Mike Ashley -- Irrelevant Cunt

[Howay 12480]

They spent a fair whack of it mind

[Rayvin 4964]

They did but I didn't think all of it. Even if they had some £20m left over it would probably be enough to surpass our profits wouldn't it? Assuming that they've benefited similarly to us in the TV revenue stakes.

 

EDIT - for clarity, I mean £20m on top of whatever their standard profit is.

Edited January 22, 2015 by Rayvin

[ewerk 26581]

They did but I didn't think all of it. Even if they had some £20m left over it would probably be enough to surpass our profits wouldn't it? Assuming that they've benefited similarly to us in the TV revenue stakes.

 

EDIT - for clarity, I mean £20m on top of whatever their standard profit is.

 

They were losing money hand over fist iirc, which is what forced the sales.

[Rayvin 4964]

Ah fair enough then. I had the impression that their focus on youth would keep player wages low, high profits on sales, etc...wonder where all the money goes.

[Happy Face 29]

Our revenue was £24m ahead of Southampton last year. Players sold in summer won't contribute to accounts to the end of June. Luke Shaw might be included but that's about it.

 

You've been listening to Pardew too much thinking they've got clout.

[ewerk 26581]

Actually, they only lost £7m in 12/13 but apparently they had to then invest £30m in a new training ground.

[Howay 12480]

They also have the additional revenue stream of employees paying for parking.

Like Ewerk and HF have said I think their finances have been a bit of a disaster in recent years.

[The Fish 9053]

Good piece from @@premleagueowl

 

 

 

Newcastle United: Say nothing, admit nothing, be nothing ⁴

by SebSB •

There’s nothing to laugh about at Newcastle United. Even in this age of feverish tribalism, the situation St James’ Park doesn’t offer so much as a hint of schadenfreude. Primarily, that’s because of a collective fear. Newcastle are a brazen example of what happens when an owner recognises the value in participation and seeks to do little more than exist in the Premier League, and that mindset could infect any of our clubs at any time.

Mike Ashley is the poster-child for football’s cynical business culture. He is the Monopoly player who never buys any houses, hotels or utilities, and who is content to go around the board and collect his £200. Maybe that’s smart? Maybe that’s a viable, low-risk strategy?

But maybe it completely defeats the object of playing in the first place?

The fractious relationship between Ashley’s regime and the club’s supporters doesn’t stem from that, though. The descaling of ambition and the deference to financial stability over on-pitch progression aggravates the tension, but really it’s the lack of trust which is at the root of all this acrimony.

Fans are very loyal and, in general, it takes something truly extreme for them to turn their back on their club. Beyond a small minority, most can tolerate short-term difficulties as long as they are part of a progression towards a brighter tomorrow. Even in 2015, football is still the game of the eternal optimist and, unfounded and naive though it can be, ‘this time next year’ culture is as prevalent as it always has been.

But just not at Newcastle.

The unrest in the north-east isn’t a response to losing football matches. Defeats are part of the game and they are the emotional trade-off for the happier moments. No, the acrimony exists because there is no obvious future for this team. There is no hope, no aspiration and no realistic expectation for anything other than what already exists.

It’s easy to sneer at that and appeal for some perspective. Newcastle are a Premier League side and they play in front of a 50,000-strong crowd every other week, so how bad can it really be?

Bad. The very principle of fandom is constructed around the notion of rising and falling and being part of something as it succeeds and fails. If that variation doesn’t exist, what else is there?

There is nothing wrong with running a club within narrow financial parameters and, given how expensive success now is, it’s unreasonable to expect every owner to bankroll a pursuit of the game’s summit. Within reason, though, there should always be a footballing objective – and that’s true at every level of the game.

Whether it’s Southampton, Southend, Leyton Orient, Tottenham, Barnsley or Wycombe Wanderers, every football club can reasonably be expected – at any time – to be at least trying to move between a Point A and a Point B. Sometimes, that objective is simply ‘to avoid relegation’, but if that’s the case, it should always be ‘to avoid relegation, so that next year we can do x, y and z”.

Newcastle don’t think like that – or, at least, the veil of secrecy around the club ensures that people assume that they don’t.

Mike Ashley’s great failing has been not to articulate his intentions at St James’ Park. Because there’s never any clarity over his objectives and because the public are left to judge him on his actions, the rational response is always to assume the worst. Newcastle United is the most opaque football club in the country and that, rather the league table, is what fuels the perpetual unrest.

