media, pundits, ex players accusing Rafa of negativity

[toonlegend]

they should flaming come and have a look at some of the posts on here to know what
flaming negative is with a capital N

[waalsendmick]

I don't get all the furore.

ONE bad performance FFS!

also, I don't get what Rafa Is supposed to have done wrong.

he hasn't bad mouthed any 1st team players, he has simply made it clear which players are not welcome and are not part of his plans, he has then voiced frustration that the business side of the club has failed to move said players on, hence, hindering his bringing in of players.

two weeks ago, pundits were saying we would go down because we hadn't added enough to the squad, now they're Slagging Rafa off, for explaining to them why this is the case!

phecking pundits....

we went up last season because we had premier league players in the champo.....

..... we're going down this season because we have champo players in the prem.....


.... it's the same phecking players!!!

[sherwoodmag]

I think more on here dislike Paul Merson than like him but I think a statement he made last week has more than a grain of truth in it.He said the problem with Newcastles first eleven is too many of their players are too good for the Championship but not good enough for the Prem.

[Jammy89]

Well said Mick.

[pboromag]

Well said Mick.

even our goalie is saying rafas moaning is effecting the players

it might be a case of protecting their selves
but i dont see his constant whinging any way positive

i dont think i have seen any other manager accusing their owner ,or complaing about funds

iim sure all of them could do with more

im sure all of them havent got their first choice

but ours seems to want to highlite his plight

[toonlegend]

the differemce being that those other managers knew from the beginning, what they could have from their clubs - what needed to be done etc. and the plans were adhered too

whereas rafa was given his limitations for planning, then they moved the goalposts and limited him further.

[pboromag]

the differemce being that those other managers knew from the beginning, what they could have from their clubs - what needed to be done etc. and the plans were adhered too

whereas rafa was given his limitations for planning, then they moved the goalposts and limited him further.

have they how??

we all knew he would have to get players out
he hasnt

we all know playyers need to go ,very few have gone

we all know what he brought last season wouldnt be good enough

we are all aware of the psitions we need

i think the statment he can have all the money the club genertes for the club is probabaly one of the most clearest statments i have heard from ash

he has never said this season he wold put any money in

we all said when that statment was made that it would include players out and off the books

the deadwood

rafa knew what he had ,he knows footy ,he knows the powr of the players

you pressume everything is rosy in the other camps
im sure chris hasnt had as much or got the players he wanted due to the works on the ground etc

im sure the german is the same

and lets face it he hasnt brought wisely at the moment anyway ,still looking for keepers

i just cant understand how rafa feels let down

he was aware at the end of last season players needed to be gone if not just to trim the squad size

very few have gone or will go

he is still picking players he has said have no future

why not stick them in the stiffs and put development players on the pitch and send thme a proper message

[waalsendmick]

it's like broken record time.... but if you can do it, so can i....


the club would generate A LOT MORE money if advertising wasn't given away free.....


and.... Rafa doesn't sell the players the club does, he is frustrated they havent

[ex_pat_magpie]

Pboro, all you are doing with posts like this is constantly showing your lack of knowledge about the workings at this club.

So that you don't make these childish remarks again Write out 50 times.

Rafa is not responsible for getting players out. Charnley is.

Rafa wasn't responsible for their silly high wages and over long contracts. Ashley and Charnley were.

Once you have grasped this you will appear to have got the basics right for a start at least.

[ghostrider]

Pboro, all you are doing with posts like this is constantly showing your lack of knowledge about the workings at this club.
So that you don't make these childish remarks again Write out 50 times.
I'd hardly say his knowledge about the workings of the club is lacking any more than any of us if we want to argue a case.
He's saying it like he thinks, whether good bad or indifferent.
He's controversial with intent to spark debate.
As silly as it might seem, it does keep forums ticking much more than everyone just agreeing as a unit.



Rafa is not responsible for getting players out. Charnley is.
So Rafa has no say in what's what with the players. Is this what you're saying?
Does Charnley take massive credit for getting 30 million for Sissoko then?
Does he take the flack for buying in players and overcrowding the player pool leaving no room, whilst Rafa keeps on looking.
Rafa and co have to accept responsibility, not just Charnley and Ashley.



Rafa wasn't responsible for their silly high wages and over long contracts. Ashley and Charnley were.
I thought they were skinflints who wouldn't allow buys because of high wages?
Make your mind up.



Once you have grasped this you will appear to have got the basics right for a start at least.I think he does grasp it but selective minds come to the fore.

[pboromag]

it's like broken record time.... but if you can do it, so can i....


the club would generate A LOT MORE money if advertising wasn't given away free.....


and.... Rafa doesn't sell the players the club does, he is frustrated they havent

but not if they had to pay the debt or the bank called in the debt

[pboromag]

Pboro, all you are doing with posts like this is constantly showing your lack of knowledge about the workings at this club.

So that you don't make these childish remarks again Write out 50 times.

Rafa is not responsible for getting players out. Charnley is.

Rafa wasn't responsible for their silly high wages and over long contracts. Ashley and Charnley were.

Once you have grasped this you will appear to have got the basics right for a start at least.

me childish
I see you are still not a man of your word or honour and would stop having digs at me
yet you constantly sit and tell who ever listens to your arsewiping that you don't start it

you have no knowledge of what goes on at the club
only what you want to believe
rafa is responsible for getting players out as he is in charge of all footy matters
and why say someone has no future at the club but continue to play them risking injury and then them not going ,or indeed make life hard for them and make them move on

please stop your stupid little digs

and then bleat like the fat waiter saying you don't start them
they start from little cowardly jibes like this

you are a man with no honour you are like one of those little to55ers who hang around with the school bully licking arse

trying to stir 5hite knowing you are protected

well your a liar an arsewipe and a 5hitstirer

do what you said you would do stay of my post stop the arguing and then stop bleating like a stuffed pig when people get bored with us arguing

[ex_pat_magpie]

me childish
I see you are still not a man of your word or honour and would stop having digs at me
yet you constantly sit and tell who ever listens to your arsewiping that you don't start it

you have no knowledge of what goes on at the club
only what you want to believe
rafa is responsible for getting players out as he is in charge of all footy matters
and why say someone has no future at the club but continue to play them risking injury and then them not going ,or indeed make life hard for them and make them move on

please stop your stupid little digs

and then bleat like the fat waiter saying you don't start them
they start from little cowardly jibes like this

you are a man with no honour you are like one of those little to55ers who hang around with the school bully licking arse

trying to stir 5hite knowing you are protected

well your a liar an arsewipe and a 5hitstirer

do what you said you would do stay of my post stop the arguing and then stop bleating like a stuffed pig when people get bored with us arguing

I'm not having digs at you nor am I replying in the childish insulting ways which you do.

All I am saying is that in NUMEROUS POSTS you complain about Rafa not moving unwanted players on.

What myself and many,many other posters point out is that once Rafa has made the decision to discard particular players it is then Charnley's job to get them moved on.

