Doing a Leeds !

[toonfalifekevbrown]

Any proof to back this statement up
Just proof.

[Geordie1974]

Have said many times Kev,what year did we nearly do a Leeds?We didn't,Ashley said so to cover up the fact he didn't do due diligence.
It's not like he is a liar is it.

[toonfalifekevbrown]

Everything in the books he looked at was there for him to see
He just didn't look
He thought he was going to sell it and make money
I think all that wasn't in the books was money for Owen deal had been spent or something like that

[TheOtherTerryMac]

It’s a hypothetical question as no one can prove that what Ashley disclosed is true

He lies like a cheap Persian Rug so I for one wouldn’t believe a word Pinocchio says

[Geordie1974]

If it was true,why didn't Ashley wait and just buy the club for peanuts whilst in administration.It is his style after all.

[ranat22]

Ah, that old chestnut
The Ashley hooplickers(there were plenty) fall back quote when they were getting their a’rses handed to them about Ashley’s pathetic running of the club,doubling the debt and getting us relegated.

Luckily these donuts are like kojak’s fringe
F’ucking long gone!

[Ragatino]

If it was true,why didn't Ashley wait and just buy the club for peanuts whilst in administration.It is his style after all.

Top answer Geordie lad; it's totally his MO.

70m mortgage at reasonable pre-crash rates. Nice revenue stream in merchandise and advertising. Nice.

I remember being outraged at the Sheppard family taking 3million in revenue from shares one summer. Was raging.

Funny looking back now. Can't remember who we bought that summer or who the manager was but I still don't think we would ever become this.

From so much hope to absolutely nope.

[Jammy89]

If it was true,why didn't Ashley wait and just buy the club for peanuts whilst in administration.It is his style after all.

It's very much his style and very much a good point.

[toptoon]

If it was true,why didn't Ashley wait and just buy the club for peanuts whilst in administration.It is his style after all.

That is a very good point.

[ex_pat_magpie]

It's odd that the resident old chestnut hasn't been on with an opinion as to why we would have been worse off than Leeds if his hero Honest Ashley hadn't rescued us from the evil Sir John and Fearsome Freddie.

[Scott Kirkland]

Leeds are lucky they did not do a Newcastle.
Have any fun and ambition sucked out of them.

[ghostrider]

Any proof to back up that we could've done a Leeds.
It depends how people want to look at it as of now against as of then.

Let's go back to the time Ashley wasn't hated. When Hall was begging for the club to sell.
When the club was in so much debt it could not be sustained, unless someone came in and not only bought it but also sorted out that debt from their own pocket.

Ashley came in and did that....but let's assume he backed out or actually did do due diligence before realising the debt issue to its full extent, as we've all been told about at the time and to this day.

So what would've happened?
Hall stated he wasn't willing to sell the family silver to try and right the club.
It appears that Shepherd was angry that Hall sold it and believed they both could've carried on running the club...yet Hall knew the club was in a financial mess that his millions or Shepherds wouldn't even scratch the surface of and also no bank was willing to bail the club out.
Basically they'd spent in advance, all the sponsor money and what not and still owed big money on transfers and such.

Basically everything Leeds was and likely the same fate that fell on Leeds could've quite easily have fell on Newcastle....or even worse.

However, it's all if's and but's. It's back down to speculation and best guessing.
But you know what? I tend to go with the thought that we would've been in one hell of a mess if someone hadn't took over, whether it was Ashley or whoever...but it had to be someone who could not only pay the readies to buy the club but also pay off a large slice of the debt.

People who say, why didn't Ashley just wait for it to go into administration and then buy it. Did nobody read what Sir John Hall said?
He made out the club was fine. He made out there were interested parties willing to buy the club and were about to do due diligence before buying it.
He then said Ashley steamed in and said he'd buy it without due diligence.
Whether people want to believe that or not, is entirely up to them but to answer the question of not waiting for administration before jumping in, you have to know a club is heading for that...and how could anyone know that if they have zero access to the accounts?

[usedtobeshearer]

Any proof to back up that we could've done a Leeds.
It depends how people want to look at it as of now against as of then.