Derek Llambias and Lee Charnley, the former and current managing director respectively, have preached the virtues of stability in the past. Each of them have tried to quell dissatisfaction by using the ‘not Leeds United or Portsmouth’ rationale and referencing a false-dichotomy in which a club is either ambitious or it goes into administration.

Beyond the obvious, the major problem with that as a line of defence is that it omits any reference to the future.

Stability is great, but stability has to be in aid of something. If, in the real world, a person saves money over a long period of time, is it not reasonable to eventually expect them to do something beyond just the further accumulation of wealth? A holiday? A new car?

A first-rate midfielder?

Newcastle employees have been very self-congratulatory about their ability to strike lucrative commercial deals and have been similarly noisy when publicly discussing incoming transfer revenue. Clubs sell players and market themselves to the hilt – those are realities of professional sport – but, ordinarily, they do so to fund a pursuit of something, be it a championship, a cup, or a better league-placing.

Newcastle will never be Chelsea or Manchester City, but should there not be a point in their future at which the past and current focus on finance translates into something tangible? If such a day exists, would that not be a reasonable way to appease unhappy supporters:

“Look, I know it’s been bloody miserable for the last couple of years, but we have to do ‘this’ so that we can do ‘that’.”

You never hear that from anyone at St James’ Park and that silence implies a deception. It’s as if, insultingly, Mike Ashley and his immediate inferiors believe if they say nothing, nobody will notice just how contrary to the spirit of competition this club has become.

 

Good to see fans of other clubs are starting to understand our malaise.

[Howay 12480]

Aye about time tbh.

"It’s as if, insultingly, Mike Ashley and his immediate inferiors believe if they say nothing, nobody will notice just how contrary to the spirit of competition this club has become." They have been correct in believing that though, all you have to do is listen to most pundits and you'd think everything was rosy and Newcastle fans are just deluded whiners. The stuff Lineker come out with the other week surprised me as it's one of the first times I've heard a notable person come out and say something like that, even Shearer avoids saying things of that nature.

[Dr Gloom 19879]

Good piece from @@premleagueowl

 

 

 

Good to see fans of other clubs are starting to understand our malaise.

 

good read that by, which club does the author support?

[Happy Face 29]

I find it difficult to agree with much of what is written there, simply because every time anyone at the club says a word it's immediately pulled apart and exposed as horseshit. By me more than most.

 

I think it's easy to judge the club on their actions without needing words. I give them stick for the lies, the rhetoric, the random approach to ticket pricing, the harmful deals that benefit Sports Direct and hurt Newcastle. But it can go too far and claims of Ashley using the club as a cash cow, pocketing tv money and all that sort of nonsense are ridiculous.

 

I object to him loaning the club money and paying himself back having got the club relegated, but it's stated in the accounts that the objective is to pay that loan off as soon as possible. There's no lack of transparency there. The club is yet to report an operating profit, and has huge debt. It will remain a club in limbo until the immediately repayable debt is satisfied. That much is clear to anyone observing with as much as a passing interest. It would make no sense for Charnley to come out and say as much, because that would impact on ticket sales and slow down the recovery, but anyone who doesn't realise and still goes to cup games thinking this could be our year isn't paying attention.

[The Fish 9053]

 

good read that by, which club does the author support?

Spurs. I think.

[The Fish 9053]

I find it difficult to agree with much of what is written there, simply because every time anyone at the club says a word it's immediately pulled apart and exposed as horseshit. By me more than most.

 

I think it's easy to judge the club on their actions without needing words. I give them stick for the lies, the rhetoric, the random approach to ticket pricing, the harmful deals that benefit Sports Direct and hurt Newcastle. But it can go too far and claims of Ashley using the club as a cash cow, pocketing tv money and all that sort of nonsense are ridiculous.

 

I object to him loaning the club money and paying himself back having got the club relegated, but it's stated in the accounts that the objective is to pay that loan off as soon as possible. There's no lack of transparency there. The club is yet to report an operating profit, and has huge debt. It will remain a club in limbo until the immediately repayable debt is satisfied. That much is clear to anyone observing with as much as a passing interest. It would make no sense for Charnley to come out and say as much, because that would impact on ticket sales and slow down the recovery, but anyone who doesn't realise and still goes to cup games thinking this could be our year isn't paying attention.

 

I'm not sure that's true though. I've not seen that written as fact (or educated opinion at least) by anyone outside of this forum. There are people paid to write about Newcastle United who don't seem to know that and who, instead, trot out the very nonsense we rightly dismiss.

