The long awaited NUFC accounts for last (2013/14) season were unveiled on 30 March 2015.

Most fans wondered whether the club would declare a profit of around the £50m and what narrative would be given surrounding those massive profits.

They didn’t and they didn’t.

(To feature like Dean, send in your articles for our website to [email protected] – all views those of the author etc etc)

The decared profit after player trading was taken into account, was £18.7m.

No explanation was given as to why the profits were far lower than expected, with apparently up to £28.5m in extra costs and/or other reasons slashing the expected circa £50m profits.

There was also no wages to turnover figure included in the limited information Mike Ashley allowed to come out.

Usually the club are very keen to trumpet the wages to turnover as showing how great they are at running the club. With much higher turnover and no obvious large additions to the wage bill, this only increased the specualtion as to why Newcastle United weren’t been more transparent with their financial information.

Never mind we thought, within a few days (after the club release the headline figures) the NUFC accounts are usually lodged at Companies House and the public can access them.

With Mike Ashley running the club as a private company rather than one accountable to other shareholders, you are never going to get that level of information, though usually the information from Companies House does put more flesh on the bone and you learn a little more. Such as the wage bill or special notes in the accounts etc etc.

Two weeks later and Mike Ashley still hasn’t allowed the accounts to be filed at Companies House. By law they should have been filed by now but the fine is only £150 if you are up to a month late, increasing to £1500 if more than six months late (thanks to @MikeAshleyLies for that info).  Based on these meagre fines, it may be a case of waiting around quite a while before we ever see them.

So in the meantime you get amateur (and professional) accountants trying to make sense of what the club have released. As Mike Ashley holds all the aces (the information) much/all of it is guesswork, a lot of it revolving around accountancy techniques/practices. Nothing wrong with the debate going on and it is a valid one, though also very frustrating as you don’t get to any definite conclusions.

I thought I’d look at it another way, the broad brush strokes of what we do know.

The facts of 2013/14:

Club turnover increased from £95.9m to £129.7m, a rise of £33.8m, including almost £30m extra from TV.

Newcastle United sold their best player (Yohan Cabaye) for around £20m as well as shifting a few others (Harper, Simpson, Perch) out of the club.

Newcastle United didn’t buy a single first team player, though loan deals were arranged for Loic Remy and Luuk de Jong.

The club announced a profit of £4.7m on the turnover of £129.7m, which then increased to a profit of £18.7m after player trading in and out.

The broad picture is that Newcastle United were handed an extra £30m from TV, sold the best player for another £20m and bought nobody.

These big decisions then equated to an end profit of £18.7m which is what all the media are quoting and is seen as the money available to spend by most.

To put it bluntly then, it appears to the man in the street that if Newcastle hadn’t sold Yohan Cabaye there wouldn’t have been any tangible profit, despite the extra £30m handed on a plate by TV.

Or alternatively, if United had replaced Yohan Cabaye with an equivalent, then there would be no profit either, despite again the extra £30m from TV.

Of course, the big problem for Mike Ashley is that many other clubs are a lot more transparent with their finances, as well as the fact that the vast majority of other Premier League clubs are also showing a profit for last season.

The only ‘slight’ difference is that they all produced a profit without selling their best player and/or by not buying a single player for the squad.



  • Oliver Lam

    Ashley’s gone and bought himself 28.5 million cheeseburgers.

  • Bearsize

    I’d imagine that missing cash is ashley’s ‘wage’ for being on the board. I hate him so much. We can force him out but this boycott cant be a one off. He’s making us look like idiots man!

  • NottsToon

    Of course the other question being why has Mike Ashley taken out a loan with Barclays bank and used the Premier League money as security against that loan?

    So we have a missing amount of around £25 – £30m, plus a mystery loan secured against club funds, plus all the usual free advertising for Sh1te Direct.

    Still the usual plants, loons and Mackems will chirp on about what a great job uncle Mike is doing and how he has the club financially secure, despite increasing the debt (which is now solely owed to him).

    Great job lads, well done.

  • NottsToon

    Bearsize It’s sh1t or bust time mate, either we make things so uncomfortable for him that he is forced out, or he takes the club down, devalues it, continues asset stripping and heads off into the sunset with a wheelbarrow full of cash, laughing at all us stupid “jawdees” for lining his pockets for all these years.