Let's go back to the time Ashley wasn't hated. When Hall was begging for the club to sell.
When the club was in so much debt it could not be sustained, unless someone came in and not only bought it but also sorted out that debt from their own pocket.

Ashley came in and did that....but let's assume he backed out or actually did do due diligence before realising the debt issue to its full extent, as we've all been told about at the time and to this day.

So what would've happened?
Hall stated he wasn't willing to sell the family silver to try and right the club.
It appears that Shepherd was angry that Hall sold it and believed they both could've carried on running the club...yet Hall knew the club was in a financial mess that his millions or Shepherds wouldn't even scratch the surface of and also no bank was willing to bail the club out.
Basically they'd spent in advance, all the sponsor money and what not and still owed big money on transfers and such.

Basically everything Leeds was and likely the same fate that fell on Leeds could've quite easily have fell on Newcastle....or even worse.

However, it's all if's and but's. It's back down to speculation and best guessing.
But you know what? I tend to go with the thought that we would've been in one hell of a mess if someone hadn't took over, whether it was Ashley or whoever...but it had to be someone who could not only pay the readies to buy the club but also pay off a large slice of the debt.

People who say, why didn't Ashley just wait for it to go into administration and then buy it. Did nobody read what Sir John Hall said?
He made out the club was fine. He made out there were interested parties willing to buy the club and were about to do due diligence before buying it.
He then said Ashley steamed in and said he'd buy it without due diligence.
Whether people want to believe that or not, is entirely up to them but to answer the question of not waiting for administration before jumping in, you have to know a club is heading for that...and how could anyone know that if they have zero access to the accounts?

"Blah,blah,blah...you are correct, there's absolutely no proof the club would have done a Leeds and it is a ****e argument to use when sticking up for Ashley"

There you go boys, no need to trawl through all that.

[Geordie1974]

I remember Ashley's interview.Ashley said he was in the Caribbean on holiday when he got the call to say we could be for sale.He couldn't believe it,so there was no sign of things being as bad as Ashley apologists make out.
Heaven forbid anyone on here has a different opinion to Wilf.

[malamoto]

If he did not do due diligence and bought it on an impulse why was he buying domain names linked to Newcastle United 6 months before hand?

[toonfalifekevbrown]

He looked at the books
Everything was there to see
Apart from the sponsorship money was spent on Owen

[toonfalifekevbrown]

3 years sponsorship bought you Owen back then
3 years sponsorship under Ashley's regime buys you joselu

[ranat22]

Sundlund “did a Leeds”

LALAS

[ex_pat_magpie]

3 years sponsorship bought you Owen back then
3 years sponsorship under Ashley's regime buys you joselu

It buys a bulge in the fat tossers back pocket to waste on whims like casinos etc.

[Kal]

Sundlund “did a Leeds”

LALAS

And the football world neither noticed or gave a f*ck. XD

[ghostrider]

If he did not do due diligence and bought it on an impulse why was he buying domain names linked to Newcastle United 6 months before hand?

What domain names?

[ranat22]

And the football world neither noticed or gave a f*ck. XD
“Sundlund’s a massive club”


Are they F’UCK

[malamoto]

What domain names?

https://www.themag.co.uk/2018/08/must-read-why-mike-ashley-bought-newcastle-united-and-why-he-wont-be-selling-reprised/

[ex_pat_magpie]

And the football world neither noticed or gave a f*ck. XD

Blunderland did a double Leeds and may even supass that this season. B)

[usedtobeshearer]

What domain names?

Nufcdirect.

[ghostrider]

Seems to be some scraping of the barrel here.
Is there anything concrete?
I'm pretty sure Sir John Hall would've knew....or is Sir John Hall lying.

[malamoto]

How much more concrete do you need the domain was registered on 18th dec 2006 ^ months before he bought us
Just in case you need people to draw you a picture. Here13605

[ghostrider]

How much more concrete do you need the domain was registered on 18th dec 2006 ^ months before he bought us
Just in case you need people to draw you a picture. Here13605

Where is the entire thing to this?

[malamoto]

I posted a link to the article and a screenshot. What else do you want?

