The 14 questions

[Park Life 71]

Agree with all of that Nicos.

[LeazesMag 0]

God I'm going to regret this but Leazes, what happens when the banks won't give us any more money?

 

we compete at the levels of Bolton, Blackburn etc rather than the likes of Spurs and Liverpool ?

 

You're saying that debt is a necessity in a football club (bar having a sugar daddy). But what happens when the debt has to be repaid?

 

quite clearly, about 80+ clubs in the country all go bust.

 

I'm asking a very specific question here. What happens when the debt has to be repaid?

 

Maybe you should be asking how 90% [give or take] of clubs appear to be operating under different financial rules to NUFC ? Why hasn't almost every club in the country gone out of existence ? Which is what you are implying, isn't it ?

 

I'm not asking about other clubs. Yet again I'm asking about NUFC. If we get ourselves into debt, what do we do when the banks either want their money back or won't lend any more to us?

 

I'm just talking about NUFC here, not anyone else.

 

unlike everybody else [ie 90% of clubs in the country] who don't go bust and out of existence, do you mean that we do ?

 

NUFC won't go out of existence. They may have when long term apathy had set in and less than 20,000 fans were attending games, and a share issue failed because they couldn't even raise the amount of money they had got for selling Gazza to Spurs only a few years earlier perhaps ?

[LeazesMag 0]

Finally got round to actually reading all the responses. Some thoughts...

 

 

 

Our long-term plan off the field is to make sure that Newcastle United is self-financing, which in turn will allow us to invest in the squad, our youth development system and our facilities, without having to rely on additional financial support from the owner. There aren’t many clubs in England who can hope to achieve that.

There's no clubs that would want to achieve that. Why on earth would anyone spend 5 years balancing the books....then go and build up £50m of debt in order to buy a top striker or two. It's like saying I'm going to clear my credit cards...so I can hammer them again. Either you're balancing the books for stability and we'll rely on the youth/facilities, or you're running a model of buying big sustained by success on the field....which can only be achived after the big buys. Clearly the former is the aim, and it's spin to say we'll invest in the squad once we're breaking even....resulting in us not breaking even.

 

unfortunately, there are some people around who inadvertently advocate this approach. They are the ones who harp on about "debts", "not spending what you don't have", "running the club as a business"...etc. They may not admit it, but this is the core of their warped thinking. They think football is like a high street business, and even criticise the expansion of the stadium, calling it a "debt" - as if attempting to capitalise on the clubs fanbase with an investment aimed at the future is "bad planning", just because it was done by the old owners [i'll try not to go there, so long as people [they know who they are] accept these comments which are in fact the truth].

 

\lies, again.

 

No-one hs said that

 

yes they have, and you know it.

 

 

Stop agreeing with me and then making outlandish claims. I get tainted by association.

 

The expansion was 20 years ago. Who off here were you talking to about it at the time?

 

I meant the expansion of the Leazes and Milburn stands.

 

So did I.

 

I was agreeing with you. That's why I quoted it and commented. But it wasn't 20 years ago.

 

As good as.

 

1993.

 

What we agree on is that it needs some vision and some investment to climb the table. Nobody does it the other way round, climbs the table, then gets a vision and starts pumping money into it. I think that is the same as the high street tbf. You have to invest in premises, stock, staff, advertising etc. That's the risk of being in business, putting your own money up and striving to succeed and possibly going bust if there's a crash, or if other businesses make a better fist of it.

 

All this talk of "how do you pay it back" doesn't interest me, not until the money is being spent year after year without any results to show from it.

 

It's like parents telling a really talented kid they can't concentrate on football, they have to do their school work and get good grades in their exams. A conservative and uninspired approach to mediocrity. Ashley has spent £140m on the club since he got here, that sort of money could have done so much more in the hands of a Kevin Keegan or an Arsene Wenger.

 

EDIT: I don't agree anyone has said the stadium shouldn't have been expanded.

 

there are people who include the cost of the expansion [the 1999 one] as part of the satanic "debt" etc, which has contributed to the imminent folding of the club.....and I have asked these people how they think we should have "paid" for this "debt", including a direct question "do you think they should have saved up for it then", but got no response. Basically, they continue to castigate the people who set it up and owned the club while it was carried out. There was even a thread a few months ago, directed at me, asking how I felt about the club not being able to afford the repayments any more on this expansion [in 1999]. The usual culprits set about my response and clearly agreed with the opening post. Look for it. I can't be bothered tbh.