  • CraigySmorls

    NUFCTheMag would the cost of the construction of the new training facilities be in this period?

  • IntravenusMP

    Companies with a June year-end will file their accounts on or before 31 March. These will take around 14-21 working days to appear on companies house website.

    You simply cannot claim that “Mike Ashley still hasn’t allowed the accounts to be filed at Companies House”, given the other football clubs with a June year-end have not seen their accounts ‘live’ at companies house, the reason is more likely to be a delay at Companies House due to the bank holiday and a high number of staff on holiday die to school holidays. 

    OK, it doesn’t make much of an article for the Mag but the ill-informed contributors will never normal know.

  • Maximus Moose

    New fooking Helicopter for the Pig

  • IntravenusMP

    NottsToon Not sure which loan you refer to. Ashley repaid a loan to Barclays back in 2007. THe club have an overdraft facility from Barclays,

  • Bearsize

    We’ll get the last laugh. He cant stay forever. Known our luck we’ll beat Liverpool 5-0 with a new style of football and get a full house next week lol

  • NottsToon

    Check the other articles , there are scans from a document detailing a loan taken out by Ashley in September 2014, secured against current Premier League revenue.

  • Peter Nealon

    The whole thing stinks……I read yesterday that palace made nearly £25 million profit last year and they bought players too!!

  • IntravenusMP

    Bearsize Very unlikely, if he took a wage, it’s far better to take it from the loan without having to pay tax than pay 45% tax, NI etc. 

    In the files accounts, it will note directors’ remuneration, I very much doubt this will include a wage for MA. I very much doubt you are being made to look like idiots.

  • v0ices

    Maximus Moose buy a nice bombardier private jet with one stop for fuel he can be in Vegas in 9 hours.

  • Boycottspurs

    Are you Mike Ashley? U0001f61c

  • Bearsize

    Thanks for clarification. You cant deny how dodgy this bloke is though? We are been made to look like idiots in other ways like the transfer policy and the paper thin squad, not to mention the ‘shutting up shop’ whenever he sees fit. He doesn’t want to make us a great club which would be fine at some other clubs. He has picked the wrong club for that

  • Andgeo

    Fatty is a complete disgrace, his greed and desire to take advantage of those less fortunate than himself bring into question his fitness to own not only a premier league football club but also a FTSE 100 company. The guy should be locked up for his unethical approach to life and lack of respect for society. Keep eating the pies chunk!

  • Andgeo

    £20,000,000 Christmas present to Sports direct and a bit of spending money for the kids, courtesy of NUFC

  • Toonsteve

    Only takes 2 days for companies house to punlish accounts these days after receipt. Also mash holdings accounts are over 2 months late, having been due at companies house 31 jan. Think they probably have something to hide!

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP Companies House already has the accounts listed as overdue.
    And what about the money? Conveniently gobbing off but side-stepping the glaring elephant in the room.

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP NottsToon The Club files accounts under two Companies. Newcastle United Ltd and Newcastle United Football Company Ltd. Why that is I don’t know.
    NUFCompany Ltd has Deed of Assignments (registered charges) with Barclays who have security (for whatever sum/loan/mortgage that is) of the Training Ground, PL income, all Badges and Trademarks.
    If that’s for the overdraft then it seems a hell of a lot of security for the Club to give.

  • mountain_goat

    I reckon he hippo has taken most if not all of the extra £28.5m and pocketed it. Now he’s trying to get his cronies, aka his accountants to fiddle the accounts to manipulate the situation. This way, rather than reduce his debt to us he is pocketing the money and saying we still owe him X amount of his initial loan. As if is doing us a favour, the fat wnaker…..

  • Andgeo

    Not necessarily. If he is ticking the club up to the hilt and striping what he wants, could leave us in a worse mess than Leeds or Portsmouth.

  • Chemical Dave

    You don’t need to be made to look one….

  • Chemical Dave

    Relax, Bob Moncur says he’s going to invest it all on top players

  • newcastle7

    The Accounts are audited by a top six company which I think is KMPG so they will be correct or they could be taken to court otherwise and fined a substantial amount. The figures will be released accruate that’s for sure.Just another article hating Newcastle when we need three points.This from the man who promised me sub 40,000 crowds this season.Still waiting not long left.

