model" can achieve that or whether it will lead to our demise as you suggest.

 

Its wishful thinking though in this current climate imo to think you can simply hold on to your best players, and keep adding more quality to it. Sound simple and ideal but falls down on many fronts if you dont have an owner prepared to chuchk in out of his own pocket every year.

 

Theres a blog from some Guardian chap here today which is entitled a cause for optimism about NUFC

 

http://www.thefootballramble.com/blog/entr...ism-on-tyneside

 

The bottom line is had we bought a striker, most would have been fairly happy.

 

I agree though, a good debate to be had, particularly if the extremist views are put on hold and a sense of reality is brought to it.

The problem is that you see the likes of mine and Leazes views as extremist, I see it as perfectly sensible. Thats why we never agree because you go into "Team nasty are picking on me" mode.

 

I'll create the thread later detailing my vision of the future under Ashley, before you dive into it and dispute though, check it back against the history of the last 4 years if you're wanting to ensure the extremist views are put on hold.

 

To give Peter's post some credence, I must admit that in the early days (in the start up of NUSC) I did think his vision about what Ashley would do with NUFC to be very extreme. What's transgressed since then proves that it wasn't extreme at all - it was bang on the money.

[LeazesMag 0]

Not ignoring it Leazes and wish we were doing it with either Ashley or anyone. I just cant see how it can be done without throwing a couple of hundred mill at it. (which would still be a gamble given who is already up there).

 

I think football in general is less enjoyable because the top four is so out of reach (not just us of course), but I think you always come across as making it sound as though bish bash bosh, we could be there so easily and without jeopardising the future existence of the club.

 

I still hope an arab etc comes in some day.

 

Mr Your Name answered your post perfectly tbh just a shame he hadnt quoted you.

 

Hes spot on though, most of us (Leazes clearly included) dont expect to sign £20m strikers or overhaul the playing staff each season by clearing out and bringing in all the latest and greatest players from round the world

What we do expect is sensible use of the resources available and honest answers from the club. Selling our best striker and leaving us short in January was mental to say the least but to then ignore the fact in August and still carry on is just disgraceful.

 

We have clearly set our stall out now that no player can be purchased unless funded by the sale of an existing one, where does that put us next January then?

 

Theres a whole thread to be had on this which should be seperate and its something Ive talked about for a while now but this clear out of high earners isnt a short term measure, its the whole future plan of the club and one that if followed will see us cease to exist as a Premiership club within 2 seasons and possibly be a lot worse.

 

He didnt answer my question because I was referring to Leazes CL constant claims without a plan or major investment not the genarlised lets build each year stuff that No Name refers to and which I agree most of us would like to see.

 

I do agree with you however that good sensible debate can be had about how you do live in this two tiered league and whether you think our "business model" can achieve that or whether it will lead to our demise as you suggest.

 

Its wishful thinking though in this current climate imo to think you can simply hold on to your best players, and keep adding more quality to it. Sound simple and ideal but falls down on many fronts if you dont have an owner prepared to chuchk in out of his own pocket every year.

 

Theres a blog from some Guardian chap here today which is entitled a cause for optimism about NUFC

 

http://www.thefootballramble.com/blog/entr...ism-on-tyneside

 

The bottom line is had we bought a striker, most would have been fairly happy.

 

I agree though, a good debate to be had, particularly if the extremist views are put on hold and a sense of reality is brought to it.

 

You're wrong CT. Long term posters will confirm that I have always advocated the notion of "build as you go" rather than "planning" as you suggest. Because quite simply, any "plan" you have, at any football club - from a "building a team perspective", stops and starts with the manager, the central footballing figure in all football club. Every time you change a manager, the "plan" starts all over again, therefore the reality is that it is all a "build" process. He builds his team, and you make progress, or you start again with a new man with different ideas. You back your manager, until you see he is going wrong, then you have to sack him. Everything, at a big club like NUFC anyway, starts with results on the pitch. It determines everything, your "plan" starts there.

 

Not really sure if I've phrased this in the way I would like, but this is the source of a few disagreements I've had with people in the past, who have harped on about "plans".

