Newcastle Club Owes Mike Ashley Over £136M


It seems that Mike Ashley has loaned the Newcastle club £136.6M, since he has been the owner.

Mike Ashley – with Chris Hughton and players


And the Sunday Sun is revealing today that the loan was previously repayable only when the club was sold.

Now that seems to have changed and the debt can now be settled on demand.

In theory that is whenever Ashley chooses – but it also assumes the club is healthy enough to be able to repay that rather large amount.

It seems the Sunday Sun has had a look at the Newcastle books for the period up to the end of June last year, and they state:

“The Group’s outstanding loan from (from Ashley) of £111M is repayable on demand.” “Under the previous arrangement, in force at 30 June, 2008, the loan was only repayable on demand in the event of a change in control.”

The £111M has been increased by a further £25.6M in loans this season, as Mike has put in money to keep the club afloat with it’s still huge wage bill.

That strategy has paid off big time however, as the club rather easily gained promotion at the very first attempt this season from the Championship, and is now back in the big time next season in the Premiership.

We’re not sure how big a news item this is – other than Newcastle owes Mike an awful lot of money, and Mike is not going to sell the club anytime soon.

Comments welcome.



You can share this articleShare on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePin on PinterestDigg thisShare on LinkedInShare on RedditShare on Tumblr

19 comments so far

  • Shot Bru

    May 2, 2010 at 10:47 AM

    Comment #1

    Here we go, back in the premeriership and the media are back on the trail with sensationalist stories about the owner and our debt in an attempt to stir up sh@t. Just looking through the transfer rumours this morning and noticed Everton are after Onuoha for £4 mill and Mackems want Stephen Ireland for £4 million. If we have a so called transfer fund of £15 mill for next season we should offer City £10 million for both players.

    0
  • toonsaint

    May 2, 2010 at 10:58 AM

    Comment #2

    What do these accounts mean Newcastle owe Mike Ashley £110 mill?! Surely as fat cash owns NUFC he assumes the debts. Does this mean that when he sells us on for a profit, and he will, that there is an extra surcharge to the new owner of £110 mill…..NUFC owe the man nothing as far as im concerned, all this info about him injecting £25 mill here and there is not anyone’s concern but fat cash’s. He bought the club so he should have understood from the start the costs in running a football business. Trouble is he assumed he could buy and sell for a quick profit. Never did a full check of accounts when took over and now still reeling from it. All this about NUFC owing the man is nonsense! Also about naming the stadium, Sports Direct never paid a penny to advertise there silly website on our stadium so where’s the fairness in that. Fat cash will argue that because he owns NUFC he does not have to pay to advertise this but then surely this proves that what I have said above about the owner assuming responsibility of the debts to be true…..?!

    0
  • toonsaint

    May 2, 2010 at 11:01 AM

    Comment #3

    Mike Ashley has “loaned” the club around…..what a joke! Is this supposed to make us all Ashley lovers! lol Mike Ashley shouldn’t loan the club anything, he owns the club. So by my way of thinking there should be no loans involved he should just do it! All this media is so that when he sells us he can then claim extra money back, that is all he is interested in folks pure and simple!

    0
  • Captain Beefheart

    May 2, 2010 at 11:13 AM

    Comment #4

    AKA: the £125m snake in the £80m woodpile that prevented the club being sold.

    Sure bidders could scrape together £80m to own the club, but they couldn’t pay another £125m Ashley. All this news does is finally confirm what many of us had pieced together about the true state of the finances, much of it stemming from the black hole in the accounts (dating back to FFS) that Ashley’s advisors failed to spot.

    It’s a rancid state of affairs, but is the price of FFS and his cronies, not Ashley. Without Ashley’s cash we would be very possibly in administration the way FFS was chucking cash around on the likes of Owen etc.

    We might not have become a nation of accountants yet, but at least fans are realising the company spreadsheet is just as important to keep an eye on as the back pages. After all, in the end it was the fans’ money being squandered on little Mickey’s horsies….

    0
  • Edd Case

    May 2, 2010 at 11:15 AM

    Comment #5

    Both good players, I agree – but you know we wont be after them…

    0
  • geordie deb

    May 2, 2010 at 11:34 AM

    Comment #6

    ToonSaint
    It’s a good job Ashley didn’t do due diligence when buying the club or he and plenty of others wouldn’t have touched us with a barge pole when the true state of our club’s finances were exposed due to the complete mismanagement by FFS and co.
    I for one am happy that we have had someone who has injected huge amounts of cash into the club, so we still have a club to support and one which is now in a much better position financially for long term sustainability than many others.

    0
  • scrotty

    May 2, 2010 at 11:52 AM

    Comment #7

    What day is it again…….wait, it must be Sunday.

    The clue was the in the b**ls**t stirring headlines.

    0
  • ToonArmy

    May 2, 2010 at 12:00 PM

    Comment #8

    After the whole portsmouth incident, I’m actually glad that Mike is in charge even though he got us relegated.

    At the very least, we still have a club that’s financially stable now. The new strategy of buying young talent is also very positive. Hopefully we’ll be self sustainable from now on and in due time, repay Mike and get rid of our debts.

    Howay the lads!

    0
  • kristfro

    May 2, 2010 at 12:30 PM

    Comment #9

    Not sure I believe this amount. Agree with ToonArmy; very happy about the way things seems to be run now. Also, I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing that we don’t have a huge heap of cash to get the big names.
    Hughton has shown that we don’t need to buy big to buy good. Let’s focus on hard-working, up-and-coming, british-style players (UK, ireland, scandinavia).