  • pissed off mag

    newcastle7  ashleys arse kisser

  • newcastle7

    Chemical Dave No wage for Mike or dividends sorry to upset you.The Halls and Shepperds took £145m out in the accounts but many more millions undercover.So well done Mike for doing it all for free.

  • pissed off mag

    newcastle7 Chemical Dave  newcastle7 works for the lumpy faced pie eater and waffels the same shait as him

  • pissed off mag

    i hope he does what mathew harding did at chelsea

  • Toonbadger

    Books well cooked

  • 2someitsonlyagame

    newcastle7 One of the main reasons why we probably will not pick up three points on Monday, is because of the very person you consistently defend, you can believe what you want, but it is NOT us who hate Newcastle.

  • Demented_Man

    newcastle7 My experience with auditors, including KPMG, is that they generally do what their paymasters tell them to do, and they don’t ask too many awkward questions.  Besides, they can only audit what is presented to them by ‘honest’ Mike Ashley and his sidekicks.

  • Maximus Moose

    newcastle7 they can only audit the figures supplied by Nufc !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Maximus Moose

    its in Mikes money belt thats what makes him look fat

  • Sickandtiredstill

    newcastle7 Chemical Dave  Here he goes again. 
    Ok, Simon, if Ashley can’t cook the books, how come you shout that Shepherd/Hall could? Can’t have it both ways.
    And they certainly and factually did NOT ‘take’ 145 million. try buying the reports – they only cost a quid each.

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill IntravenusMP They have other June y/e companies as overdue such as Southampton’s. My own company filed in Feb but we showed as overdue until mid March. 

    The money? hard to say without seeing the accounts. A writing down of player values, increased wage roll, the cost of losing a managing director and appt of director of football, loss of director of football are unusual costs incurred.

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP Sickandtiredstill Player amortisation totals overall decreased by 640,000 in the previous accounts (33,253 to 32,611)
    How can the wage roll increase when he let go more than he brought in?
    Unless Kinnear and Llambias cost more than 20 million I think you are grasping at straws.
    It’s an answer many many eyes are waiting to read.

  • Grumpyoldmag

    Or he just continues as is untroubled by negative criticism that he just ignores. Read the financial press mate – city investors dislike distrust and continually criticise him. He sails serenely on

  • TinoAsp

    The ONLY way the Ashley Out Campaign will work……
    Is if it isn’t about Mike Ashley at all.
    Now you are all going to be thinking that’s a stupid statement, so let me explain. This is something I have previously written about and I feel even more strongly about it now. My opinion and suggestions also involve not boycotting games, or at least for those that do attend, to protest in a different way to what is planned.
    Mike Ashley does not care what any Newcastle fan, Rangers fan, member of the public, employee or MP thinks of him on a personal basis, not one little bit. You can call him all the names under the sun, write articles about his life and everything else but he simply does not talk back to media outlets or react by giving statements so what is the point?
    If anything, you are more likely to make him dig his heels in further. I actually think he is probably happy for the abuse to be directed personally at him, the simple reason for this is because this detracts bad press and investigation in to the business practices of his various companies and focusses solely on him. What Mike Ashley cares about most is Sports Direct, it’s profits and its major shareholders. He has few very close allies he relies on, but I am not sure if he actually ‘cares’ about even these people in anything other than a business relationship.
    However, although Ashley and his allies have yet to show it in the press, the one thing that I think slightly riles him (or his cronies) is informed, well written criticism of his beloved Sports Direct (SD). There have been little incidents which have shown this, such as the journalists who became SD shareholders so they could attend the Sports Direct AGM to ask questions about SD’s involvement at Newcastle United, this stunt did not go down well and the journalists were banned,
    We have seen many other Newspapers and Journalists banned over the past couple of years for daring to question how the regime at SJP currently run our club. Indeed the Chronicle and Journal have only just been allowed back and you can make your own judgement as to what the conditions were for them being allowed back, when you read the ‘line’ they now take when reporting events at the club.
    Ashley was recently ‘invited’ to appear before a group of Scottish MP’s over the way fashion retailer USC went into administration and the way the staff were treated. Of course Ashley was too busy to attend (perhaps stuck in the queue at Greggs?) so he sent Sports Direct’s chairman Keith Hellawell, an odious, slimy man, similar to Derek Llambias and Lee Charnley. The following exchange between Hellawell and MP’s at the hearing sums up how they treat people;
    Hellawell said that in fashion retail, unlike in supermarkets, the suppliers hold the power, which led to Sports Direct using tactics Conservative MP Simon Revell said belonged to a ‘backstreet outfit’.
    ‘We withheld a bill from Diesel,’ admitted Hellawell, before an uncomfortable exchange with Revell. ‘We used it as a bargaining chip.’
    Revell wasn’t impressed. ‘Were you in breach of contract by withholding payment?’
    ‘I haven’t seen that specific contract.’
    Revell pushed. ‘When you, as chairman of a FTSE 100 company, make a decision to withhold monies you owe to a supplier, presumably you go to someone and ask are we legally entitled to do this?’
    ‘Yes.’
    ‘Were you?’
    Some heavy breathing from Hellawell now. ‘No.’
    ‘So you were in breach of contract?’
    ‘Yes.’
    ‘So you acted in breach of contract with Diesel in order to bring them to the negotiating table?’
    ‘Yes.’ By this point Hellawell sounded like he really didn’t want to be there anymore, and it was only 10 minutes in…
    It also emerged that Sports Direct had used the same tactic on the landlord of the warehouse that closed in Dundonald. It didn’t work in either case. Diesel refused to change its mind, while the warehouse owner ‘blockaded’ Sports Direct from taking out its products. The result of these actions was that Sports Direct called in the administrators.
    ‘That sounds like a backstreet outfit,’ Revell said. ‘We struggle to understand why a reputational matter like this was completely unknown to you as chairman.’
    There are quite a lot of further interesting comments that were made by Mr Hellawell, mainly around events he was ‘Not aware of….’ (really?), you can read them here; http://www.managementtoday.co.uk/news/1340399/how-mike-ashleys-sports-direct-run/
    Sports Direct employs nearly 15,000 staff on zero hours contracts, that’s 75% of it’s own workforce and this means Sports Direct are responsible for a fifth of all zero hour contracts in the retail sector.