 

I think it's obvious to you and to others on here because we devour everything morsel of Newcastle United information we can get our hands on. Even poring over financial records to prove that Ashley doesn't "pocket" transfer monies. LM was a perfect example of someone who spent a lot of his time reading & talking about Newcastle and yet he remains to this day a man demanding to know what happened to the Carroll money.

 

This piece on a small blog is, for me, an encouraging small step.

 

Edit:- Also, this isn't for the Newcastle fans, this blog is targeted at fans of other clubs.

Edited January 22, 2015 by The Fish

[PaddockLad 14691]

Good piece from @@premleagueowl

 

 

 

Good to see fans of other clubs are starting to understand our malaise.

 

 

Mike Ashley is the poster-child for football’s cynical business culture. He is the Monopoly player who never buys any houses, hotels or utilities, and who is content to go around the board and collect his £200. Maybe that’s smart? Maybe that’s a viable, low-risk strategy?

 

Think we need a re think on the thread title, "cunt" isnt really strong enough....

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/mike-ashley-wields-his-iron-fist-once-more-at-usc-9994171.html

 

 

Alastair Cook, who had worked for USC for eight years in the company’s Dundonald factory in Ayrshire before being made redundant last week, explained: “The first warning signs were on 4 January when we got some emails, saying we are doing a full warehouse stock-check. It’s not unusual, but it did raise a few eyebrows.”

Five days later, at 7.30am, two senior workers from Sports Direct’s head office in Shirebrook, Derbyshire, arrived and told staff that they were to start loading up 50 Sports Direct trucks, which arrived an hour later

 

Mr Cook explained: “We weren’t told USC was going bust or going into administration. We made some calls to head office to ask what was happening, but no one told us anything. We knew something was up but were told to carry on loading the trucks. We were essentially digging our own graves.”

On 8 January the situation turned farcical when the landlords of the warehouse, Sir Tom Hunter’s private equity group West Coast Capital, got wind of the stock being shipped out, and sent their own staff to blockade the departing trucks.

By 2.30pm the trucks could not leave and the police arrived. Sir Tom was owed rent and a billionaire’s-standoff ensued which led to the power being shut off to the factory and an eight-hour negotiation. The landlord’s bill was finally settled.

Before the power was cut, Mr Cook also noticed that the USC website said “© 2015 Republic.Com Retail Ltd” whereas it had previously said “© 2015 West Coast Capital (USC) Ltd”. “That suggested to us the sale was a done deal – before we had been told anything,” he said.

Edited January 22, 2015 by PaddockLad

[Park Life 70]

I find it difficult to agree with much of what is written there, simply because every time anyone at the club says a word it's immediately pulled apart and exposed as horseshit. By me more than most.

 

I think it's easy to judge the club on their actions without needing words. I give them stick for the lies, the rhetoric, the random approach to ticket pricing, the harmful deals that benefit Sports Direct and hurt Newcastle. But it can go too far and claims of Ashley using the club as a cash cow, pocketing tv money and all that sort of nonsense are ridiculous.

 

I object to him loaning the club money and paying himself back having got the club relegated, but it's stated in the accounts that the objective is to pay that loan off as soon as possible. There's no lack of transparency there. The club is yet to report an operating profit, and has huge debt. It will remain a club in limbo until the immediately repayable debt is satisfied. That much is clear to anyone observing with as much as a passing interest. It would make no sense for Charnley to come out and say as much, because that would impact on ticket sales and slow down the recovery, but anyone who doesn't realise and still goes to cup games thinking this could be our year isn't paying attention.

......and he will quote any buyer silly money.

[Kitman 2188]

Whats not clear to me is whether the club is being run to profit Ashley (via advertising, merchandising etc) or simply not to lose him money. I suspect theres been a bit of a journey here

 

1. it started out as a short term speculative adventure for Ashley which went sour

 

2. he then battened down the hatches and ran it simply to not lose any money. He determined to extract maximum benefits for SD in return for his loans

 

3. the game has shifted from not losing money to recouping all the money he has put in including loans and purchase price.

 

He might elect not to repay the loans but let the net worth of the club rise instead. Or maybe the club could refund its own purchase.

 

Whatever hes up to, i dont think we'll ever move forward until the club has generated sufficient worth to ensure all of his investment (purchase price plus funding loans) will be repaid, plus a handsome profit on top.

 

Until that day, we won't see more tgan the bare minimum invested in players. I think this what limits the ambition of the club, as any significant profits wont go back into the playing staff.