 

Interestingly, I wonder if the 1993 expansion was OK because SJH was chairman, but the 1999 one wasn't because Fred was the chairman ?

 

Just wondering.

Edited September 20, 2011 by LeazesMag

[JawD 31]

I know someone who has a box at SJP. They have invited corporate members to a meeting with DL/MA to ask questions etc. No doubt the club looking to reassure those spending. Apart from us that is.

[Happy Face 29]

there are people who include the cost of the expansion [the 1999 one] as part of the satanic "debt" etc, which has contributed to the imminent folding of the club.....and I have asked these people how they think we should have "paid" for this "debt", including a direct question "do you think they should have saved up for it then", but got no response. Basically, they continue to castigate the people who set it up and owned the club while it was carried out. There was even a thread a few months ago, directed at me, asking how I felt about the club not being able to afford the repayments any more on this expansion [in 1999]. The usual culprits set about my response and clearly agreed with the opening post. Look for it. I can't be bothered tbh.

 

Interestingly, I wonder if the 1993 expansion was OK because SJH was chairman, but the 1999 one wasn't because Fred was the chairman ?

 

Just wondering.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...te=%2Bexpansion

 

Search results show you asking over and over again if people would prefer there had not been an expansion...and literally no-one saying they would.

[ewerk 26828]

I'm not asking about other clubs. Yet again I'm asking about NUFC. If we get ourselves into debt, what do we do when the banks either want their money back or won't lend any more to us?

 

I'm just talking about NUFC here, not anyone else.

 

unlike everybody else [ie 90% of clubs in the country] who don't go bust and out of existence, do you mean that we do ?

 

NUFC won't go out of existence. They may have when long term apathy had set in and less than 20,000 fans were attending games, and a share issue failed because they couldn't even raise the amount of money they had got for selling Gazza to Spurs only a few years earlier perhaps ?

 

You have failed to answer my question. Now, without reference to any other clubs, how would we survive if/when we could no longer raise further debt?

[LeazesMag 0]

I'm not asking about other clubs. Yet again I'm asking about NUFC. If we get ourselves into debt, what do we do when the banks either want their money back or won't lend any more to us?

 

I'm just talking about NUFC here, not anyone else.

 

unlike everybody else [ie 90% of clubs in the country] who don't go bust and out of existence, do you mean that we do ?

 

NUFC won't go out of existence. They may have when long term apathy had set in and less than 20,000 fans were attending games, and a share issue failed because they couldn't even raise the amount of money they had got for selling Gazza to Spurs only a few years earlier perhaps ?

 

You have failed to answer my question. Now, without reference to any other clubs, how would we survive if/when we could no longer raise further debt?

 

 

as I said, quite clearly, going by your criteria, we have to allow smaller clubs to buy our best players and compete at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn. Or cease to exist.

 

My reply to you is also quite clear. Why aren't 90% of football clubs in imminent danger of ceasing to exist. Please answer the question.

[LeazesMag 0]

there are people who include the cost of the expansion [the 1999 one] as part of the satanic "debt" etc, which has contributed to the imminent folding of the club.....and I have asked these people how they think we should have "paid" for this "debt", including a direct question "do you think they should have saved up for it then", but got no response. Basically, they continue to castigate the people who set it up and owned the club while it was carried out. There was even a thread a few months ago, directed at me, asking how I felt about the club not being able to afford the repayments any more on this expansion [in 1999]. The usual culprits set about my response and clearly agreed with the opening post. Look for it. I can't be bothered tbh.

 

Interestingly, I wonder if the 1993 expansion was OK because SJH was chairman, but the 1999 one wasn't because Fred was the chairman ?

 

Just wondering.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...te=%2Bexpansion

 

Search results show you asking over and over again if people would prefer there had not been an expansion...and literally no-one saying they would.

 

there is clearly a lot more results that are missing.

 

The cost of the expansion [the 1999 one] is a large part of the "debt" that has put the club in imminent danger of ceasing to exist, according to the financial experts on here.

[Happy Face 29]

there are people who include the cost of the expansion [the 1999 one] as part of the satanic "debt" etc, which has contributed to the imminent folding of the club.....and I have asked these people how they think we should have "paid" for this "debt", including a direct question "do you think they should have saved up for it then", but got no response. Basically, they continue to castigate the people who set it up and owned the club while it was carried out. There was even a thread a few months ago, directed at me, asking how I felt about the club not being able to afford the repayments any more on this expansion [in 1999]. The usual culprits set about my response and clearly agreed with the opening post. Look for it. I can't be bothered tbh.