  • TinoAsp

    The recently released ‘partial’ accounts from NUFC have highlighted some unexplained dips in revenue and the debt to Ashley remaining unchanged at £129 million, so there are further questions and answers that need to be sought out by fans and journalists here.
    In light of all of this, my opinion and my suggestion is to attend the games if you wish, don’t boycott purely because you think it will dent Ashley’s pockets or the reputation of the regime, because it won’t, gate receipts are not a major revenue source now for Premier League clubs, but if you want to boycott out of principal (as I do) then go ahead.
    My main suggestion is around the current plans for protesting about Mike Ashley, inside and outside the ground with the hope of persuading him to sell up. My opinion is that all protests should be directed at Sports Direct, their working practices and their involvement with the club. No personal attacks or banners about Mike Ashley, just simple banners and songs regarding SD.
    The reason for this is simple, the massive TV and Radio appeal the Premier League has. Let’s face it, this is why Ashley wants to keep the club, to promote his beloved SD in countries throughout the world, every home game and all for free! So lets turn that massive TV and Radio coverage against Ashley by using it to highlight the shocking business practices of Sports Direct and also use it to highlight questions we have over the club accounts.
    The method of doing this is simple; banners, statements and interviews stating the same points over and over again, even if it takes months and months and becomes repetitive and boring.
    An example of a simple banner/statement saying;
    “Sports Direct sells the cheapest merchandise and employs 75% of its already low paid staff on zero hours contracts, we as fans do not want such a company associated with OUR CLUB.”
    Other statements around the finances at our club can also be carried out, in a factual, non-threatening way, which simply asks questions of the board and creates uncomfortable issues for them to answer and bad press beamed around the world.
    That’s it, a simple non-threatening, sustained protest which highlights the poor practices of Sports Direct and the current NUFC board. These messages are then seen and heard all around the world, instead of just shouts of ‘Ashley Out’ or ‘Fat [email protected]’ this and that.
    There are those that have said they can’t get involved in this type of protest because they could be accused of being slanderous and this could affect their websites or forums, well I have to say that is a bit of cop out because all of what I have written has already been written and proven as fact by other media outlets, none of those have been sued! As for the public, you are allowed to say things far more defamatory and not be arrested or sued, saying someone is a ‘Murderer and War Criminal’ is a pretty strong statement, but one which is perfectly allowed in this country of free speech.
    Inside the ground, there is the issue of not allowing stewards to take banners and leaflets away from you, know your rights and take a copy of the stadium rules and fire certs with you. This is something the sackpardew movement didn’t do properly or give enough advice on.
    The first link below is our own clubs Stadium Rules, nothing in there about taking banners in, although ‘Promotional’ material is banned, they may say you are ‘promoting’ your website if you have ashleyout.com, so you may have to cover the ‘.com’ part.
    The other links are from other club sites and supporters groups, some useful information stating what Stewards and Police, can and cannot do. For example a Steward cannot use force of any means unless violence or a crime is happening or is about to happen.
    It may be worth printing out the Clubs Stadium rules and some of the other stuff on Stewards, highlighting the relevant parts and everyone taking a copy. Everyone taking part can then challenge the Stewards if they get heavy handed.
    http://www.nufc.co.uk/page/Club/GroundRegulations
    http://www.urban75.org/football/rights.html
    http://www.spiritofshankly.com/representation/legal-briefing-for-supporters
    http://www.imusa.org/newsarticle.php?id=273
    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fsf.org.uk%2Fmedia%2Fuploaded%2FStand%2520Up%2520Sit%2520Down%2520Fact%2520Sheet.pdf&ei=IZcYVJPJM66I7AbJ74DIAw&usg=AFQjCNHW3Be_Q1IlQ6-MsgBIhEd9yY4cCQ&sig2=Z3ZOuXgb4DHfW2txLLeQHQ&bvm=bv.75097201,d.ZWU
    Finally, Are our fans any less passionate than Liverpool fans?
    The answer is no, but they put aside differences for coordinated protest to remove Gillett and Hicks, who actually had far more money tied up in their club than Ashley has in ours, something our fans have so far not managed to achieve.
    So fans need to unite, in a non-threatening, non-abusive campaign to intelligently protest against Sports Direct and the board, this will ultimately have the desired affect of Ashley being ousted.