If this task is made more difficult because average or poor players were given higher wages and longer contracts than their ability deserves then that is the fault of those who allowed this to happen.

That was Charnley and Ashley and not Rafa.

Surely that must be clear. Or What?

[ex_pat_magpie]

I'd hardly say his knowledge about the workings of the club is lacking any more than any of us if we want to argue a case.
He's saying it like he thinks, whether good bad or indifferent.
He's controversial with intent to spark debate.
As silly as it might seem, it does keep forums ticking much more than everyone just agreeing as a unit.


Ex_pat
Not when it's so repetitive as to blame Rafa for ALL of the mistakes he has inherited from Ashley and Charnley.

Ghost
So Rafa has no say in what's what with the players. Is this what you're saying?
Does Charnley take massive credit for getting 30 million for Sissoko then?
Does he take the flack for buying in players and overcrowding the player pool leaving no room, whilst Rafa keeps on looking.
Rafa and co have to accept responsibility, not just Charnley and Ashley.


Ex_pat
Sissoko is one success sale. Add the value and wages of those who they can't move on and these outweigh that one success.
And the responsibility I posted about was what has gone on for seasons before Rafa arrived. Ashley is not an ideal owner and Charley is not an ideal puppet. And before you begin to compare them with worse alternatives from Sunderland, compare them with better owners and executives from other normal clubs (and I don't mean the unreal plastic clubs)

Just think a few seasons ago just before Ashley came we were a better club than both Everton and Spurs. Now look where they were.

In fact at the start of the season not so long ago we were second bottom of the Prem and who was bottom. Spurs were. And not much water has flowed under the bridge since then.



Ghost
I thought they were skinflints who wouldn't allow buys because of high wages?
Make your mind up.

Ex_pat
What I was saying is that they have given the wrong wages to the wrong players.

When Shearer came no one cribbed at him having a big wage and a top wage. Good players deserve this but if you give willy nilly average players better wages and contracts than they deserve then they will sit on them and wait for some other mug puppet to sign them up and take them over. but there are not many more mugs about worse than the executive we have been encumbered with.

Ghost
I think he does grasp it but selective minds come to the fore.


Ex_pat
Of course he grasps it but just gets infantile enjoyment in getting attention by being a wum.

[ghostrider]

I'm not having digs at you nor am I replying in the childish insulting ways which you do.

All I am saying is that in NUMEROUS POSTS you complain about Rafa not moving unwanted players on.

What myself and many,many other posters point out is that once Rafa has made the decision to discard particular players it is then Charnley's job to get them moved on.

If this task is made more difficult because average or poor players were given higher wages and longer contracts than their ability deserves then that is the fault of those who allowed this to happen.

That was Charnley and Ashley and not Rafa.

Surely that must be clear. Or What?

It's also Rafa's problem if he brought them to the club if they turn out to be below standard or surplus to his set up.
It's a collective issue not just a Charnley issue.

As for poor players given higher wages...ask yourself this. Who's buying the poor players and is it done on purpose?
Or is it that the players are bought for potential and end up poor for whatever reasons?

How do you put a wage tag on that?

Rafa Benitez is not immune to criticism on this score, just as Charnley or anyone else who deals in the transfers and wage demands aren't.

[ex_pat_magpie]

It's also Rafa's problem if he brought them to the club if they turn out to be below standard or surplus to his set up.
It's a collective issue not just a Charnley issue.

As for poor players given higher wages...ask yourself this. Who's buying the poor players and is it done on purpose?
Or is it that the players are bought for potential and end up poor for whatever reasons?

How do you put a wage tag on that?

Rafa Benitez is not immune to criticism on this score, just as Charnley or anyone else who deals in the transfers and wage demands aren't.

But we are not talking about players Rafa brought to the club. We are talking about players who came before Rafa's time and need to be moved on to free up both valuable wages and valuable squad places.

[waalsendmick]

to be fair though.

Rafa did bring in Hanley, Lazaar and Gamez.

but, as has been mentioned elsewhere, we pay slightly lower wages than other clubs, because of this we give longer contracts with loyalty bonuses.

if buying clubs don't match these contracts, the players won't leave.

I believe we have plenty of money to spend, but the squad needs balancing first.

all Rafa has done is voice frustration in this....

[ghostrider]

But we are not talking about players Rafa brought to the club. We are talking about players who came before Rafa's time and need to be moved on to free up both valuable wages and valuable squad places. Name me the players that are hard to move on due to wages and fees.
Don't forget to include Rafa's signing's and also the signings that many fans were over the moon at when first signed.

Let's not be too selective.

[ghostrider]

to be fair though.

Rafa did bring in Hanley, Lazaar and Gamez.

but, as has been mentioned elsewhere, we pay slightly lower wages than other clubs, because of this we give longer contracts with loyalty bonuses.

if buying clubs don't match these contracts, the players won't leave.

I believe we have plenty of money to spend, but the squad needs balancing first.

all Rafa has done is voice frustration in this....

And that's all fair comment.
Rafa is well within his rights to voice his frustration but he's also got to be aware that his frustration can be seen as a massive negative by both fans and players alike.

There's players at the club that know they are surplus to requirements but won't be too buoyed up by Rafa's sentiments to the press, etc.
He doesn't need to name names because his discontent sends the wrong vibes out.

It also creates an issue with the fans in terms of attaching blame and creating a total negative mindset against Ashley and Charnley on top of it all, which (as we have seen first hand) reverberates around the entire club and city and quickly turns into bile which destroys the players confidence and positive mindset.

It's a tricky situation that should be managed in a better way, because the press just love this kind of stuff.

[sherwoodmag]

Rafa said in a statement yesterday that he brought in some players to help get us out of the Championship but need to be moved on because they are not Prem quality.
It is obvious that Hanley,Lazaar and Gamez were just brought in as cover because of the often 3 games a week in the Championship.
Hopefully they will be gone by next week.

[pboromag]

But we are not talking about players Rafa brought to the club. We are talking about players who came before Rafa's time and need to be moved on to free up both valuable wages and valuable squad places.

so 3 of the 4 or 5 players he wants gone arent rafas

and the ones he has signed this seson he doesnt play or werent his finds

hanley lazzar to name a couple
brought them and hardly played them anyway

wasting ashlys money

[pboromag]

Rafa said in a statement yesterday that he brought in some players to help get us out of the Championship but need to be moved on because they are not Prem quality.
It is obvious that Hanley,Lazaar and Gamez were just brought in as cover because of the often 3 games a week in the Championship.
Hopefully they will be gone by next week.

but he would have agreed wages etc and why not play development players instead of burdening the club with high wages

[ex_pat_magpie]

In reply to Ghostriders post no 18

Hanley and Lazaar, bought specifically to aid promotion and possibly de Jong, Mitro and Mbemba.


Then the old chestnuts Saivet, Riviere, Krul, Colback, Haidara. There's quite a bit of wages and contract space to be freed up there.