 

Mike Ashley has a "plan", as the owner, but it is not dependant on good results on the pitch, his aim is only to make financial profits/recoup his money/prop up Sports Direct.......it isnt' to speculate and improve the football team by taking risks on footballers. This is why NUFC are not going to prosper or move forward on the pitch, it will always be one step forwards then one step backwards [or even two if his gamble fails] with him.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Not ignoring it Leazes and wish we were doing it with either Ashley or anyone. I just cant see how it can be done without throwing a couple of hundred mill at it. (which would still be a gamble given who is already up there).

 

I think football in general is less enjoyable because the top four is so out of reach (not just us of course), but I think you always come across as making it sound as though bish bash bosh, we could be there so easily and without jeopardising the future existence of the club.

 

I still hope an arab etc comes in some day.

 

Mr Your Name answered your post perfectly tbh just a shame he hadnt quoted you.

 

Hes spot on though, most of us (Leazes clearly included) dont expect to sign £20m strikers or overhaul the playing staff each season by clearing out and bringing in all the latest and greatest players from round the world

What we do expect is sensible use of the resources available and honest answers from the club. Selling our best striker and leaving us short in January was mental to say the least but to then ignore the fact in August and still carry on is just disgraceful.

 

We have clearly set our stall out now that no player can be purchased unless funded by the sale of an existing one, where does that put us next January then?

 

Theres a whole thread to be had on this which should be seperate and its something Ive talked about for a while now but this clear out of high earners isnt a short term measure, its the whole future plan of the club and one that if followed will see us cease to exist as a Premiership club within 2 seasons and possibly be a lot worse.

 

He didnt answer my question because I was referring to Leazes CL constant claims without a plan or major investment not the genarlised lets build each year stuff that No Name refers to and which I agree most of us would like to see.

 

I do agree with you however that good sensible debate can be had about how you do live in this two tiered league and whether you think our "business model" can achieve that or whether it will lead to our demise as you suggest.

 

Its wishful thinking though in this current climate imo to think you can simply hold on to your best players, and keep adding more quality to it. Sound simple and ideal but falls down on many fronts if you dont have an owner prepared to chuchk in out of his own pocket every year.

 

Theres a blog from some Guardian chap here today which is entitled a cause for optimism about NUFC

 

http://www.thefootballramble.com/blog/entr...ism-on-tyneside

 

The bottom line is had we bought a striker, most would have been fairly happy.

 

I agree though, a good debate to be had, particularly if the extremist views are put on hold and a sense of reality is brought to it.

The problem is that you see the likes of mine and Leazes views as extremist, I see it as perfectly sensible. Thats why we never agree because you go into "Team nasty are picking on me" mode.

 

I'll create the thread later detailing my vision of the future under Ashley, before you dive into it and dispute though, check it back against the history of the last 4 years if you're wanting to ensure the extremist views are put on hold.

 

Not at all, I have the ability to discuss a topic without calling you a cunt etc etc.

 

When I say extreme, I mean discussing where we are now and what is sensible / practical to do given the current climate of wages / debt etc.

 

Anyone who tries to discuss the here and now without giving some thought to the business world is kidding themselves.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

What sort of a cunt calls himself a "possy"?

 

And right on queue

[LeazesMag 0]

Not ignoring it Leazes and wish we were doing it with either Ashley or anyone. I just cant see how it can be done without throwing a couple of hundred mill at it. (which would still be a gamble given who is already up there).

 

I think football in general is less enjoyable because the top four is so out of reach (not just us of course), but I think you always come across as making it sound as though bish bash bosh, we could be there so easily and without jeopardising the future existence of the club.

 

I still hope an arab etc comes in some day.

 

everybody wants that man. But we don't need it to act bigger than competing with the relegation candidates in the premiership.

 

I agree with that bit Leazes, but there's the ocean and the big blue sea between " competing with relegation candidates" and breaking the top four.

 

Bit more realism in your posts (kettle pot btw) would lead to less arguments, particularly given you were once an Ashley Fan.