  • boycottashleyout
  • IntravenusMP

    Palace had wages of a small championship club and managed to stay up on those wages. Our costs are far higher than Palace’s. They have a small squad of low salaried players, they have an estate of a cow-shed and half a dozen exec boxes, we have a huge conference facility in daily use which makes money on a good day and loses on a fallow day,  i.e. we need a lot more management day-to-day, our costs are far higher.

  • NottsToon

    IntravenusMP £28.5m million more to manage some conference suite’s……bwahahahaha….that is the living definition of clutching at straws.

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill i really don;t know until I’ve read he accounts but I’m guessing as to how the costs can increase from 2013, player amortisation can go up, other costs can go up. I’m just guessing as are you

  • IntravenusMP

    @CraigySmorls NUFCTheMag very little, it’s written off over time

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP Sounds great, unless you actually use facts.
    300 employees on the payroll for 11/12 accounts. 288 employees on last accounts.
    Last accounts – Operating expenses fell by 2.4%. Wage bill fell by 5%. Core slaray level remained static.

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP and wages to turnover ratio fell to 64.3% from 68.7%.
    All from the club accounts. Not sure exactly why you are trying to tell a story different from the facts.

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP Sickandtiredstill I’m not guessing on the numbers I provided. I have both sets of last accounts – for NU Ltd and NUFC Ltd.
    They cost a pound each. Why don’t you go educate yourself by buying them instead of making things up?

  • v0ices

    Sickandtiredstill IntravenusMP since when did Ashley’s stooges use facts? Let’s just stick to musings and blame the fans for appointing carver as manager.

  • DownUnderMag

    The fans unfortunately don’t have a right to know.  The only people that need to investigate are the tax authorities and footballing authorities if they are looking into financial fair-lay…but since we haven’t posted a massive loss, i’m guessing it’s all down too the tax services to sort out the tax dodge if even there is one, either way the fans aren’t going to see any benefit of this profit, real or imaginary!

  • Greekgeordie

    Accounts are Accounts, and there is no other topic that can be twisted and manipulated as it is Accounts, and this applies to both sides, so come up with another topic.

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill We’ve not seen the accounts, that is why the article was posted. Like anyone else, I am just guessing at how the costs have increased and how the profit has been suppressed.

    You are quoting 2013 accounts which is not what is being discussed here.

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill IntravenusMP You have 2013 accounts  not the 2014 accounts. Some cost in the P&L has increased, I’m just guessing as to what that cost may be in the absence of seeing the actual accounts. 