[malamoto]

If you want to check yourself
Visit nufcdirect copy the address from address bar then visit Whois lookup paste nufcdirect address into search bar and all the info is there.
This is a FACT that he bought the domain 6 months before he bought the club but do not let that influence your opinion that he bought us out of the blue to save us from meltdown

[ex_pat_magpie]

If you want to check yourself
Visit nufcdirect copy the address from address bar then visit Whois lookup paste nufcdirect address into search bar and all the info is there.
This is a FACT that he bought the domain 6 months before he bought the club but do not let that influence your opinion that he bought us out of the blue to save us from meltdown

You can't convince a confirmed doughnut. Just take him to the edge of the flat earth and tell him to take a jump ino space. :O

[malamoto]

I know I am a fool for trying Bill but sometimes you just have to try

[ex_pat_magpie]

I know I am a fool for trying Bill but sometimes you just have to try

The whole thing is that he knows as well as all of us what is wrong with the regime but by going against the pattern is the only way he can attract attention.

It must be sad being so lonely as to get your only kicks from wind ups. Bet his kids are embarrassed.

[Geordie1974]

Hes an idiot and that's being polite.Its a forum fair enough,he is entitled to his opinion fair enough.He just needs to let others have their opinion and their view instead of asking for proof and even then when it is shown not believing facts.I honestly dont know why people bother with him,he doesn't want debate he wants an argument.There is a difference.

[usedtobeshearer]

C'money boys, we all know Wilf doesn't deal in facts.

[ghostrider]

If you want to check yourself
Visit nufcdirect copy the address from address bar then visit Whois lookup paste nufcdirect address into search bar and all the info is there.
This is a FACT that he bought the domain 6 months before he bought the club but do not let that influence your opinion that he bought us out of the blue to save us from meltdown

To take over Newcastle he set up st James holdings limited.
I have no clue about nufcdirect at that time or before. It says very little.

By all means argue it and go with it but for him to buy the shares he had to set up his company to get them.

The point stands out a mile and Sir John Hall makes it quite clear. The club was in dire trouble and there's no getting away from it.
The club is in zero trouble as it stands.

[usedtobeshearer]

To take over Newcastle he set up st James holdings limited.
I have no clue about nufcdirect at that time or before. It says very little.

By all means argue it and go with it but for him to buy the shares he had to set up his company to get them.

The point stands out a mile and Sir John Hall makes it quite clear. The club was in dire trouble and there's no getting away from it.
The club is in zero trouble as it stands.

Haha. Stop pretending you look at both sides, are open to debate, accept factual evidence or don't stick to one agenda.

Go dig a hole with the easter bunny and see how long it takes before you fall through the earth.

[malamoto]

Jesus H Christ. He registered NUFCDIRECT 6 months before he allegedly heard we were up for sale on the saturday and he moved in to buy us on the monday. The fact he registered Nufcdirect 6 months before shows that it was not a spur of the moment deal. The NUFCDIRECT had nothing to do with buying shares but was set up to redirect anyone buying from the club site to sports direct.So people thinking they were buying from the club were actually buying from his tat shop. He was lying about not having time to do due diligence as he had planned to buy us for at least 6 months. He lied then and has continued the lie. The debt he claimed he did not know about was there for all to see. If you could not see it in 6 months you deserve to be lumbered with it. He has used the "no time for due diligence" as an excuse to lumber the club with an increased (debt) loan to claim tax relief.
Is that simple enough for you

[ghostrider]

Jesus H Christ. He registered NUFCDIRECT 6 months before he allegedly heard we were up for sale on the saturday and he moved in to buy us on the monday. The fact he registered Nufcdirect 6 months before shows that it was not a spur of the moment deal. The NUFCDIRECT had nothing to do with buying shares but was set up to redirect anyone buying from the club site to sports direct.So people thinking they were buying from the club were actually buying from his tat shop. He was lying about not having time to do due diligence as he had planned to buy us for at least 6 months. He lied then and has continued the lie. The debt he claimed he did not know about was there for all to see. If you could not see it in 6 months you deserve to be lumbered with it. He has used the "no time for due diligence" as an excuse to lumber the club with an increased (debt) loan to claim tax relief.
Is that simple enough for you

He initially bought John Hall's shares.
Listen to what John Hall said.