There are currently 42 players in the squad and this needs to be drastically cut down.

[ghostrider]

In reply to Ghostriders post no 18

Hanley and Lazaar, bought specifically to aid promotion and possibly de Jong, Mitro and Mbemba.

Aiding promotion for Hanley and Lazaar is all fine but in reality they were hardly played, so the younger players would have been ideal enough back up, rather than adding excess wages to the mix without much return.

I'm not sure what you're implying when you mention de Jong Mitro and Mbemba.


Then the old chestnuts Saivet, Riviere, Krul, Colback, Haidara. There's quite a bit of wages and contract space to be freed up there.
Yep but we have to put it into context, because this was an argument about Charnley's and Ashley's so called incompetence in terms of contract lengths plus wages.

Krul has been here for a decade.
Colback was a free transfer and deemed a decent buy by fans alike, even amid the mackem digs.
Haidara succumbed to glass doll syndrome but was also deemed a potential class act.
Saivet has had very little time to do anything to make his wages an issue except not to be picked, before and after being loaned out.

Riviere I totally agree with but then again he came with a potential and didn't fulfil it due to being crap for this league and basically destroyed in confidence most likely.
Of course we need rid but the issue is that contracts are a wing and a prayer job and if it wasn't for the silly Bosman ruling then clubs would not be held to ransom and could offer any contract and still be entitled to a transfer fee should a player refuse to sign another contract, which means they can be controlled much better rather than them controlling their own stance.


There are currently 42 players in the squad and this needs to be drastically cut down.
Of course but this isn't the argument. We all know it has to be trimmed.

[ex_pat_magpie]

Of course Hanley and Lazaar didn't feature much as they were back up and not first selection but never the less needed as squad players.

Likes of Colback on a free is still drawing wages is he not as is Krul who's been here 100's of years. Wages are wages and if players are not needed their wages are to pay others. That's simple economics.

The likes of de Jong Mitro and Mbemba. I added in as my own opinion thinking if Rafa can replace with better before the window shuts then these may be the ones to go and replace.

[ex_pat_magpie]

but not if they had to pay the debt or the bank called in the debt


Quote Originally Posted by waalsendmick View Post
it's like broken record time.... but if you can do it, so can i....


the club would generate A LOT MORE money if advertising wasn't given away free.....


and.... Rafa doesn't sell the players the club does, he is frustrated they havent


What would be the interest on the debt, would be offset many, many times by the revenue lost in the advertising quoted in WaalsendMick's post.

And remember the vast amount of that debt was responsible for the building and maintenance of our magnificent stadium.

[ex_pat_magpie]

so 3 of the 4 or 5 players he wants gone arent rafas

and the ones he has signed this seson he doesnt play or werent his finds

hanley lazzar to name a couple
brought them and hardly played them anyway

wasting ashlys money


No one said all of the players to go weren't Rafas. Read other posts to see this. He bought several players specifically to aid promotion who would be discarded at the end of the promotional season.

They were not wasted money. We have a squad and not just a first team. You play your best first team and the squad players are there to cover for injuries, loss of form and suspensions.

I would have thought even you could have reasoned that one out.

[ghostrider]

Of course Hanley and Lazaar didn't feature much as they were back up and not first selection but never the less needed as squad players.

Likes of Colback on a free is still drawing wages is he not as is Krul who's been here 100's of years. Wages are wages and if players are not needed their wages are to pay others. That's simple economics.

The likes of de Jong Mitro and Mbemba. I added in as my own opinion thinking if Rafa can replace with better before the window shuts then these may be the ones to go and replace.

Mbemba is quality. He's a potential set in partner for Lejeune and/or Lascelles and/or Clarke.
Basically a way better than average 4 CB's.

However, you have strayed off the actual topic we were all debating, which was Charnley and co being buffoons for giving long contracts to crap players, apparently.

The argument is, do we buy the crap knowing they are crap or did we buy them in the hope they would turn out to be worth it and also have enough contract to make sure we don't get held to ransom for their services, by other clubs.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
What contracts are all the players on who Rafa bought for the championship?
1 year? 2 year? 3 year? 4 year? 5 year?


You see, Matz Sels has a 5 year contract on 35,000 a week. Rafa's player.
Ciaran Clarke on 5years.
Grant Hanley on 5 years.
Matt Ritchie on 5 years.
Yedlin on 5 years.
Hayden 5 years.
Lazaar 5 years.


Are any of them worth 5 years and if so, which one's?

You see, this isn't just about Charnley and co. It's about the entire set up and having to take risks.

Now that I'm getting at is; if we only put some players on short term contracts and they eventually turn out to excel or even progress, only to find that they have become an integral part of the team yet are in the last year of their contract and have now become a transfer target from a bigger club, who prefer to wait and steal or force a cheap sale with the player threatening to see out his contract and go for free.

This is what we're up against and there's no crystal ball that can identify which players will turn in to diamonds and who will turn into glass until that contractual ink is dried.

I'd sooner we tie players to longer contracts that shorter one's.
The mere fact that we are over stocked in testament to the club's willingness to buy in regardless of the fact that some can be argued to be nothing other than dressing room fly-by's.

[Nufc24Mag]

I don't get all the furore.

ONE bad performance FFS!

also, I don't get what Rafa Is supposed to have done wrong.

he hasn't bad mouthed any 1st team players, he has simply made it clear which players are not welcome and are not part of his plans, he has then voiced frustration that the business side of the club has failed to move said players on, hence, hindering his bringing in of players.

two weeks ago, pundits were saying we would go down because we hadn't added enough to the squad, now they're Slagging Rafa off, for explaining to them why this is the case!

phecking pundits....

we went up last season because we had premier league players in the champo.....

..... we're going down this season because we have champo players in the prem.....


.... it's the same phecking players!!!

Yea some pundits are absolutely sh*te, the other week I was watching the Sunderland match and that grabbon hit a shot and it went miles over the bar and that sh*tty championship pundit who always had us to lose said that will give him confidence :D

Merson ect are the worst

[pboromag]

No one said all of the players to go weren't Rafas. Read other posts to see this. He bought several players specifically to aid promotion who would be discarded at the end of the promotional season.

They were not wasted money. We have a squad and not just a first team. You play your best first team and the squad players are there to cover for injuries, loss of form and suspensions.

I would have thought even you could have reasoned that one out.

so if they were goingto be discarded at the end of the season why did they get 5 year contracts
please reason to me why if you buy a player to do aone year job you give him a 5 year conract

surely if you brought them to do a job and they have done it every year you keep them after that drawing money and taking up squad places and the likes they then become a waste of money

maybe rafa aint all that when he has 6 players on long term contracts doing short term work

and he wonders why money is tight

[waalsendmick]

a little bit more of the broken record from me.....

Rafa has NOTHING to do with the contracts!

[pboromag]

a little bit more of the broken record from me.....