    I am not the one that needs an education my friend.

  • IntravenusMP

    NottsToon That’s not going to be in these accounts then, the year end is June 14.

    Can you post a link, I’ll be interested in those scans

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill newcastle7 Chemical Dave Hall & Shepherd took dividends on profits that were a little inflated on account of the policy of player amortisation (very optimistic). The club borrowed to pay those dividends so yes, they did ‘take’ monies out of the club.

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP Sickandtiredstill newcastle7 Chemical Dave But they didn’t take 145 million, and that was the allegation made.

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP Sickandtiredstill Plainly, when I refer to the ‘previous accounts’ that wasn’t clear enough for you.
    Anyhow, the point is that all the scenarios you throw up just do not fit in with Ashley’s financial management of this Club. A man driven by cost reductions and all round cheapness, now has 28 million more in expenses for one season.
    Rather – the profit is 28 million less than it could/should have been. 
    No need to guess on the areas you have suggested because all the previous accounts show a reduction in wages, operating costs, amortisation etc.

  • LeazesEnder

    It’ll come out eventually that he’s used it to buy a stake in Rangers….can he do that?

  • RobBrown

    That’s the beauty of blogging – you dont need facts, can say anything you like and dont have to justify it.

  • LeazesEnder

    RobBrown Are you Lee Ryder?

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill  Well, as you’re not guessing, what is it?  Some costs have increased in the P&L as the Net Profit margin has fallen.

    Obviously any well managed company will take all legal steps to reduce the profit liable for taxation, I’ve just come up with possible ideas. 

    What was done in previous years is not a cast iron indicator of what is in 2014 and clearly, if the margin has fallen, there must be new / increased cost.

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill IntravenusMP newcastle7 Chemical Dave OK, what they did was very dangerous as it left the club technically bankrupt

  • Gaffa201

    Mike has run the club well that in June 2013 it was worth 11.1m less than in June 2007!

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP Sickandtiredstill newcastle7 Chemical Dave 
    Ahhh, that old chestnut. It’s a complete myth.

    The vast majority of football clubs, including PL ones, run at a loss. They can be called technically bankrupt too then? How’s that working out for us?

    Using that tired argument discounts completely the huge growth in TV (media) revenue since Ashley arrived. Never mind the other revenues (commercial) which other Clubs now enjoy.

    In 8 seasons, Ashley has only just reported (for the first time) commercial revenue similar to that of June 2006! 

    Wake up man.

  • Sickandtiredstill

    RobBrown What in this article would you say is not factual? They are the facts as known, until the latest accounts are released.
    The genius businessman has took 8 season to supposedly get commercial revenue back to the same area it was before he arrived.
    We are bombarded by how costs are cut, and boy can we see the result of that. Falling costs, higher turnover revenue, the profit not apparently matching that.

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill IntravenusMP newcastle7 Chemical Dave We had a debt and were running losses, Barclays were not prepared to continue the facilities and the directors were unable to raise the money to repay that borrowing. That’s technically Bankrupt.

    The club were running out of time, however, the Halls and Shepherd then did very well in selling the club to Ashley, albeit allegedly against Shepherd’s wishes when he was ill in hospital with pneumonia. Yes, at time the club was technically bankrupt and (this bit is just my opinion) I’m convinced that SJH pushed Ashley into a quick deal by persuading him that he was in a race for the shares hence the lack of real due-diligence. Ashley paid over the odds for the club which was already in serious financial difficulties.  

    Whilst we reported impressive revenues in the Hall & Shepherd days, we also ran very high costs and optimistically valued the value of the players in the balance sheet. They also purchased of players on finance which effectively did for us which was why Barclays were plug pulling. 

    You are right, had we survived and stayed in the division and started to be a little more prudent with wages plus developed the youth without relying on headline signings, the club would be in the money now. What I’m saying is that had H&S changed strategy closer to that of Ashley’s, the club would be solvent.

  • v0ices

    IntravenusMP Sickandtiredstill newcastle7 Chemical Dave total rubbish trotting out same old Ashley lies from 8 years ago yawn.

  • IntravenusMP

    v0ices IntravenusMP Sickandtiredstill newcastle7 Chemical Dave Not sure how you can say that. What is it you know to make my post incorrect?