Absolute bollocks, you know, but choose to ignore the fact that LM isnt talking about us suddenly chasing Man U, hes talking about competing for anything. Making a push onwards and upwards, be that over 2, 3, 4 or more years. Putting in the hard work to increase the clubs profits not just decrease its outgoings and spend on players of the required calibre needed to do just that.

 

Rubbish, you show me a leazes post where he hopes we push on and finish 9th or 8th next year. Theres not a drop of realism brought virtually any of his posts.

 

CT - I hope we do, but unfortunately there is not a cat in hells chance, because the setup of the club is not now geared to moving forward in this way.

[Craig 6308]

What sort of a cunt calls himself a "possy"?

 

And right on queue

 

The quoted post was posted over 15 mins before you made that claim you absolute cretin

[Christmas Tree 3997]

What sort of a cunt calls himself a "possy"?

 

And right on queue

 

The quoted post was posted over 15 mins before you made that claim you absolute cretin

 

And iM just working my way through the thread you horror of a little man

[Toonpack 6881]

I see no difference in Ashley lending the money or a bank lending the money other than it being interest free. At the end of the day the clubs still owes money be it to Ashley or the bank.

 

Presumably with Ashley's debt the club has a bit less control over when it gets paid off. For instance if there was 35 mill lying around in a bank account, Ashley could demand the cash rather than it being used say to buy a new striker. Assuming his debt was repayable on demand of course.

 

Nope, a bank could take all of the money at any time it liked (as Barclays all but did once in the late 80's) if Ashley increases the debt in the club to pay himself back all he would be doing is creating losses which he himself would be liable for or at least have to cover. Your statement forgets that Ashley as the single owner with no shareholders, to all intents and purposes, is the club.

 

If he's recovering money, it would be by reducing the debt the club owes to him from the operating subsidies he's put in, which based upon the lack of spend this window, may be exactly what he's doing.

 

Recovery of the £130-odd Million would come when and if the club is sold again.

 

I'm sorry I don't understand this. If you have a loan agreement with a bank, and are honouring the terms of it, why can the bank take all of the money any time they like? And why would they want to?

 

In addition, I never said anything about increasing debt to pay himself back. Your last point is exactly what I was saying - if the club is cash positive, and does not require subsidising anymore, then he can use surplus cash to repay all his debts. Which a bank couldn't demand if the terms of the bank loan are being honoured.

 

Maybe I've got this wrong. Happy to be corrected, try not to be a patronising twat in the process, eh?

 

I don't see what you are driving at in all honesty.

 

There's a world of difference between owing money to yourself (through whatever vehicle) and owing the money to a third party. A bank can pull or reduce an overdraft or call in a loan any time it likes, or the security it has on said loan/overdraft. Why would a bank do that, probably if their risk team recommended the exposure was unwarranted.

 

Don't play down the interest free either, it's probably worth about £10mill a year based on current exposure. (It was £7Mill a year "in the old days").

 

This is still the bit I don't "get" about Ashley. If the club is to become simply a cash cow, why doesn't he charge interest on his loans (a'la virtually all the other owners) that way he'd be making money on his subsidy, especially if, as we believe, the club is at least breaking even. Of course if he's simply reducing his exposure not charging interest makes sense as that would make the repayment quicker, but he's not "making money" or anything from it (as far as we know - up to the last accounts).

 

All I can think is that he's postioning the club to be "really" debt free asap and he'll make his coin on a sale.

 

Alternatively he's a bloody minded twat and he's in "I'll show the fuckers how it can be done, my way" mode, which wouldn't surprise me in the least either. As I've mentioned before, in my past, I've worked with a couple of multi-millionaire's (as a direct report to said rich bassa's) and I'd never underestimate their egotism let alone the size of an ego a self made barrow boy billionaire may have. They really are a different breed. Maybe we have to "buckle up" for that ride.

 

I watched a bloke with tens of millions in the bank have panic attacks over basically nowt, and I used to think, what the fuck are you doing this to yourself for, you don't need to do another days work in your life (neither did his kids or grandkids either) but it was all about "showing I can do it again" or "going a bit further", all about the ego. Madness.

[Kitman 2188]

I see no difference in Ashley lending the money or a bank lending the money other than it being interest free. At the end of the day the clubs still owes money be it to Ashley or the bank.