Rafa has NOTHING to do with the contracts!

DOESNT HE

AND YOU KNOW THIS HOW ??

you may pressume charnley does everything

but i assure you we have a goalie that hasnt talked to charnley regards his contract and future

it has been done between rafa his agent and father

[ex_pat_magpie]

Mbemba is quality. He's a potential set in partner for Lejeune and/or Lascelles and/or Clarke.
Basically a way better than average 4 CB's.

However, you have strayed off the actual topic we were all debating, which was Charnley and co being buffoons for giving long contracts to crap players, apparently.

The argument is, do we buy the crap knowing they are crap or did we buy them in the hope they would turn out to be worth it and also have enough contract to make sure we don't get held to ransom for their services, by other clubs.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
What contracts are all the players on who Rafa bought for the championship?
1 year? 2 year? 3 year? 4 year? 5 year?


You see, Matz Sels has a 5 year contract on 35,000 a week. Rafa's player.
Ciaran Clarke on 5years.
Grant Hanley on 5 years.
Matt Ritchie on 5 years.
Yedlin on 5 years.
Hayden 5 years.
Lazaar 5 years.


Are any of them worth 5 years and if so, which one's?

You see, this isn't just about Charnley and co. It's about the entire set up and having to take risks.

Now that I'm getting at is; if we only put some players on short term contracts and they eventually turn out to excel or even progress, only to find that they have become an integral part of the team yet are in the last year of their contract and have now become a transfer target from a bigger club, who prefer to wait and steal or force a cheap sale with the player threatening to see out his contract and go for free.

This is what we're up against and there's no crystal ball that can identify which players will turn in to diamonds and who will turn into glass until that contractual ink is dried.

I'd sooner we tie players to longer contracts that shorter one's.
The mere fact that we are over stocked in testament to the club's willingness to buy in regardless of the fact that some can be argued to be nothing other than dressing room fly-by's.


Rafa only selects the players in order of choice. Ashley and Charnley agree the contracts. Rafa isn't involved with the contracts.

[ex_pat_magpie]

so if they were goingto be discarded at the end of the season why did they get 5 year contracts
please reason to me why if you buy a player to do aone year job you give him a 5 year conract

surely if you brought them to do a job and they have done it every year you keep them after that drawing money and taking up squad places and the likes they then become a waste of money

maybe rafa aint all that when he has 6 players on long term contracts doing short term work

and he wonders why money is tight

Same answer to the one above for Ghost's post

Rafa only selects the players in order of choice. Ashley and Charnley agree the contracts. Rafa isn't involved with the contracts.

You must accept Ashley and Charnley know what is best. After giving the likes of Cabaye and Sissoko good contracts the word is "here puppet, we've made a killing on these two, what easy money, give them all stupid contracts and We'll make a fortune" "Yes Lord Muck, pardon me , Lord Mick we'll make a killing on every 5 year contract signing"

[ronandtet]

Quote Originally Posted by waalsendmick View Post
it's like broken record time.... but if you can do it, so can i....


the club would generate A LOT MORE money if advertising wasn't given away free.....


and.... Rafa doesn't sell the players the club does, he is frustrated they havent


What would be the interest on the debt, would be offset many, many times by the revenue lost in the advertising quoted in WaalsendMick's post.

And remember the vast amount of that debt was responsible for the building and maintenance of our magnificent stadium.

and heres me thinking that the debt was wiped out with an interest free loan from ashley

[ex_pat_magpie]

DOESNT HE

AND YOU KNOW THIS HOW ??

you may pressume charnley does everything

but i assure you we have a goalie that hasnt talked to charnley regards his contract and future

it has been done between rafa his agent and father

Woodman has almost 3 years left on his contract and he knows the procedure when he talks of contract extensions.

[ex_pat_magpie]

Quoted in Ghostriders post.

Ciaran Clarke on 5years.
Grant Hanley on 5 years.
Matt Ritchie on 5 years.
Yedlin on 5 years.
Hayden 5 years.
Lazaar 5 years.

Actual length of contract. Weekly wage.

Ciaran Clarke contract ends 2021 £30 k per week

Grant Hanley contract ends 2021 £30 k per week

Matt Ritchie contract ends 2021 £30 k per week

Yedlin contract ends 2021 £20 k per week

Hayden contract ends 2021 £10 k per week

Lazaar contract ends 2021 £9 k per week

[ex_pat_magpie]

and heres me thinking that the debt was wiped out with an interest free loan from ashley

Therefor alternatively paying interest on the debt would be offset and more than covered by advertising revenue obtained if the advertising wasn't given away free.

And an interest free loan does not wipe out the debt. The debt remains.

[ghostrider]

Rafa only selects the players in order of choice. Ashley and Charnley agree the contracts. Rafa isn't involved with the contracts.

Would it not be fair to say that Rafa would be the man to edge a player over the line if the terms are not to the players liking?
Is it not Rafa who bought the supposed short term gap fillers for the championship and would know that 5 year deals are not on the agenda and would say so?

Fair do's getting Rafa off the entire hook but To be fair, I'm not letting him have it all his own way in terms of being Mr untouchable just because of who he is.
I dearly want the bloke to succeed but he needs to understand that he's managing Newcastle United, not real Madrid or Liverpool or Chelsea, etc...meaning he has to accept being part of the bargain as far as recruitment goes and equally take the pressure when a juggling act is required.

[ex_pat_magpie]

Would it not be fair to say that Rafa would be the man to edge a player over the line if the terms are not to the players liking?
Is it not Rafa who bought the supposed short term gap fillers for the championship and would know that 5 year deals are not on the agenda and would say so?

Fair do's getting Rafa off the entire hook but To be fair, I'm not letting him have it all his own way in terms of being Mr untouchable just because of who he is.
I dearly want the bloke to succeed but he needs to understand that he's managing Newcastle United, not real Madrid or Liverpool or Chelsea, etc...meaning he has to accept being part of the bargain as far as recruitment goes and equally take the pressure when a juggling act is required.

Well apparently the way it was set up was for Rafa to totally run the entire football side and therefor list players names he wants for particular positions or functions and for Charnley's department to get them over the line preferably top choice first.

I would imagine that Ashley has a real total input on the final figure of total fees and costs as well as wages over the entire contract.

The "juggling" Rafa has to do is to finish up with the squad numbers allowed by discarding players he has no future for but hoping that Charnley can move these on. Charnley's big handicap is that he was never a football man and was without contacts therefor starting from scratch as perhaps some of us on here could have done.

Too big a step up for a former tea boy.

[Kal]

and heres me thinking that the debt was wiped out with an interest free loan from ashley

It wasn't wiped out, it was transferred from the Bank to Ashley thus saving interest. As NUFC is not a PLC, it was sensible for him to do this, as any interest would be paid by him as he is the sole owner of the club.

The debt has been added to the cost of the club and will be included when it is sold.

