Jump to content

NUFC Accounts 12/13


Tooj
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'd suggest, given that some of the worlds leading companies advertise by paying for blanket sponsorship of sports and music arenas that they think its a good way to advertise their products.

Edited by JaMoUsE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 400
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

We weren't talking about the total commercial income (performance of which is poor, no argument there), I was talking about the in ground signage in particular, no way that would be £10Mill all by itself, it'd be lucky to be anywhere near £2-3Mill IMO, interest would likely be circa £8 mill at round about 6-ish %

 

Absolutely, but the justification for Ashley NOT paying for ANY advertising, is the fact that he has £129m owed to him from the club.

 

Through his free advertising and other activities that devalue the brand he has cost the club £13.8m a year though. Which would dwarf the interest on that debt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're debt free!! :thumbup:

 

 

We owe £129M :thumbdown:

 

 

He's not charging us any interest! (We'll be able to repay the debt quicker!) :thumbup:

 

 

We haven't repaid a nut (other than the relegation loan). :thumbdown:

 

 

Sports Direct and associated MA brands are getting free advertising which is revenue lost to the club. :thumbdown:

 

 

Ah but this is because he isn't charging interest, so in effect the loan is not interest free. :thumbdown:

 

And the loan amount never goes down but his 'interest' payments of 'free' advertising carries on. (seven years worth so far and counting!) :thumbdown:

 

 

All hail the Genius!!! :yahoo:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely, but the justification for Ashley NOT paying for ANY advertising, is the fact that he has £129m owed to him from the club.

 

Through his free advertising and other activities that devalue the brand he has cost the club £13.8m a year though. Which would dwarf the interest on that debt.

But the ONLY point of contention is the stadium signage, there's all sorts of reasons for commercial revenue performance, or lack thereof, and it's not just the margin on signage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hows it irrelevant? If I own a business and I can make 10m per annum by investing 8m per annum its an extra 2m for me every year.

It's only relevant IF you can prove that the lost revenue to the club from signage is greater than what the interest would be on £129 Mill, I don't think it would be greater.

 

What any advertiser gets from their advert is irrelevant to the owner of what the advert's plastered on, all that matters is what is the benefit to the owner of said billboard for hosting said advert. The benefit to us is nil in income terms but is more than nil in the avoidance of a cost, the latter would far exceed (in my opinion) the income derived from sale of the advertising space if placed against the cost of interest on £129 Million.

 

As I said earlier I don't particularly understand why he doesn't pay for it (as it's SD cash not his) but it's a perfectly equitable arrangement IMO. If it was a choice between advert income and the interest, I'd lose the advert income and avoid the interest every day of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're debt free!! :thumbup:

 

 

We owe £129M :thumbdown:

 

 

He's not charging us any interest! (We'll be able to repay the debt quicker!) :thumbup:

 

 

We haven't repaid a nut (other than the relegation loan). :thumbdown:

 

 

Sports Direct and associated MA brands are getting free advertising which is revenue lost to the club. :thumbdown:

 

 

Ah but this is because he isn't charging interest, so in effect the loan is not interest free. :thumbdown:

 

And the loan amount never goes down but his 'interest' payments of 'free' advertising carries on. (seven years worth so far and counting!) :thumbdown:

 

But the difference between the two is likely to be about £4-£5 Million a year positive to the club YAY :yahoo:

 

So over those 7 years so far and counting the clubs around £35 Mill better off (or one Andy Carroll even)

 

 

 

All hail the Genius!!! :yahoo:

FYP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HI EVERYBODY!

 

If I have 3 beans and I add 3 more beans, what do I have?!

Tve14825-2-42.jpg

"Some more beans"

 

av-271.jpg?_r=0

"Yes... and no. Let's try again shall we? I have two beans, then I add two more beans. What does that make?

 

 

Tve14825-2-42.jpg

"A very small trophy cabinet."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's only relevant IF you can prove that the lost revenue to the club from signage is greater than what the interest would be on £129 Mill, I don't think it would be greater.What any advertiser gets from their advert is irrelevant to the owner of what the advert's plastered on, all that matters is what is the benefit to the owner of said billboard for hosting said advert. The benefit to us is nil in income terms but is more than nil in the avoidance of a cost, the latter would far exceed (in my opinion) the income derived from sale of the advertising space if placed against the cost of interest on £129 Million.As I said earlier I don't particularly understand why he doesn't pay for it (as it's SD cash not his) but it's a perfectly equitable arrangement IMO. If it was a choice between advert income and the interest, I'd lose the advert income and avoid the interest every day of the week.