If Ashley had this NUFC domain thing then John Hall has to be lying through his teeth.
Do you think John Hall was lying through his teeth?

What's clear is the St James holdings in May 2007.
What's not clear is the NUFCdirect stuff being registered in 2006.
There's little on it.

The club was in a mess. Hall knew it and so did Shepherd.
Nobody appeared to want to bail the club out and Ashley stepped in...and this is the crux of the matter regardless of domain nitpicking.

[ex_pat_magpie]

It is simple enough but it won't be made to look simple enough. We all know the procedure by now.:zzz:

[usedtobeshearer]

He initially bought John Hall's shares.
Listen to what John Hall said.

If Ashley had this NUFC domain thing then John Hall has to be lying through his teeth.
Do you think John Hall was lying through his teeth?

What's clear is the St James holdings in May 2007.
What's not clear is the NUFCdirect stuff being registered in 2006.
There's little on it.

The club was in a mess. Hall knew it and so did Shepherd.
Nobody appeared to want to bail the club out and Ashley stepped in...and this is the crux of the matter regardless of domain nitpicking.

You don't get to dictate the direction in which people are carrying on a debate sweetheart.

How about being a big boy for a change. There is no doubt Ashley was looking to buy the club 6 months before he did...otherwise no need for the domain. There doesn't need to be a lot on it, stop squirming.

While we are at it, John Hall did not say he wouldn't sell the family silver to keep the club going...he realised he couldn't compete with Abramovich.

Again...if you are going to pretend to be an enlightened thinker that looks at all sides then you can't always come in from Ashley's side.

[Kal]

Hes an idiot and that's being polite.Its a forum fair enough,he is entitled to his opinion fair enough.He just needs to let others have their opinion and their view instead of asking for proof and even then when it is shown not believing facts.I honestly dont know why people bother with him,he doesn't want debate he wants an argument.There is a difference.

He does have a few fanboys mind, as his shyte is 'well written' shyte.

[Geordie1974]

John Hall is a cùnt for selling to Ashley.He knew Ashleys plan for the club was to promote his tatty empire.John Hall and Douglas had 41.6 percent of shares.Ashley had already in the months before buying John Hall out purchased the other 9.4 percent he needed to gain overall control of the club by making Sheppard(who was ill in hospital at the time)have to sell his shares to which he wasnt happy about.
The fact he had 51 percent also forced fans who were shareholders into accepting the paltry sum on offer for them.
I just wish a certain person would think for themselves instead of quoting the Ronny Gill,which is also full of sh1te I may add.Everything that has been quoted,that Wilf has written is what was in that rag.

[Kal]

John Hall is a cùnt for selling to Ashley.He knew Ashleys plan for the club was to promote his tatty empire.John Hall and Douglas had 41.6 percent of shares.Ashley had already in the months before buying John Hall out purchased the other 9.4 percent he needed to gain overall control of the club by making Sheppard(who was ill in hospital at the time)have to sell his shares to which he wasnt happy about.
The fact he had 51 percent also forced fans who were shareholders into accepting the paltry sum on offer for them.
I just wish a certain person would think for themselves instead of quoting the Ronny Gill,which is also full of sh1te I may add.Everything that has been quoted,that Wilf has written is what was in that rag.


^^^ This ^^^ is not a view popular with many toon fans, but the truth isn't always popular.

[ex_pat_magpie]

The point stands out a mile and Sir John Hall makes it quite clear. The club was in dire trouble and there's no getting away from it.
(Quoted by Wilf/Ghost/Pboro from Usedtobeshearers post no. 37)

Sir John Hall never ever made it "quite clear" that the club was in dire trouble, because it simply was not. Sir John was a multi millionaire jousting with other owners who were muli billionaires and he realised he could not compete.

He did get the better of Fatty over the sale but Fatty got the better of Sir John by convincing him that his intention was to invest in the club and take it forwards which we all know now was a complete load of bullsh1t.

Remember his false antics of mixing with the fans and having and buying drinks for the lads in the early days to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Sitting with the fans instead of in the directors' box and being one of the "lads".

