The 14 questions

[peasepud 59]

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 ????

You're right, best not to bother trying

[Kitman 2188]

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 ????

You're right, best not to bother trying

 

Toonpack's sympathies lie with the owner and his bank balance for some reason. Dunno why some people worry about FMA's bank balance, he's very rich. (I realise it's easy to play with other people's money but then I didn't ask him to buy NUFC.)

[Guest alex]

Tbh, has he ever made a post on here that has anything to do with what goes on on the pitch? If he has, I must've missed it.

[citizenerased 0]

Tbh, has he ever made a post on here that has anything to do with what goes on on the pitch? If he has, I must've missed it.

 

He hate's Keegan and admitted he isn't even a football fan.

 

Give him the Deano/Christmas Tree treatment. They can discuss consolidated financial statements at Newcastle Online.

Edited September 21, 2011 by citizenerased

[peasepud 59]

Tbh, has he ever made a post on here that has anything to do with what goes on on the pitch? If he has, I must've missed it.

 

He hate's Keegan and admitted he isn't even a football fan.

[OTF 6380]

Tbh, has he ever made a post on here that has anything to do with what goes on on the pitch? If he has, I must've missed it.

 

He hate's Keegan and admitted he isn't even a football fan.

 

Give him the Deano/Christmas Tree treatment. They can discuss consolidated financial statements at Newcastle Online.

 

Has to post a picture of himself with an I'm not Paul Wyn banner to prove ees not a wrongun who will default on a promise to charity or run off sulking in a strop at that time of the month.

[ewerk 26828]

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.

 

That's a lovely idea in theory but in reality 100k per month would barely cover the interest payments. What you are proposing works fine in an ordinary business where the money can be ear marked for a specific area/project where the potential economic benefit can be reasonably accurately forecast, not so much in football. You can't say that spending £10m on player X will increase revenues by 500k per year.

 

If you look at the finances of the Premier League clubs you'll find that most clubs' debts are largely made up of loans from their owners rather than banks. Generally these loans aren't being repaid, though quite a few are charging interest on the loans.

 

So our options are either to become self-sufficient or find an owner who is prepared to invest in the team. The days of going to the bank to fund transfer spending are over, not just for us for us but for all football clubs.

[ewerk 26828]

We also have the fourth highest debt total in the PL.

[Toonpack 7073]

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 ????

You're right, best not to bother trying

 

Toonpack's sympathies lie with the owner and his bank balance for some reason. Dunno why some people worry about FMA's bank balance, he's very rich. (I realise it's easy to play with other people's money but then I didn't ask him to buy NUFC.)

 

Pud’s bold bit – That wasn’t the question. It is perfectly valid to try but …….

If you try (your way) and fail (as we did) to the point credit lines are all but exhausted, what then ? What would you do, what can you do ?

 

Kitman’s bold bit – Utter rubbish, I have no sympathy for him at all, I do however have the ability to look at things dispassionately. Some things he’s done I can understand, some I can’t (like not going out on a personal limb, just a little more, to buy a striker).

 

That's a lovely idea in theory but in reality 100k per month would barely cover the interest payments. What you are proposing works fine in an ordinary business where the money can be ear marked for a specific area/project where the potential economic benefit can be reasonably accurately forecast, not so much in football. You can't say that spending £10m on player X will increase revenues by 500k per year.

If you look at the finances of the Premier League clubs you'll find that most clubs' debts are largely made up of loans from their owners rather than banks. Generally these loans aren't being repaid, though quite a few are charging interest on the loans.

So our options are either to become self-sufficient or find an owner who is prepared to invest in the team. The days of going to the bank to fund transfer spending are over, not just for us for us but for all football clubs.

 

Exactly, that is the crux of the whole thing and my only point in post #126

[Happy Face 29]

Not sure why the "break even" cheerleaders even see it as an issue. Most of us understand a club needs investment. For all his protestations about running a break even operation, Mike Ashley understands that he's required to put his own money into the club. He said himself he was willing to do so, to the tune of £20m a season.

 

Having bought the club for £140m, now in his fifth year (5 x £20m = £100m), he's only spent about 10% more than he had gone into it expecting to.

 

The problem is he's spent too much of it covering losses that were to a large extent down to him and entirely avoidable, rather than spending it on the squad.

Edited September 21, 2011 by Happy Face

[Guest alex]

Aye, succinctly put, HF. I'll leave the Ashley apologists to mull it over.

[ChezGiven 0]

I prefer the term 'financial realists whose judgements aren't clouded by personal hatred' but whatever.

[ewerk 26828]

Not sure why the "break even" cheerleaders even see it as an issue. Most of us understand a club needs investment. For all his protestations about running a break even operation, Mike Ashley understands that he's required to put his own money into the club. He said himself he was willing to do so, to the tune of £20m a season.

 

Having bought the club for £140m, now in his fifth year (5 x £20m = £100m), he's only spent about 10% more than he had gone into it expecting to.