My gripe is with the interest free bollocks. Its not interest free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My gripe is with the interest free bollocks. Its not interest free.

Erm, I think you'll find that it is, that it remains so appears to be conditional, but at the end of the day it is currently interest free.

 

I don't know why it matters so much TBH

 

If it wasn't because of the revilement of SD and MA no-one would give a toss, especially because when looking at both sides of the equation the club is better off (in my opinion).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should support Aston Villa, mate.

You and several others should grow the fuck up.

 

Ashley's not going anywhere, we're stuck with him, get used to it, because it could be incredibly worse (if you leave your hatred at the door and dispassionately think about it) Vincent Tan anyone ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You and several others should grow the fuck up.

 

Ashley's not going anywhere, we're stuck with him, get used to it, because it could be incredibly worse (if you leave your hatred at the door and dispassionately think about it) Vincent Tan anyone ??

 

It could be worse. It could not be incredibly worse.

 

It could be incredibly better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I choose not to grow up. I choose not kow tow to anyone, least of all someone I think is taking, and has already taken, the piss out of my club and by association, me.

 

:good:

 

P.s. Ever belted out 'sack the board' in the past? Bit childish maybe, but it does you good to let it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm, I think you'll find that it is, that it remains so appears to be conditional, but at the end of the day it is currently interest free.I don't know why it matters so much TBHIf it wasn't because of the revilement of SD and MA no-one would give a toss, especially because when looking at both sides of the equation the club is better off (in my opinion).

Its a trade off, interest free for free advertising. Dress it up how you want mate. If it isn't why not charge for the advertising like you suggest.

Edited by JaMoUsE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It could be worse. It could not be incredibly worse.

 

It could be incredibly better.

No doubt it could be incredibly better, but equally, of course it could be incredibly worse. It's really, really, not all bad, in fact it's more good than bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You and several others should grow the fuck up.

 

Ashley's not going anywhere, we're stuck with him, get used to it, because it could be incredibly worse (if you leave your hatred at the door and dispassionately think about it) Vincent Tan anyone ??

 

So someone who hasnt paid to see Newcastle United in decades is telling us we should just suck it up because theres worse out there?....go fuck yourself you mealy mouthed passionless old cunt (no safety wink)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Growing up would involve not bothering with the multi millionaires kicking an inflated sack around the grass.

 

Given the fact I'm childish enough to still be bothered about that I think it's fair enough to make childish demands on the owner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully expect a summer of continued negativity because we won't spend £50 - £60 Mill on transfer fees, but we'd better spend £30 to £40 Mill (net) because I really think we can easily afford that and still stay within the model.

 

I was with you up until this sentence. It'll be a summer of negativity because we won't spend 50-60 million? The past two summers have been oppressively negative without cracking 10 mil, let alone 50! Nobody who follows this club is going to be "negative" because we're not spending Man City money. Then in the same breath you suggest we'd "better" spend at least 30 mil net. Tell me how likely to happen you think that is, then tell me who's being "negative." Most of what you're saying makes sense, but this part came across as hopelessly out of touch and is reminiscent of media coverage of NUFC circa 2008 - "sad, divine-righting Geordies kicking off because their new owner didn't splash enough cash."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt it could be incredibly better, but equally, of course it could be incredibly worse. It's really, really, not all bad, in fact it's more good than bad.

Get the fuck out of here with that shit man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So someone who hasnt paid to see Newcastle United in decades is telling us we should just suck it up because theres worse out there?....go fuck yourself you mealy mouthed passionless old cunt (no safety wink)

Been back this season as it happens, three ST's at this address.(renewed for next season as well btw).

Edited by Toonpack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was with you up until this sentence. It'll be a summer of negativity because we won't spend 50-60 million? The past two summers have been oppressively negative without cracking 10 mil, let alone 50! Nobody who follows this club is going to be "negative" because we're not spending Man City money. Then in the same breath you suggest we'd "better" spend at least 30 mil net. Tell me how likely to happen you think that is, then tell me who's being "negative." Most of what you're saying makes sense, but this part came across as hopelessly out of touch and is reminiscent of media coverage of NUFC circa 2008 - "sad, divine-righting Geordies kicking off because their new owner didn't splash enough cash."

Ok maybe I worded it wrong, we can, and should be easily able to spend at least £30Mill Net, maybe more, and we bloody well should and yes I expect it, because even within the prudence model we must be able to afford it, based on the lack of action and the TV income explosion, of late. But (and maybe I had my N-O head on) that still won't be enough in some quarters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.