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP Sickandtiredstill newcastle7 Chemical Dave Sounds like more of the Ashley rhetoric and urban myth, not the actual facts.

    Barclays provided mortgages (over St James’ and Benton) which were fully repayable, ONLY on (and immediately of) change of ownership. Do you seriously believe Ashley and his team of financial experts couldn’t deduce that much prior to buying the Club? Give us all a break from that ludicrous (Ashley) story line.

    Barclays STILL have security over Benton, all PL income, and all intellectual property (badges, trademarks, websites etc) – and someone needs to ask why that is if Ashley paid off all the ‘debt’ as is touted. Does an overdraft really require that level of asset security, in a profitable business? 

    Basically, everything but St James’ (as far as I can ascertain) has a charge over it to Barclays through ongoing Deed of Assigments. You can all buy the reports for a quid each from Companies House. They are under NUF Company Ltd not NU Ltd.

    Matchday and commercial revenue in 12/13 accounts were still below Hall/Shepherd levels. Wage bill was still higher than then also. Tv income however was double of the Hall / Shepherd period. 

    Those are the facts, not the spin.

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill IntravenusMP newcastle7 Chemical Dave  Barclays were comfortable with the mortgage debt, they were not comfortable with the overdraft and would not increase facilities when FFS needed it to pay for transfer instalments that were due. 
    Mike Ashley’s mistake was paying too much for NUFC. Barclays and the Eurobond holder would have been happy to receive £100m for NUFC, as they would have recovered all their debt assets. 
    Ashley effectively paid £240m for the club, and the question I still can’t comprehend is why he didn’t come to an arrangement with Barclays that would have enabled him to acquire the club for £100m or so – with Hall & Shepherd getting nothing. Without any doubt the company was a busted flush, and that would have been the sensible thing to do. The question is why didn’t he do so? I simply don’t know the answer, but a guess would be one of two things:
    Either Barclays may have worked closely with Hall & Shepherd to arrange a sale to Ashley (or anyone else) that all the ‘exiting’ parties were happy with. 
    or Barclays, or possibly Shepherd, may have been close to doing a deal with someone else, and the only way for MA to get in was to do a deal with SJH and effectively scupper any other moves that were in hand – but at a extremely high price. 
    I tend to think it was the latter but the deal was not as close as made out as most interested parties  looking at the club’s finances would realise in 5 minutes that it was technically bankrupt, and would never have paid anything like £240m where the Halls et al would not have got a thing.

  • NottsToon

    That’s a hell of a tale. Regarding the first paragraph, how do you know this to be true?

  • Boycottspurs

    IntravenusMP is Mike Ashley. Same worn out excuses and horse manure.Takes us all for mugs (SD mugs, at that!) Sell up Mike, please!

  • Sickandtiredstill

    NottsToon Indeed. It’s a tale, based on his thinking rather than actual fact. He’s getting his story line mixed up :-

    “As of the 30th June 2009, Newcastle had an overdraft of £47.87 million. As a result the bank decided that having such a sum unsecured was too much of a risk.
    On the 1st July 2009, Barclays took steps to reduce the risk they faced by registering a mortgage on St James’ Park, the training ground, and the youth academy. Not only that, our brand name was also taken into consideration, as well as any intellectual property. By having a mortgage it is actually Barclays bank that owns most our assets, including St James’ Park, although technically we don’t own the land, but the buildings on it we do…. or did.”

    Those Deeds of Assignment are still place (as far as I can ascertain, but I cant find St James’, though PL funds are now mentioned also) and the latest one was renewed/signed on 9th September 2014. FACT.

  • Sickandtiredstill

    NottsToon http://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/jun/02/newcastle-debt-banks

    And by the way Chris Mort, through his firm, was paid 1.37 million by Ashley. How much more did Ashley cost the Club because of Verete, Jimenez, Llambias,  Allardyce, Houghton, KK, Wise, JK (twice)? 
    That from the man who fanfared the end of the revolving door of managers and directors which cost the Club money before he arrived. Great job he did with that!

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill NottsToon No, I’m not referring to 2009, very much 2007. 

    The 2007 balance sheet had a liability of £16m!!! Things were not pretty. 

    An overdraft facility is not a problem, you’d expect a company of NUFC’s size to have one, especially as most income is provided in tranches and not by the punters paying at the turnstyle.