 

The problem is he's spent too much of it covering losses that were to a large extent down to him and entirely avoidable, rather than spending it on the squad.

 

The £20m a year comment was made a few years back, I doubt now whether he's prepared to put any more money into the club at all.

[Park Life 71]

Not sure why the "break even" cheerleaders even see it as an issue. Most of us understand a club needs investment. For all his protestations about running a break even operation, Mike Ashley understands that he's required to put his own money into the club. He said himself he was willing to do so, to the tune of £20m a season.

 

Having bought the club for £140m, now in his fifth year (5 x £20m = £100m), he's only spent about 10% more than he had gone into it expecting to.

 

The problem is he's spent too much of it covering losses that were to a large extent down to him and entirely avoidable, rather than spending it on the squad.

 

Yup.

[Happy Face 29]

Not sure why the "break even" cheerleaders even see it as an issue. Most of us understand a club needs investment. For all his protestations about running a break even operation, Mike Ashley understands that he's required to put his own money into the club. He said himself he was willing to do so, to the tune of £20m a season.

 

Having bought the club for £140m, now in his fifth year (5 x £20m = £100m), he's only spent about 10% more than he had gone into it expecting to.

 

The problem is he's spent too much of it covering losses that were to a large extent down to him and entirely avoidable, rather than spending it on the squad.

 

The £20m a year comment was made a few years back, I doubt now whether he's prepared to put any more money into the club at all.

 

Whatever his approach was or is, it shows that he knows as well as any of us that it needs investment to succeed.

 

The arguments for being tight and having a mediocre team are legitimate, and the arguments for pushing the boat out and trying to compete are too. Which is why it's an argument that's gone on here for years and years. The only question is what sort of owner you have and what he can afford. It's our great misfortune to have a bloke who's spent enough to be making a challenge....but he's spent it reactively on losses rather than pro-actively on building revenue, without ever coming close to success.

 

That sort of incompetence would be forgiveable. The suggestion that we're now going to climb the table and prove a great success, without any investment, is a contradiction of what we all know and what he said himself.

[Guest alex]

Spot on again.

[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.

 

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.

 

and that was your reason for wanting rid of the Halls and Shepherd 5-6 years ago ? Or was it because you stupidly - like others - thought "anybody would do better" ?

[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?

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 ????

 

obviously, they shouldn't have attempted to be successful in the first place.

[LeazesMag 0]

Tbh, has he ever made a post on here that has anything to do with what goes on on the pitch? If he has, I must've missed it.

 

neither did macbeth.

 

He's disappeared into thin air during the last 4 years too.

[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 ????

 

obviously, they shouldn't have attempted to be successful in the first place.

 

But when you're not, what do you do ??

[Toonpack 7073]

I prefer the term 'financial realists whose judgements aren't clouded by personal hatred' but whatever.

 

Yep.

 

 

BTW PM me your address I have a balance sheet pom-pom for you

[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?

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 ????

 

obviously, they shouldn't have attempted to be successful in the first place.

 

But when you're not, what do you do ??

 

strange that the vast majority [or so it seems] of those spouting on about waving scarves in support of a good balance sheet rather than a winning, thriving team on the pitch, are those who are sitting in the backround watching the team on TV instead of actually putting their own cash into supporting the club. Not just you, but some on other message boards too.

 

I don't know a single person in real life, who actually goes to games and takes this view.

[Happy Face 29]

I prefer the term 'financial realists whose judgements aren't clouded by personal hatred' but whatever.

 

Yep.

 

 

Is it unrealistic to expect better than relegation/12th place for £280m of investment?

 

Or even for £70m if you take into account that £140m went to the previous owners and £70m to the banks on day 1.

[OTF 6380]

But when you're not, what do you do ??

 

The pursuit of success within the constraints of responsible financial practice should be a gradual process, not a large push for immediate success.

 

This would be achieved by retaining your best players and replacing your weaker ones with superior performers on a gradual basis. There is every chance that these players may cost more and be on higher wages, but the idea is for this to be offset by an increase in match attendance, merchandise sales, sponsorship money, prize money (higher league position, further in Cup competitions and ultimately qualification for European competition), and an increased value in the club along with its a superior perceived position in relation to other clubs.

 

This is obviously not the model that Ashley is operating under, regardless of what they say.

 

Any risk taken should be a manageable one.

[LeazesMag 0]

But when you're not, what do you do ??

 

The pursuit of success within the constraints of responsible financial practice should be a gradual process, not a large push for immediate success.

 

This would be achieved by retaining your best players and replacing your weaker ones with superior performers on a gradual basis. There is every chance that these players may cost more and be on higher wages, but the idea is for this to be offset by an increase in match attendance, merchandise sales, sponsorship money, prize money (higher league position, further in Cup competitions and ultimately qualification for European competition), and an increased value in the club along with its a superior perceived position in relation to other clubs.

 

This is obviously not the model that Ashley is operating under, regardless of what they say.

 

Any risk taken should be a manageable one.

 

kids stuff.