[Nufc24Mag]

Yea some pundits are absolutely sh*te, the other week I was watching the Sunderland match and that grabbon hit a shot and it went miles over the bar and that sh*tty championship pundit who always had us to lose said that will give him confidence :D

Merson ect are the worst

And that sh*tty pundit has us losing again tonight, predicts forest to win 0-1 w*nker

[ronandtet]

It wasn't wiped out, it was transferred from the Bank to Ashley thus saving interest. As NUFC is not a PLC, it was sensible for him to do this, as any interest would be paid by him as he is the sole owner of the club.

The debt has been added to the cost of the club and will be included when it is sold.

it was a reply to a previous post

"but not if they had to pay the debt or the bank called in the debt "

and the bank debt was wiped by the loan my financial friend

[Geordie_Jacko]

And that sh*tty pundit has us losing again tonight, predicts forest to win 0-1 w*nker

The guys a complete tosser don't think I've ever seen him predict a Toon win.

[Kal]

Some think Ashley is doing 'the club' a favour by paying off the Bank loan (not wiping out the debt) yes he's stopped the interest having to be paid on that loan, but as he owns the club and has the means to pay off the loan, he is the one who benefits, as the clubs debt is his debt not shareholders.

[pboromag]

Therefor alternatively paying interest on the debt would be offset and more than covered by advertising revenue obtained if the advertising wasn't given away free.

And an interest free loan does not wipe out the debt. The debt remains.

or shut the club down if the bank at any time called the debt in if ash hadnt taken it on

how much is pitch side revenue by the way ??

you seem certain that the figure far out weighs the loan repayments

where is your proof other than keep making the statement

[ex_pat_magpie]

or shut the club down if the bank at any time called the debt in if ash hadnt taken it on

how much is pitch side revenue by the way ??

you seem certain that the figure far out weighs the loan repayments

where is your proof other than keep making the statement

Just look at what other clubs receive from this "free advertising" and it's not just pitch side. it's plastered all over the club.

[pboromag]

Just look at what other clubs receive from this "free advertising" and it's not just pitch side. it's plastered all over the club.

so as you say to me tell me the facts
tell me how much we charge others for advertising pitch side and tell me how much tha generates

what would the interest payments be on our debt??

beariing in mind if we only paid the interest we would always have the debt

you continually make these accusations that he gets free advertising that more than covers the payments
well tell us how much wecharge others for pitch side advertising and how much we should be charging sports direct

[ex_pat_magpie]

so as you say to me tell me the facts
tell me how much we charge others for advertising pitch side and tell me how much tha generates

what would the interest payments be on our debt??

beariing in mind if we only paid the interest we would always have the debt

you continually make these accusations that he gets free advertising that more than covers the payments
well tell us how much wecharge others for pitch side advertising and how much we should be charging sports direct



How does FROM £25,000 per minute grab you then. And this is from two years ago, we know how prices have increased since then. And there are all of the Sports Direct Tat Static advertising boards in every conceivable space on top of that.


Nick Thompson
Nick Thompson, I have been a fan, a sponsor, a club secretary and a club CEO
Answered Nov 1, 2015
I assume you are talking about the LED boards around the pitch? These will be a mix of central sales and local sales, with the providers of the board taking an amount of time, depending on whether the boards have been purchased, are leased or have been provided free, for the advertising and leaving the balance for local sales. Normally you will sell the 90 minutes plus 2 for first half extra time and 3 minutes for second half extra time.
Normally you would have exclusivity clauses within sectors.
LED's can cost from £25,000 per minute for the season with the money going to the club.

[toonlegend]

or shut the club down if the bank at any time called the debt in if ash hadnt taken it on

how much is pitch side revenue by the way ??

you seem certain that the figure far out weighs the loan repayments

where is your proof other than keep making the statement

contradictory or what. on the cup exit thread you are slating rafa for not having a cup run that brings in extra revenue.... the only revenue would be from gate money and maybe tele money if chosen to be on tele. so either gate money is worth having or it isn't. make your friggin mind up


and whilst on about this debt....... ashley has more than doubled the debt since he took over.

[ghostrider]

and whilst on about this debt....... ashley has more than doubled the debt since he took over.How has he doubled the debt?

[pboromag]

contradictory or what. On the cup exit thread you are slating rafa for not having a cup run that brings in extra revenue.... The only revenue would be from gate money and maybe tele money if chosen to be on tele. So either gate money is worth having or it isn't. Make your friggin mind up


and whilst on about this debt....... Ashley has more than doubled the debt since he took over.

where have i said gate money isnt worth having
i am saing if plastic thisnks pitch side advertising is 25 k hes a bigger mug than even i think he is

[pboromag]

how does from £25,000 per minute grab you then. And this is from two years ago, we know how prices have increased since then. And there are all of the sports direct tat static advertising boards in every conceivable space on top of that.


Nick thompson
nick thompson, i have been a fan, a sponsor, a club secretary and a club ceo
answered nov 1, 2015
i assume you are talking about the led boards around the pitch? These will be a mix of central sales and local sales, with the providers of the board taking an amount of time, depending on whether the boards have been purchased, are leased or have been provided free, for the advertising and leaving the balance for local sales. Normally you will sell the 90 minutes plus 2 for first half extra time and 3 minutes for second half extra time.
Normally you would have exclusivity clauses within sectors.
Led's can cost from £25,000 per minute for the season with the money going to the club.

you my friend are a mug if you think the this is footy advertising
maybe super bowl

but definatly not footy

but you are a stupid as you are obsessed if you think any football club gets 25k per minute for advertising

[ex_pat_magpie]

you my friend are a mug if you think the this is footy advertising
maybe super bowl

but definatly not footy

but you are a stupid as you are obsessed if you think any football club gets 25k per minute for advertising

Any one, if they have the brains to check can do so. You, obviously haven't the capacity to check these things out. It's quite simple. Does that say anything.

And while you are at it do the maths and work the sums out. Call yourself a business man? ;D

[TheBigSausage]

Worldsoccertalk.com quote actual figures from the 2008 season . A five minute advert on the pitchside LED at the smoggies was $29640(£15000 at rate then) and at Wet Spam was $11855.(£5500) or 1 min was £3000 at the smoggies... when its a live TV game.

So anyones guess how much now 9 years on . Plus all the sports direct boards, static signs etc.. get your calculators out .

[pboromag]

i suggest you contact kam sports advertising like i did two seasons ago

believe me you are way out

you can sghirt sponsor a team for way less than the equivelent cost of 25k per minute

think about that pat

25k a minute for 90 minutes mutiplied by 40 odd games

if that was the case why doesnt he plaster his name all over the shirts

[pboromag]

Worldsoccertalk.com quote actual figures from the 2008 season . A five minute advert on the pitchside LED at the smoggies was $29640(£15000 at rate then) and at Wet Spam was $11855.(£5500) or 1 min was £3000 at the smoggies... when its a live TV game.