  • Sickandtiredstill

    IntravenusMP Sickandtiredstill NottsToon Plainly, Barclays had and have very differing views than you.

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill IntravenusMP NottsToon

    Whoops, I should have read that before posting, try again:

    No, I’m not referring to 2009, very much 2007. 

    The 2007 balance sheet had the club as insolvent. 

    An overdraft facility is not a problem, you’d expect a company of NUFC’s size to have one, especially as most income is provided in tranches and not by the punters paying at the turnstyle.  However, the club has only been allowed to trade because it’s major creditor has stated his willingness to support it. 

    Even in 2013 the balance sheet still looks bad from the Shepherd & Hall days.

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill IntravenusMP NottsToon Not different to me, on paper, NUFC are a huge risk. Not so much now but going off 2013 accounts, the balance sheet still looks shot. If the P&L wasn’t showing the earnings potential, Barclays would possibly want a PG from Mike himself.

  • IntravenusMP

    Sickandtiredstill NottsToon Mort was very good, as far as the public realm info there is about the takeover, this article has it about right with regard of the goings on at the time (some of the other ramblings are a bit off) http://www.true-faith.co.uk/thru-black-white-eyes-zombies-6apr14/

    Not sure of the points you are trying to make. Ashley didn’t appoint Allardyce, however, it was Allardyce’s time that convinced him that running a football club in this way was madness. Ashley did not like rewardign failure in the way he had to with Allardyce. It is why KK’s compensation was quite low in football terms, Houghton cost very little to appoint and very little in compensation. Llambias could well be back soon.

  • Petri Mäkäläinen

    those all are in his pockets

  • v0ices

    IntravenusMP Sickandtiredstill NottsToon bla bla  black repeat lie ad infinitum.

  • SteveSmith16

    Chances are it will be Deloitte since they have their own sports division that effectively monopolises sport audit in this country. But this is besides the point.
    The reason the big 4 firms became the big 4 in the first place is that they command massive fees for being able to present accounts in the most beneficial way for their clients. It’s how tax accountancy was spawned and you can guarantee audit is the same.

  • alreet

    Its all a load of tosh. He is making the city and all people from the town a total laughing stock.
    Really wish it would end. So tired of being stuck in this downwards rut. No ambition. No manager and apparently no profit to stake a mention.
    What a greedy lying piece of work this sweede is. Please someone SOS. Its not funny anymore.

  • leighsamagpie

    NUFCTheMag NUFCTips maybe he’s taken his tax free loan back, so he’s ready to go #nufc we can dream right?

  • howay_the_lad

    Mike_Ashley_Out NUFC whats happeinig before the spurs game & after the match

  • Mike_Ashley_Out

    howay_the_lad NUFC see http://ashleyout.com

  • howay_the_lad

    Mike_Ashley_Out NUFC will do mate is everyone welcome even the people who go to the match as we don’t want to alienate fans

  • Mike_Ashley_Out

    Everyone free to choose their own method of protest, options are there, we need to be United! howay_the_lad
    #BoycottSpurs #AshleyOut

  • NUFC_1980_1994

    Mike_Ashley_Out howay_the_lad just putting it out there.My #nufc fbook page has people saying they are walking out after 17th min respects

  • KeeganNufc09

    NUFC_1980_1994 Mike_Ashley_Out howay_the_lad http://www.facebook.com/NUSWW what’s your FB here’s mine maybe we can share pages to get pt across

  • NUFC_1980_1994

    KeeganNufc09 Mike_Ashley_Out howay_the_lad Thanks pal. https://www.facebook.com/groups/nufc1980s/ mine is based primarily on 1980-1994 but enough is enough

  • KeeganNufc09

    NUFC_1980_1994 Mike_Ashley_Out howay_the_lad M8 that’s cool those were some of the best times check mine out http://www.facebook.com/NUSWW

  • IntravenusMP

    Accounts are now at companies house, kind of makes the article redundant

  • howay_the_lad

    KeeganNufc09 NUFC_1980_1994 Mike_Ashley_Out not on it as no one accepted my friend request

  • NUFC_1980_1994

    howay_the_lad KeeganNufc09 Mike_Ashley_Out Mine Scott? If so, please try again.

  • IntravenusMP

    Wages to turnover ratio 60.3% but turnover went up so wages jumped significantly as did player amortization. There you go, no mystery