If Ghost was to occaisionally tell the truth then even he could not deny the above facts.

[ghostrider]

It's clear and blatant to see at the time that Newcastle United was in serious trouble.
Forget Ashley's this and that for the moment. Take him out of the picture and look at it from the point of view of having Hall and co with their stakes.

Where was the club going from that point on?
The club was in serious debt.
John Hall had no money to bail it out and neither did Shepherd. The bail out money was used up. It was used up because it was money borrowed from banks and money spent ahead of time on sponsorship income, down to money owed for transfers in.

Basically a mountain of debt that nobody could pay.
This is regardless of Abramovich. He just made the situation untenable for many clubs but we were in serious trouble.

Shepherd apparently didn't want to sell his shares. Shepherd and Hall could've maybe tried to get someone onboard to aid them with a cash injection other than Ashley....but looking at the debt, how could that be sustained?

If John Hall and Shepherd had decided to turn down Ashley's offer and carried on running the club...tell me....anyone....seriously, where do you think the club would've ended up and tell me why?

There's a very good reason why I back Ashley, regardless of the club not being in the dizzy heights of the premier league.

[ronandtet]

-the debt was standard all clubs had debt at that time indeed there was at least 4 clubs with greater debt ( who are still in existence)
- ashley didn't clear the debt - he loaned nufc the cash to clear it which is now at least 50% higher
- shepherd must of thought the club was sustainable because he didn't want to give it up

and to quote your post-
"John Hall had no money to bail it out and neither did Shepherd. The bail out money was used up. It was used up because it was money borrowed from banks and money spent ahead of time on sponsorship income, down to money owed for transfers in."

where's the proof?

[Geordie1974]

Like banging your heed off a brick wall.Freddy Sheppard did NOT need to sell,did NOT want to sell.He was forced to sell as Hall had sold his shares to give Ashley a controlling stake in the club enabling him to purchase the remaining shares to give him overall control.
Hall is a cùnt for selling while Sheppard was in hospital,they fell out over it.And Ashley,well I think everyone knows by now what I think of that snake.
Sorry to say lads but the board is dying a death.Debate and opinions have gone by the looks of it.Every single thread descends away from original topic.

[ex_pat_magpie]

It's clear and blatant to see at the time that Newcastle United was in serious trouble.
Forget Ashley's this and that for the moment. Take him out of the picture and look at it from the point of view of having Hall and co with their stakes.

Where was the club going from that point on?
The club was in serious debt.
John Hall had no money to bail it out and neither did Shepherd. The bail out money was used up. It was used up because it was money borrowed from banks and money spent ahead of time on sponsorship income, down to money owed for transfers in.

Basically a mountain of debt that nobody could pay.
This is regardless of Abramovich. He just made the situation untenable for many clubs but we were in serious trouble.

Shepherd apparently didn't want to sell his shares. Shepherd and Hall could've maybe tried to get someone onboard to aid them with a cash injection other than Ashley....but looking at the debt, how could that be sustained?

If John Hall and Shepherd had decided to turn down Ashley's offer and carried on running the club...tell me....anyone....seriously, where do you think the club would've ended up and tell me why?

There's a very good reason why I back Ashley, regardless of the club not being in the dizzy heights of the premier league.

GHOST, WE ALL KNOW THAT I HAVE YOU BLOCKED BUT I ANTICIPATED WHAT THIS REPLY WOULD BE SO I WILL ANSWER AS YOU DO IN YOUR USUAL WHINGING AND WHINING WAY.

You show the proof that the club was in serious difficulties. You show where the debt was which was uncontrolable apart from that is of course the mortgage to supply us all with the magnificent stadium that SJH and FS provided us with which Ashley is allowing to run down also the agreed stage payments for Owen's transfer.

Show us the facts and figures which support your spurious statements. Show where you get or got your information from.

This is precisely what you ask other posters to do when you can't answer their facts and opinions so let you man up and give us YOUR FACTS AND THE BASIC ORIGINS OF THEM AS TO WHY THE CLUB WAS IN SERIOUS DIFFICULTIES.