So anyones guess how much now 9 years on . Plus all the sports direct boards, static signs etc.. get your calculators out .

these are agencies sellin g advertising space

[toonlegend]

How has he doubled the debt?

because the debt we had when he took over was under £80,000, it';s more like 140-160,000 now

[toonlegend]

where have i said gate money isnt worth having
i am saing if plastic thisnks pitch side advertising is 25 k hes a bigger mug than even i think he is

you keep saying tyhe gate money means nothing to the club or ashley, they don't need it.

[ex_pat_magpie]

i suggest you contact kam sports advertising like i did two seasons ago

believe me you are way out

you can sghirt sponsor a team for way less than the equivelent cost of 25k per minute

think about that pat

25k a minute for 90 minutes mutiplied by 40 odd games

if that was the case why doesnt he plaster his name all over the shirts

YOU DAFT PRAT, it's not £25K per minute for each game. Any fool would suss that out at £90million. :O

WE are not in your fairyland. It is £25K X 95 mins for the season. B) B) B)

[Zippity]

YOU DAFT PRAT, it's not £25K per minute for each game. Any fool would suss that out at £90million. :O

WE are not in your fairyland. It is £25K X 95 mins for the season. B) B) B)

Right, I'm confused here, Pat.

I'm not having a go but I thought it was you who said it was £25 thousand per minute in post 49?

[ex_pat_magpie]

Right, I'm confused here, Pat.

I'm not having a go but I thought it was you who said it was £25 thousand per minute in post 49?

Yes. As the quote I posted. But obviously that rate not per game as that would be over £100 million with a good cup run of home games.As it says clearly For the season.

Normally you will sell the 90 minutes plus 2 for first half extra time and 3 minutes for second half extra time.
Normally you would have exclusivity clauses within sectors.
LED's can cost from £25,000 per minute for the season with the money going to the club.

[Zippity]

Yes. As the quote I posted. But obviously that rate not per game as that would be over £100 million with a good cup run of home games.As it says clearly For the season.

Normally you will sell the 90 minutes plus 2 for first half extra time and 3 minutes for second half extra time.
Normally you would have exclusivity clauses within sectors.
LED's can cost from £25,000 per minute for the season with the money going to the club.

But from what I can make out, he was arguing against it being 25 grand per minute.

[ex_pat_magpie]

But from what I can make out, he was arguing against it being 25 grand per minute.

Well I copied and pasted it with the contact's name and as I read it it states £25,000 per minute for the season so as I reckoned as they stated 95 mins per game that could only be the full season price Which would be £2,375,000 for the season.

No one could imagine it would be that much for each and every home game.



Although some might. ;D And it's From £25,000 in other words likes of Chelski or Manure may be in the region of £100,000k per min.

Our's could be £50,k per min which would bring in £4,750,000 per season.

That's the way I read the article.

[pboromag]

Yes. As the quote I posted. But obviously that rate not per game as that would be over £100 million with a good cup run of home games.As it says clearly For the season.

Normally you will sell the 90 minutes plus 2 for first half extra time and 3 minutes for second half extra time.
Normally you would have exclusivity clauses within sectors.
LED's can cost from £25,000 per minute for the season with the money going to the club.i think you have confused yourself

so are you trying to tell us he gets a 100 mill of free advertising per year

contact the club ,like id did as i wanted to advertise at a newcastle game

along with a box for some friends and in the match programme

to get a certain amount of spalshes the box and tnd the match programme was significantly less than what you are spouting

all you are doing is spouting what some one has pasted on to some web post and as it suits your argument are believing it

do you honestly believe small and medium buisness can afford 25 k per minute

think about what you are saying

[TheOtherTerryMac]

Well I copied and pasted it with the contact's name and as I read it it states £25,000 per minute for the season so as I reckoned as they stated 95 mins per game that could only be the full season price Which would be £2,375,000 for the season.

No one could imagine it would be that much for each and every home game.



Although some might. ;D And it's From £25,000 in other words likes of Chelski or Manure may be in the region of £100,000k per min.

Our's could be £50,k per min which would bring in £4,750,000 per season.

That's the way I read the article.

So your now stating that every company that purchased the 95mins LED electronic advertising are paying £4.75 million. Give ya heed a shake man Bill have you been on the drink, stop digging a deeper hole for yourself.

[ex_pat_magpie]

i think you have confused yourself

so are you trying to tell us he gets a 100 mill of free advertising per year

contact the club ,like id did as i wanted to advertise at a newcastle game

along with a box for some friends and in the match programme

to get a certain amount of spalshes the box and tnd the match programme was significantly less than what you are spouting

all you are doing is spouting what some one has pasted on to some web post and as it suits your argument are believing it

do you honestly believe small and medium buisness can afford 25 k per minute

think about what you are saying

If you had bothered to read the above I said you had worked it out per match per season WHEREAS IT IS A FIGURE WHICH COVERS AN ENTIRE SEASON.

I.E. £25,000 per minute equates to £2.375,000 per season. Here is my link, now show where you got your figures in your post 56.


https://www.quora.com/How-is-football-soccer-advertising-in-stadiums-arranged-in-terms-of-contracts

[ex_pat_magpie]

So your now stating that every company that purchased the 95mins LED electronic advertising are paying £4.75 million. Give ya heed a shake man Bill have you been on the drink, stop digging a deeper hole for yourself.

No I didn't state that. The link is re Prem pitchside advertising from 2015 and states FROM £25,000 per min. which as I state above would be £2,375,000 per season.

https://www.quora.com/How-is-football-soccer-advertising-in-stadiums-arranged-in-terms-of-contracts.


Pboro as usual jumped the gun and made it PER MATCH PER SEASON. That is just DAFT.

[toonlegend]

So your now stating that every company that purchased the 95mins LED electronic advertising are paying £4.75 million. Give ya heed a shake man Bill have you been on the drink, stop digging a deeper hole for yourself.

no he isn't. he is saying that if we sell the whole 95 minutes of space it will generate something in the region of 4.5 mill a year

[pboromag]

How does FROM £25,000 per minute grab you then. And this is from two years ago, we know how prices have increased since then. And there are all of the Sports Direct Tat Static advertising boards in every conceivable space on top of that.

PAT YOU SAY 25K PER MINUTE

NOT ME
YOUR WORDS

YOU SAY ASH IS GETTING 25K OF FREE ADVERTISING PER MINUTE

NOT PER SEASON OR INDEED PER GAME

YOUR WORDS HOW DOES 25 K PER MINUTE GRAB YOU

SO EVEN ON THE NEW FIGURES AND HE HAS SAY 15 MINUTES OF SPORTS DIRECT ROTATING AROUND THE GROUND THAT IS ABOUT 9300 A GAME

THATS ONLY 320K A YEAR

NOW BEARING IN MIND HE PAID 134 MILLION FOR THAT ADVERTISING SAPCE ALONE AND TOOK ON A DEBT HOWEVER IT CAME ABOUT WHICH IS ABOUT 129 MILLION

WHAT WOULD THE REPAYMENT ON THE DEBT BE TO A BANK ??