 

If thats right, the interesting question is whether if Ashley got all if his loans repaid, and the club's shares achieved a satisfactory value, he would change to reinvesting profits into the first team. I suspect not.

[Park Life 70]

Personally think the biggest problem is that he doesn't really understand football (the game)...Think he understands it as a business totally now as he's proved...

 

If the club moves into continual profit then a levereged buyout would be possible.

 

If that is possible then the club could be run as a trust with a membership with voting rights and presidential elections every 3 years.

 

Trust would write into its rules regarding ownership and have legal protection against future predators.

Edited January 22, 2015 by Park Life

[sammynb 2929]

Whats not clear to me is whether the club is being run to profit Ashley (via advertising, merchandising etc) or simply not to lose him money. I suspect theres been a bit of a journey here

 

1. it started out as a short term speculative adventure for Ashley which went sour

 

2. he then battened down the hatches and ran it simply to not lose any money. He determined to extract maximum benefits for SD in return for his loans

 

3. the game has shifted from not losing money to recouping all the money he has put in including loans and purchase price.

 

He might elect not to repay the loans but let the net worth of the club rise instead. Or maybe the club could refund its own purchase.

 

Whatever hes up to, i dont think we'll ever move forward until the club has generated sufficient worth to ensure all of his investment (purchase price plus funding loans) will be repaid, plus a handsome profit on top.

 

Until that day, we won't see more tgan the bare minimum invested in players. I think this what limits the ambition of the club, as any significant profits wont go back into the playing staff.

 

If thats right, the interesting question is whether if Ashley got all if his loans repaid, and the club's shares achieved a satisfactory value, he would change to reinvesting profits into the first team. I suspect not.

 

A few years ago I claimed his only aim was to utilise Newcastle and St James as a huge billboard for his tat.

The value of the global coverage of the premier league, especially with online retail being so strong, is larger than most consider.

For him as long as the club finishes above 18th he's getting exactly what he wants.

[sammynb 2929]

Oh and depressingly I also don't think he will ever sell unless the club is relegated and does not bounce back up the following season.

[Kitman 2188]

He'll only flick it on if he can't use us as a TV billboard for his shitty gear? That is a depressing thought!

[Happy Face 29]

Whats not clear to me is whether the club is being run to profit Ashley (via advertising, merchandising etc) or simply not to lose him money. I suspect theres been a bit of a journey here

 

1. it started out as a short term speculative adventure for Ashley which went sour

 

2. he then battened down the hatches and ran it simply to not lose any money. He determined to extract maximum benefits for SD in return for his loans

 

3. the game has shifted from not losing money to recouping all the money he has put in including loans and purchase price.

 

He might elect not to repay the loans but let the net worth of the club rise instead. Or maybe the club could refund its own purchase.

 

Whatever hes up to, i dont think we'll ever move forward until the club has generated sufficient worth to ensure all of his investment (purchase price plus funding loans) will be repaid, plus a handsome profit on top.

 

Until that day, we won't see more tgan the bare minimum invested in players. I think this what limits the ambition of the club, as any significant profits wont go back into the playing staff.

 

If thats right, the interesting question is whether if Ashley got all if his loans repaid, and the club's shares achieved a satisfactory value, he would change to reinvesting profits into the first team. I suspect not.

How Newcastle United Has Been Exploited For The Gain Of Sports Direct

 

http://nufc-ashlies.blogspot.com/2014/08/how-newcastle-united-has-been-exploited.html

[Kitman 2188]

The one thing I dont understand is why je would enrich SD at the expense of NUFC. He owns 100% of the latter and just over half of SD. Unless more profit in SD translates into an exponential increase in the value of his SD shares?

[Park Life 70]

To a large extent Chelsea and Man C commercial income is faked and a way to get around FFP. Some of it at both clubs are hostage brands in cahoots with the ownership. By far the best performance has been from Spurs and Liverpool.

[Happy Face 29]

The biggest profit any premier league football club ever reported is £50m. I think SD are up to £250m a year or summat aren't they? That's his bread & butter.

[Park Life 70]

The one thing I dont understand is why je would enrich SD at the expense of NUFC. He owns 100% of the latter and just over half of SD. Unless more profit in SD translates into an exponential increase in the value of his SD shares?

There is a kind of glass ceiling in football which is hard to break with regard to income unless there is massive investment and the brand becomes global ie CL. With SD and its policy of continually expanding into Euro and picking up failing brands there isn't really any barriers to continued growht (yet).