Show genuine honest proof if you want to be believed.

As a p.s. I have returned to blocking you.

[ghostrider]

-the debt was standard all clubs had debt at that time indeed there was at least 4 clubs with greater debt ( who are still in existence)
- ashley didn't clear the debt - he loaned nufc the cash to clear it which is now at least 50% higher
- shepherd must of thought the club was sustainable because he didn't want to give it up

and to quote your post-
"John Hall had no money to bail it out and neither did Shepherd. The bail out money was used up. It was used up because it was money borrowed from banks and money spent ahead of time on sponsorship income, down to money owed for transfers in."

where's the proof?

Proof?
It's all speculation from all sides.
I can't claim facts on any of this no more than you can to the contrary.
All we can go on is what we are fed.

The situation was, Sir John Hall could not sustain the club and decked out, selling his shares. Shepherd could not sustain the club so also decked out and all made a nice healthy profit, it seems.

It's all about what you believe to be the potential reality.
It's all been documented since Ashley took over, with all kinds of stories coming out about this that and the other.

[usedtobeshearer]

Proof?
It's all speculation from all sides.
I can't claim facts on any of this no more than you can to the contrary.
All we can go on is what we are fed.

The situation was, Sir John Hall could not sustain the club and decked out, selling his shares. Shepherd could not sustain the club so also decked out and all made a nice healthy profit, it seems.

It's all about what you believe to be the potential reality.
It's all been documented since Ashley took over, with all kinds of stories coming out about this that and the other.

Stop asking for proof yourself then, b3ll3nd!

This is an ancient argument. We went through these arguments with Wilf 10 years ago. It's time we just ignored him everytime he tries to repeat his ****e point of view. It's all getting boring.

Let's stick to football. He doesn't have an opinion on that (other than we are going to win every game) because there's too much risk of agreeing with somebody.

[usedtobeshearer]

The OP was...is there any proof we would have done a Leeds...answer is...NO. even Wilf agreed in his last post.

Sorted.

[ex_pat_magpie]

The OP was...is there any proof we would have done a Leeds...answer is...NO. even Wilf agreed in his last post.

Sorted.

Is there any proof that Ghost might one day have the guts to back up his dubious opinions with facts rather than his usual wild and inaccurate speculation.

[usedtobeshearer]

Is there any proof that Ghost might one day have the guts to back up his dubious opinions with facts rather than his usual wild and inaccurate speculation.

Don't be silly.

[ex_pat_magpie]

Don't be silly.

Just speculation with out facts on my part so neither Ghost nor I could prove whether or not he might at one day in the near or far future be tempted to support his wild and strange pontifications with deadly facts and surprise us all. B)

[ex_pat_magpie]

Ghost. Where is the proof that the earth is flat.

Many people have sailed around the globe for centuries without falling over the edge.


Come on don't leave us in suspense. Tell us what you know that we don't all know.

[Andy1981_2]

Sorry to be late to the party on this debate...

A few caveats before I chip in:

1. I've posted about this before, so apologies for those who actually read it first time around.
2. I'm not a forensic accountant, and as a business owner I'm well aware that stuff can be buried in the details of accounts ;)

OK... the question is whether or not we were about to do a Leeds i.e. drop down the divisions as a result of financial mismanagement.

For me, the only way we can address the question is to look at the financial position of the club at the time, and to look at what happened subsequently to the financial picture for football. We can't know what Shepherd and Hall would have done had they continued to be in charge, so let's not speculate.

For evidence of the financial picture of the club, any of us can pull up the books for the club. I'm going to look at only the recent picture i.e. 4 years up to and including the sale of the club.

2004 Accounts

This was a 'bad year' for us. Turnover fell from £96.4m to £90.2m. We made a pre-tax profit of £4.2m (down from £4.4m). Seems like the sale of Jonathan Woodgate kind of propped us up a bit, and we made a player trading profit of £0.3m. Debt looks like it was around £59,224,000.