 

Presumably with Ashley's debt the club has a bit less control over when it gets paid off. For instance if there was 35 mill lying around in a bank account, Ashley could demand the cash rather than it being used say to buy a new striker. Assuming his debt was repayable on demand of course.

 

Nope, a bank could take all of the money at any time it liked (as Barclays all but did once in the late 80's) if Ashley increases the debt in the club to pay himself back all he would be doing is creating losses which he himself would be liable for or at least have to cover. Your statement forgets that Ashley as the single owner with no shareholders, to all intents and purposes, is the club.

 

If he's recovering money, it would be by reducing the debt the club owes to him from the operating subsidies he's put in, which based upon the lack of spend this window, may be exactly what he's doing.

 

Recovery of the £130-odd Million would come when and if the club is sold again.

 

I'm sorry I don't understand this. If you have a loan agreement with a bank, and are honouring the terms of it, why can the bank take all of the money any time they like? And why would they want to?

 

In addition, I never said anything about increasing debt to pay himself back. Your last point is exactly what I was saying - if the club is cash positive, and does not require subsidising anymore, then he can use surplus cash to repay all his debts. Which a bank couldn't demand if the terms of the bank loan are being honoured.

 

Maybe I've got this wrong. Happy to be corrected, try not to be a patronising twat in the process, eh?

 

I don't see what you are driving at in all honesty.

 

There's a world of difference between owing money to yourself (through whatever vehicle) and owing the money to a third party. A bank can pull or reduce an overdraft or call in a loan any time it likes, or the security it has on said loan/overdraft. Why would a bank do that, probably if their risk team recommended the exposure was unwarranted.

 

You see, this is the bit I don't understand. If I enter into a loan with a bank, and meet all the requirements regarding interest and loan repayments, they can still demand all of the principal is repaid at any time? So a bank can put a business under at any time if it wants its money back, even if the debtor is meeting all of its obligations?

[Toonpack 6881]

I see no difference in Ashley lending the money or a bank lending the money other than it being interest free. At the end of the day the clubs still owes money be it to Ashley or the bank.

 

Presumably with Ashley's debt the club has a bit less control over when it gets paid off. For instance if there was 35 mill lying around in a bank account, Ashley could demand the cash rather than it being used say to buy a new striker. Assuming his debt was repayable on demand of course.

 

Nope, a bank could take all of the money at any time it liked (as Barclays all but did once in the late 80's) if Ashley increases the debt in the club to pay himself back all he would be doing is creating losses which he himself would be liable for or at least have to cover. Your statement forgets that Ashley as the single owner with no shareholders, to all intents and purposes, is the club.

 

If he's recovering money, it would be by reducing the debt the club owes to him from the operating subsidies he's put in, which based upon the lack of spend this window, may be exactly what he's doing.

 

Recovery of the £130-odd Million would come when and if the club is sold again.

 

I'm sorry I don't understand this. If you have a loan agreement with a bank, and are honouring the terms of it, why can the bank take all of the money any time they like? And why would they want to?

 

In addition, I never said anything about increasing debt to pay himself back. Your last point is exactly what I was saying - if the club is cash positive, and does not require subsidising anymore, then he can use surplus cash to repay all his debts. Which a bank couldn't demand if the terms of the bank loan are being honoured.

 

Maybe I've got this wrong. Happy to be corrected, try not to be a patronising twat in the process, eh?

 

I don't see what you are driving at in all honesty.

 

There's a world of difference between owing money to yourself (through whatever vehicle) and owing the money to a third party. A bank can pull or reduce an overdraft or call in a loan any time it likes, or the security it has on said loan/overdraft. Why would a bank do that, probably if their risk team recommended the exposure was unwarranted.

 

You see, this is the bit I don't understand. If I enter into a loan with a bank, and meet all the requirements regarding interest and loan repayments, they can still demand all of the principal is repaid at any time? So a bank can put a business under at any time if it wants its money back, even if the debtor is meeting all of its obligations?

 

It sure can

[Tom 13882]

I mailed David Conn from the Guardian & he's also going to take a lot at it.