EVEN IF IT WAS ONLY THE 80 MILL THE CLUB HAD BEFORE HE BROUGHT IT HOWEVER IT CAME ABOUT AND WHO EVER IS TO BLAME AND WETHER HE SHOULD HAVE DONE DUE DILLIGENCE ETC THE TRUTH IS THE CLUB OWED IT TO SOMEONE SO IT WOULD NEED PAYING BACK AND THE NORTHERN NUMPTIES WHO HAD RUN IT UP WOULD HAVE PROBABALY HAD TO PAY THE BANK SOMEHOW

SAY THE INETEREST IS 2.8%

SO THTS ABOUT 2 MILLION A YEAR ROUGHLY

YOU GET A LOT OF ADVERTISING FOR 2 MILL

[ex_pat_magpie]

How does FROM £25,000 per minute grab you then. And this is from two years ago, we know how prices have increased since then. And there are all of the Sports Direct Tat Static advertising boards in every conceivable space on top of that.

PAT YOU SAY 25K PER MINUTE

NOT ME
YOUR WORDS

YOU SAY ASH IS GETTING 25K OF FREE ADVERTISING PER MINUTE

NOT PER SEASON OR INDEED PER GAME

YOUR WORDS HOW DOES 25 K PER MINUTE GRAB YOU

SO EVEN ON THE NEW FIGURES AND HE HAS SAY 15 MINUTES OF SPORTS DIRECT ROTATING AROUND THE GROUND THAT IS ABOUT 9300 A GAME

THATS ONLY 320K A YEAR

NOW BEARING IN MIND HE PAID 134 MILLION FOR THAT ADVERTISING SAPCE ALONE AND TOOK ON A DEBT HOWEVER IT CAME ABOUT WHICH IS ABOUT 129 MILLION

WHAT WOULD THE REPAYMENT ON THE DEBT BE TO A BANK ??

EVEN IF IT WAS ONLY THE 80 MILL THE CLUB HAD BEFORE HE BROUGHT IT HOWEVER IT CAME ABOUT AND WHO EVER IS TO BLAME AND WETHER HE SHOULD HAVE DONE DUE DILLIGENCE ETC THE TRUTH IS THE CLUB OWED IT TO SOMEONE SO IT WOULD NEED PAYING BACK AND THE NORTHERN NUMPTIES WHO HAD RUN IT UP WOULD HAVE PROBABALY HAD TO PAY THE BANK SOMEHOW

SAY THE INETEREST IS 2.8%

SO THTS ABOUT 2 MILLION A YEAR ROUGHLY

YOU GET A LOT OF ADVERTISING FOR 2 MILL

It is adequately explained in POSTS, 60,62,64 and 67. ToonLegend gets it and explains it rationally so what's your problem.

And where is the linky for your figures? B)

[Kal]

EVEN IF IT WAS ONLY THE 80 MILL THE CLUB HAD BEFORE HE BROUGHT IT HOWEVER IT CAME ABOUT AND WHO EVER IS TO BLAME AND WETHER HE SHOULD HAVE DONE DUE DILLIGENCE ETC THE TRUTH IS THE CLUB OWED IT TO SOMEONE SO IT WOULD NEED PAYING BACK AND THE NORTHERN NUMPTIES WHO HAD RUN IT UP WOULD HAVE PROBABALY HAD TO PAY THE BANK SOMEHOW


The majority of the £80 million debt the "NORTHERN NUMPTIES" accrued was for stadium redevelopment. Hardly a misuse of funds.

Indeed, pound for pound, one of the clubs better investments.

[pboromag]

It is adequately explained in POSTS, 60,62,64 and 67. ToonLegend gets it and explains it rationally so what's your problem.

And where is the linky for your figures? B)

im only commenting on figures you have used regards

again you make a mistake and arent man enough to admit it
yet constantly hound posters to admit their mistakes

two faced cowardly fool

i wont use linkys to try and prove a point

next time you make a statement that ash is getting 25k of feee advertising per minute i would make sure your sauces are correct
any fool can find something on the internet to try and prove a point

but when its pointed out what a tool yu are in twisting and turning you divert the subject

admit you were wrong and that ash isnt getting 25k a minute fo free advertising

in fact on you maths that he get s free advertising we actually owe him

[ex_pat_magpie]

im only commenting on figures you have used regards

again you make a mistake and arent man enough to admit it
yet constantly hound posters to admit their mistakes

two faced cowardly fool

i wont use linkys to try and prove a point

next time you make a statement that ash is getting 25k of feee advertising per minute i would make sure your sauces are correct
any fool can find something on the internet to try and prove a point

but when its pointed out what a tool yu are in twisting and turning you divert the subject

admit you were wrong and that ash isnt getting 25k a minute fo free advertising

in fact on you maths that he get s free advertising we actually owe him

There is no mistake if you aren't too thick to work it out. Toonlend did so I am quite sure that it has been explained adequately. Zippity also asked for an explanation so he appears to understand.

Mind with you we are dealing with a person who "claims" to do property deals and yet doesn't know the difference between FREEHOLD and LEASEHOLD. ;D

Also please have the courtesy to point out where I have specifically stated the Ashley gets the benefit of free advertising per minute.

As usual it's a case of you stupidly diving in head first again and again, too eager to argue and condemn without having the NUNCE AS USUAL to read posts correctly an thoroughly.

[pboromag]

There is no mistake if you aren't too thick to work it out. Toonlend did so I am quite sure that it has been explained adequately. Zippity also asked for an explanation so he appears to understand.

Mind with you we are dealing with a person who "claims" to do property deals and yet doesn't know the difference between FREEHOLD and LEASEHOLD. ;D

Also please have the courtesy to point out where I have specifically stated the Ashley gets the benefit of free advertising per minute.

As usual it's a case of you stupidly diving in head first again and again, too eager to argue and condemn without having the NUNCE AS USUAL to read posts correctly an thoroughly.
I have used your words you fool

Not some random copy and paste

Another poster pointed it out as well

If you ain't man enough to ad mit it then
Not only are you a liar have no honour then you are also a. Onward

[pboromag]

There is no mistake if you aren't too thick to work it out. Toonlend did so I am quite sure that it has been explained adequately. Zippity also asked for an explanation so he appears to understand.

Mind with you we are dealing with a person who "claims" to do property deals and yet doesn't know the difference between FREEHOLD and LEASEHOLD. ;D

Also please have the courtesy to point out where I have specifically stated the Ashley gets the benefit of free advertising per minute.