2005 Accounts

Turnover continued to fall, 'cos we were ****e and finished 14th. 2004 turnover was £87m. We did, however, offload more player liabilities and made a player trading profit of £13.5m. Overall revenues (catering, match-day, etc.) were actually increasing generally-speaking here. Pre-tax profit of £4.5m. We were in the semi-final of an FA Cup in this season... remember those days? Debt seems to have risen to £62,118,000.

2006 Accounts

Revenue continues to fall as our Champions League and UEFA cup days fall further behind us. Now at £83.1m. We posted an operational loss of £6.2m this season, and a retained loss of £12m. Commercial revenue increases due to new sponsorship deals with Northern Rock and Adidas, though a large part of this sponsorship deal is paid up front meaning it doesn't count in the following years' books. We signed Michael Owen in this set of accounts, like a bunch of dicks. They changed their accounting format in this year, but it looks like the debt rises to £67,686,000, with some things not previously rolled into the debt getting added in (because of posting losses). Overdraft, we can see, sits at £5,528,000 and interest bearing loans at £10,867,000. The bulk of the debt seems to be in deferred income.

2007 Accounts i.e. the first year of accounts posted AFTER the acquisition of the club by Ashley. More detail here, since it's all a bit harder to work through and it's an interesting year!

This is the year things really tank for us financially, as well as changing in terms of how the accounts are done (they shift the reporting period to line up with player contract expiry dates, for example... this made the accounting period longer, ultimately increasing the losses reported). First of all, the £45m loaned to the club by the previous owners is rolled up into one big bill, rather than the sort of soft loan we'd be getting. Mike Ashley, essentially, pays that bill and the club now have a debt to him instead. However, to 'bring the overdraft back within the agreed limits', Ashley actually loans the club £75m (which is odd if the overdraft amount reported in the previous set of accounts was accurate). However, there's a big change to how this sort of 'senior loan note' works for the accounts, since it looks like they shift to putting these loans as 'amounts due within 12 months', which means you end up counting this in your costs in a totally different way.

Revenue actually rises this year, since we'd qualified for the UEFA cup in the previous set of accounts (knocked out by AZ Alkmaar on away goals), and we post revenues of £87.1m. We retain losses of £32.5m, up from the £12m the previous year. We did, however, get over £6m as an insurance payment because of Michael Owen getting injured. Who insured him in the first place remains uncertain, but it'll likely be whoever insured all those mortgages just before the 2008 financial crisis. There were costs of about £6.1m just on items relating to the takeover itself, which is a lot! That was changing the manager, payments to the old owners/directors, and an aborted financing project contracted by the previous owners. The new financing deal we did get, however, was more expensive - they note higher interest rates.

The bank overdraft increases from £5,528,000 to £10,863,000. Interest bearing loans and other borrowings leaps to £61,675,000, most of which will be money owed to Ashley. Total debt hits £131,165,000.

....

So, all of that being said... in my non-(financial-)expert analysis, it looks like Ashley simply moved some stuff around in the accounts, and that the overall financial picture didn't shift considerably. If Hall and Shepherd were covering up anything nasty, it was actually loans from them, which is why they walked away with a bit of cash in their pockets upon the sale of the club. Ashley hasn't actually loaned the club a significant amount of money since he acquired it, and there's no reason to think that Hall and Shepherd couldn't have raised the £20-30m he did following relegation (assuming we would have been relegated regardless of the owner) if that was required. This seems particularly true since we got a more generous overdraft agreement subsequently. We haven't 'done a Leeds' under Ashley, so we wouldn't have done one under Hall and Shepherd if they'd ran the club in a remotely similar fashion. One could argue that their better understanding of the industry might have avoided some of Ashley's costly mistakes, and all of this would have been during a period where TV revenue leapt from £1bn per season to £5bn per season for Premier League clubs. Even if they'd been terrible stewards of the club, this 500% increase would likely have kept us in business.

[Jammy89]

Well said and from my also non financial understanding that looks a fair conclusion.

Not that Ghost will accept any of it mind.

[toptoon]

Cheers Andy - good post.

[ex_pat_magpie]

Well said and from my also non financial understanding that looks a fair conclusion.

Not that Ghost will accept any of it mind.

No doubt we will get speculations and opinions from Ghost disputing all of those well put together figures. He just cannot help himself.