 

Interestingly, I wonder if the 1993 expansion was OK because SJH was chairman, but the 1999 one wasn't because Fred was the chairman ?

 

Just wondering.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...te=%2Bexpansion

 

Search results show you asking over and over again if people would prefer there had not been an expansion...and literally no-one saying they would.

 

there is clearly a lot more results that are missing.

 

The cost of the expansion [the 1999 one] is a large part of the "debt" that has put the club in imminent danger of ceasing to exist, according to the financial experts on here.

 

Then the onus is on you to quote those people saying it. I can't find something I don't think exists to prove to you that it doesn't. I looked because I'm happy to give you the benefit of the doubt if ANY dimwit said expansion was bad for the club with thousands on the waiting list.

 

The £42m cost of expansion (that's the total from '93 all the way through) even just going back to 99 works out at a cost of £3.5m a year. The extra 16000 seats have brought in at least £5m a season every season over that period.

 

I can't find the terms of that £42million loan though. How much interest was paid on it, when it was due to be paid off, what proportion of the debt handed to Ashley in 2007 was down to it?

[Happy Face 29]

http://www.nufc-finances.org.uk/

 

 

 

Can anyone see it?

[LeazesMag 0]

for instance.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...p;hl=fao+leazes

 

[what side of the bed has HF fell out of this morning like ........]

Edited September 20, 2011 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

http://www.nufc-finances.org.uk/

 

 

 

Can anyone see it?

 

that was the site which macbeth used to quote all the time...according to him, the club should have ceased to exist about 15 years ago, and was doing just great before 1992.

[Happy Face 29]

How much interest was paid on it, when it was due to be paid off, what proportion of the debt handed to Ashley in 2007 was down to it?

 

In fact, it is fair to say that the previous ownership had mortgaged the club to the hilt, securing loans on virtually all the club’s assets (training ground) and future income streams (TV, sponsorship), though they would argue that this was used to fund the stadium development. Whatever the reasons, when Ashley bought the club, the holders of the loan notes invoked a change of control clause, forcing the new owner to immediately repay the £45 million outstanding, as opposed to the annual installments until 2016 that he had anticipated.

 

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2010/12/ne...-black-and.html

 

So having expanded the stadium at a cost of £42m, the outstanding mortgage 8 years later was £45m. Unbelievable tbh.

 

It doesn't include the £25m of other loans Ashley had to repay upon arrival or the £41m of working capital that had to follow it soon after.

 

In that time Shepherd/Hall took a combined total of £150m OUT of the club into their own pockets.

[LeazesMag 0]

you're starting to sound like Toonpack and half of skunkers.

 

Anyway, you asked for links, I've found one.

 

Are you attempting to join the other 3 monkeys ?

Edited September 20, 2011 by LeazesMag

[Happy Face 29]

for instance.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...p;hl=fao+leazes

 

[what side of the bed has HF fell out of this morning like ........]

 

You often post links, without saying what I'm looking at.

 

Saying Shepherd was struggling to pay the mortgage isn't the same as saying he shouldn't have taken out the mortgage...if that's what you're getting at.

[LeazesMag 0]

for instance.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...p;hl=fao+leazes

 

[what side of the bed has HF fell out of this morning like ........]

 

You often post links, without saying what I'm looking at.

 

Saying Shepherd was struggling to pay the mortgage isn't the same as saying he shouldn't have taken out the mortgage...if that's what you're getting at.

 

its a follow up to my comment that people are critical of the expansion. There is plenty in that thread to back it up. The arsehole that started also fucked off when he knew that he had been shown up to be an idiot, I suppose he could have argued about it for 4 years ago then changed his mind, like mancmag for instance.

[Happy Face 29]

you're starting to sound like Toonpack and half of skunkers.

 

Anyway, you asked for links, I've found one.

 

Are you attempting to join the other 3 monkeys ?

 

A lot of what TP says is spot on.

 

A lot of what you say is spot on.

[manc-mag 1]

for instance.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...p;hl=fao+leazes

 

[what side of the bed has HF fell out of this morning like ........]

 

You often post links, without saying what I'm looking at.

 

Saying Shepherd was struggling to pay the mortgage isn't the same as saying he shouldn't have taken out the mortgage...if that's what you're getting at.

 

its a follow up to my comment that people are critical of the expansion. There is plenty in that thread to back it up. The arsehole that started also fucked off when he knew that he had been shown up to be an idiot, I suppose he could have argued about it for 4 years ago then changed his mind, like mancmag for instance.