As usual it's a case of you stupidly diving in head first again and again, too eager to argue and condemn without having the NUNCE AS USUAL to read posts correctly an thoroughly.

your the stupid one pat for making a statement when asked how much advertising was .
so you presumably go on google and troll the boards untill you get a figure that suits your argument
and quite clearly havent a clue what you are looking at or even undertsand it

you then answer my question saying and these are your words at that point
try 25 thousand a minute

quite clearly any right minded person who doesnt need a 5 year old to expalin to him that that cant be right pulls you up on it

from that you copy and past e you so vcalled evidence which not only has confused you and others but is actually incorrect as i asked you how much advertising is at the toon

so i suggest in future yu actually read your googled posts before answereing questions put to you by people who actually have an idea how much it costs to advertise at the TOON

or if you want send them to me and i will get my daughter to work them out for you who has just got 8 excellent marks in her gcse,s one being maths the other being in computer studies
try 25 k a minute

you dont say he gets it per the minute you say he gets free advertising full stop

splitting hairs again arent you to cover you blatant twisting and lying

he doesnt ask for an explanation he makes a statement he said he thought it was you who said 25 k a minute and that is why he was confused

he didnt ask a question so he made a statement .im sure if you read it that what it says

[ex_pat_magpie]

your the stupid one pat for making a statement when asked how much advertising was .
so you presumably go on google and troll the boards untill you get a figure that suits your argument
and quite clearly havent a clue what you are looking at or even undertsand it

you then answer my question saying and these are your words at that point
try 25 thousand a minute

quite clearly any right minded person who doesnt need a 5 year old to expalin to him that that cant be right pulls you up on it

from that you copy and past e you so vcalled evidence which not only has confused you and others but is actually incorrect as i asked you how much advertising is at the toon

so i suggest in future yu actually read your googled posts before answereing questions put to you by people who actually have an idea how much it costs to advertise at the TOON

or if you want send them to me and i will get my daughter to work them out for you who has just got 8 excellent marks in her gcse,s one being maths the other being in computer studies
try 25 k a minute

you dont say he gets it per the minute you say he gets free advertising full stop

splitting hairs again arent you to cover you blatant twisting and lying

he doesnt ask for an explanation he makes a statement he said he thought it was you who said 25 k a minute and that is why he was confused

he didnt ask a question so he made a statement .im sure if you read it that what it says

Pboro you really enjoy NOT UNDERSTANDING posts then arguing because you are either too stupid or too lazy to grasp the facts.

The link is there for all to see. I did not write it I only discovered it and as it reads If a client wants to take the space for the full length of each match for the season then it will cost from £25k per minute based on 95 mins per game.

Therefore if the client wants to sign up for the entire schedule then it would cost 95 X £25,000 for the season. A sum of £2,375,000.

I really can't explain it in more simple terms and if you can't understand that please give up and go and play with something.

I don't know the cost of advertising at the Toon because Ashley has it for free.

I have put the link up twice so it's no excuse if you either haven't or can't read it.

[pboromag]

Pboro you really enjoy NOT UNDERSTANDING posts then arguing because you are either too stupid or too lazy to grasp the facts.

The link is there for all to see. I did not write it I only discovered it and as it reads If a client wants to take the space for the full length of each match for the season then it will cost from £25k per minute based on 95 mins per game.

Therefore if the client wants to sign up for the entire schedule then it would cost 95 X £25,000 for the season. A sum of £2,375,000.

I really can't explain it in more simple terms and if you can't understand that please give up and go and play with something.

I don't know the cost of advertising at the Toon because Ashley has it for free.

I have put the link up twice so it's no excuse if you either haven't or can't read it.

Pat I don't know how much you can lie and twist
I asked you a straight forward question

How much does it cost
You went away and gave me an answer
Try 25 k per minute
Know at this point I kind of thought you had some credibility and honour
And didn't read the other posts as they were irrelevant to me

So it seems not only are you a man of no honour, a liar , a coward and a plastic

But you are also a laughing stock
Everyone can see what you have said
I'm an honourable man
When I make a mistake I admit it

You just twist

[ex_pat_magpie]

Pat I don't know how much you can lie and twist
I asked you a straight forward question

How much does it cost
You went away and gave me an answer
Try 25 k per minute
Know at this point I kind of thought you had some credibility and honour
And didn't read the other posts as they were irrelevant to me

So it seems not only are you a man of no honour, a liar , a coward and a plastic

But you are also a laughing stock
Everyone can see what you have said
I'm an honourable man
When I make a mistake I admit it

You just twist

I have told you SEVERAL TIMES. The sample quoted was based on £25,000 per minute based on 95 minutes which is the cost for a season.

I.E. £25,000 x 95 = £2,375,000 for the season. those prices were from 2015 and obviously the prices for some clubs would be more and others less.

Now as far as you being an honourable man. That is as cheap as monkey nuts. You have made numerous mistakes on here without admitting them and told many lies and denied them.

You are simply a person who goes out to deliberately spoil posts and threads.

The most polite way I can think of describing you is that in my opinion you are a Cupid Stunt and would be more useful using an alias on RTG and doing your disruptive work there.

I have put up the link, more than once, which is NOT MY WORDS but words published in an article about perimtor advertising but obviously too difficult for you to understand.

[toonlegend]

The majority of the £80 million debt the "NORTHERN NUMPTIES" accrued was for stadium redevelopment. Hardly a misuse of funds.

Indeed, pound for pound, one of the clubs better investments.

yep it was a mortgage on the ground, so yes ashley had no choice but to pay it up immediately ... however ,,, he was shafted there. lets face it if i sell my house the new owner doesn't pay off my mortgage for me, i have to pay it from the proceeds of the sale.

[pboromag]

yep it was a mortgage on the ground, so yes ashley had no choice but to pay it up immediately ... however ,,, he was shafted there. lets face it if i sell my house the new owner doesn't pay off my mortgage for me, i have to pay it from the proceeds of the sale.

and then iy was increased as they hadnt divulged the northern rock deal and hthat we had had the money and also the transfer money

thats the bit he got caiught on

[pboromag]

I have told you SEVERAL TIMES. The sample quoted was based on £25,000 per minute based on 95 minutes which is the cost for a season.

I.E. £25,000 x 95 = £2,375,000 for the season. those prices were from 2015 and obviously the prices for some clubs would be more and others less.

Now as far as you being an honourable man. That is as cheap as monkey nuts. You have made numerous mistakes on here without admitting them and told many lies and denied them.

You are simply a person who goes out to deliberately spoil posts and threads.

The most polite way I can think of describing you is that in my opinion you are a Cupid Stunt and would be more useful using an alias on RTG and doing your disruptive work there.

I have put up the link, more than once, which is NOT MY WORDS but words published in an article about perimtor advertising but obviously too difficult for you to understand.

but you were trying to mislead or you didnt understand it untill it was pointed out that anyone who thinks it costs 25 k perm minute to advertise at the toon is a umpty

it does not cost 25 k a minute as you stated

when you said try 25 k a minute

it actually should have said try 650 a minute if you werent trying o mislead

[ex_pat_magpie]

I don't understand what you are ranting on about now pboro and it does look like you're ranting. I think you posting at 5.21 in the morning you must have got up too early for the milk round.