 

NOT NOW, KATO!

[Guest alex]

[ChezGiven 0]

for instance.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...p;hl=fao+leazes

 

[what side of the bed has HF fell out of this morning like ........]

 

You often post links, without saying what I'm looking at.

 

Saying Shepherd was struggling to pay the mortgage isn't the same as saying he shouldn't have taken out the mortgage...if that's what you're getting at.

 

its a follow up to my comment that people are critical of the expansion. There is plenty in that thread to back it up. The arsehole that started also fucked off when he knew that he had been shown up to be an idiot, I suppose he could have argued about it for 4 years ago then changed his mind, like mancmag for instance.

 

NOT NOW, KATO!

 

Genius

[JawD 31]

[Park Life 71]

[peasepud 59]

God I'm going to regret this but Leazes, what happens when the banks won't give us any more money?

 

we compete at the levels of Bolton, Blackburn etc rather than the likes of Spurs and Liverpool ?

 

You're saying that debt is a necessity in a football club (bar having a sugar daddy). But what happens when the debt has to be repaid?

 

quite clearly, about 80+ clubs in the country all go bust.

 

I'm asking a very specific question here. What happens when the debt has to be repaid?

It gets paid, these loans arent usually a case of heres £20m I'll give you a shout when I want it and the interest back. Its a case of heres £20m and we want £100k per month back for the next few years. You dont go into that lightly, you calculate what you can afford to borrow and how much it will be worth to you.

 

Its fairly straight forward really, you borrow money to ensure you have a team that can compete, by competing you entertain and as a result you sell tickets, shirts, pies, pints. You appear on TV more often and hopefully manage to get into Europe, getting additional TV revenue and further ticket, shirts, pies, pints and novelty "NUFC went to Italy and all I got was this lousy t-shirt" t-shirts.

 

Part of that additional income is used to repay the debt each month.

[Toonpack 7073]

I'm not asking about other clubs. Yet again I'm asking about NUFC. If we get ourselves into debt, what do we do when the banks either want their money back or won't lend any more to us?

 

I'm just talking about NUFC here, not anyone else.

 

unlike everybody else [ie 90% of clubs in the country] who don't go bust and out of existence, do you mean that we do ?

 

NUFC won't go out of existence. They may have when long term apathy had set in and less than 20,000 fans were attending games, and a share issue failed because they couldn't even raise the amount of money they had got for selling Gazza to Spurs only a few years earlier perhaps ?

 

You have failed to answer my question. Now, without reference to any other clubs, how would we survive if/when we could no longer raise further debt?

 

 

as I said, quite clearly, going by your criteria, we have to allow smaller clubs to buy our best players and compete at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn. Or cease to exist.

 

My reply to you is also quite clear. Why aren't 90% of football clubs in imminent danger of ceasing to exist. Please answer the question.

 

As I have stated many times and as you asidiously refuse to acknowledge. Those 90% of clubs debts are underwritten or at least guaranteed by an owner/benefactor. NUFC's debt position was solely, 100%, every single penny, leveraged on the club, it's income, present and future, and it's assetts. Our debt position was incomparable with 99% of the other clubs never mind 90%.

 

Chalk and cheese.

[Toonpack 7073]

God I'm going to regret this but Leazes, what happens when the banks won't give us any more money?

 

we compete at the levels of Bolton, Blackburn etc rather than the likes of Spurs and Liverpool ?

 

You're saying that debt is a necessity in a football club (bar having a sugar daddy). But what happens when the debt has to be repaid?

 

quite clearly, about 80+ clubs in the country all go bust.

 

I'm asking a very specific question here. What happens when the debt has to be repaid?

It gets paid, these loans arent usually a case of heres £20m I'll give you a shout when I want it and the interest back. Its a case of heres £20m and we want £100k per month back for the next few years. You dont go into that lightly, you calculate what you can afford to borrow and how much it will be worth to you.

 

Its fairly straight forward really, you borrow money to ensure you have a team that can compete, by competing you entertain and as a result you sell tickets, shirts, pies, pints. You appear on TV more often and hopefully manage to get into Europe, getting additional TV revenue and further ticket, shirts, pies, pints and novelty "NUFC went to Italy and all I got was this lousy t-shirt" t-shirts.

 

Part of that additional income is used to repay the debt each month.

 

To the point where you've borrowed to the point where you've no equity left and have spent the next several years money, what then, if in your scenario you don't manage to compete, what happens ????