    I’m hoping in the next couple of years Hughton and Ashley can show that the relegation really was a blessing in disguise. Let’s face it, this has been the best year for nufc in quite some time. Spirits are finally high and I have no doubt that even without much reinforcements we could challenge the mid-table PL teams after the summer.

    0
  • Solaidback

    May 2, 2010 at 1:12 PM

    Comment #10

    How can something owe you money when you own it outright???

    Ashley owns the Toon & everything about it except the land it stands on, so if he’s put £136m into the club since buying it, then that was his choice, its not as if he went to the bank like the Glaziers, Hicks & Gillet did & loaned the money off them & has to pay it back, no,… it was his club & his money, so no matter what the crap-loids say, Newcastle doesn’t owe ashley anything, not a single penny & if he sell us for £200m, then thats how much he’ll get, if it’s less than what he paid for it & paid for the debts, then thats his loss, its not the clubs loss & it’s not the new owners loss…

    0
  • Solaidback

    May 2, 2010 at 1:14 PM

    Comment #11

    Oh another thing, if the interest payments off a £1m in the bank are £30k a year, then Ashley having £900m fortune will bring him in around £27m interest every year, so in 2 or 3 years, he’ll be a Billionair again.. lol

    0
  • Yorkie Dave

    May 2, 2010 at 2:38 PM

    Comment #12

    The loans from ashleyare to newcastles holding company and are interest free. basically the toon owe the money to him as ashley is acting like the bank to the holding company. i have no doubt what so ever that if he hadnt bought us we would be in league 1 now as administration was the biggest dead cert ever!!!! We were a one legged horse trying to win the national under FFS. Clubs been run right we are back in Prem and we are gonna spend some money on players so ignore the newspapers and enjoy the summer

    0
  • stk85

    May 2, 2010 at 3:37 PM

    Comment #13

    i agree yorkshire dave…. the loans are from ashley so we can clear any debt, so that he has the final say over when its paid at the amount he paid it off at, hence no further interest payments due to banks.

    i think all of u on here are still a bit rose tinted towards fat ash. i’m not his biggest fan either, but without ashley, we’d be in admin and probably relegated again this season. we had to get the debt down – end of. ash did that, so we owe him money and not the banks. glazers etc. actually have bought their clubs and done even worse, they’ve loaded the amount they have paid onto their clubs as extra debts, so on the face of it, mike ashley has been a pretty good owner for us for bailing us out of our freddy sheppard hell and by not loading debt onto our club and making us virtually debt free.

    the money he shelled out will be repayed when it can and when it doesnt hurt the club. we all need to pay back our debts. because we havent is why this country runs at a deficit. we cant have it all ways all the time!

    0
  • yuwing

    May 2, 2010 at 4:29 PM

    Comment #14

    dont want to owe any money better dont buy NUFC, just keep the money in your fat pocket rather than investing!!

    0
  • DJG

    May 2, 2010 at 6:23 PM

    Comment #15

    Why do people assume that Ashley bought the club to sell it on at a profit a few years later. No matter how clever or stupid the man apparently is, surely he realised that owning a football club is a toy for the super wealthy and not a quick investment. Ok the guy didnt come from a football background and made some mistakes but he is slowly putting them right, starting with our promotion back to the premier league. Also there is no way he can get that £110M back in the near future but depending on who he brings in and if he can keep the wages reasonably down, tv revinues and hopefully increased ticket sales will surely mean he is not at a loss next season. We have to be realistic and admit we could be worse off without Ashleys millions considering the plight of Portsmouth, Crystal Palace ect.

    0
  • Cockney Magpie

    May 2, 2010 at 6:28 PM

    Comment #16

    I doubt this is true but if it is im gonna be really p***ed off! how can u own something and then say it owes you money? he better hope this is a bullsh*t story because just after most people had started to think maybe it wont be so bad under Ashley because admittedly we would probably be in the same sort of situation as portsmouth right now without him. Then he goes and decides to take money out of a company HE OWNS! because he has decided HIS OWN company owes it too him!? im sorry but is it just me or when you own something surely you cant claim to have lent it money?

    0
  • Cockney Magpie

    May 2, 2010 at 6:29 PM

    Comment #17

    thats basically like me saying to my 1 year old daughter when she is 18 ” i spent alot of money on nappies food and clothes and i want it back!”

    0
  • jimiley

    May 2, 2010 at 6:49 PM

    Comment #18

    The fat man is the owner and the 136 million is his loss. This club will never be a force under the fat man. We will never buy any top players because the club owes the owner 136 million and the club must pay the owner back. A crazy situation. We will always be paying the owner back and just surviving.

    0
  • pavel

    May 2, 2010 at 7:38 PM

    Comment #19

    There is no way that we are more financially secure under Ashley.

    The bank pulled the plug on Portsmouth when they felt they couldn’t get a return on their loan.
    Ashley will keep us out of administration as long as he thinks he can get his money out of the club.

    If everyone here is saying that he is just giving us 130 million out of the goodness of his heart, then can someone tell me why he would leave it as an outstanding debt?

    I don’t blame him for wanting his money back, but cannot see how this makes us any more stable than if it was the bank in the same position, as was the case before.

    I don’t want to stand up for Shepherd, but in fact we had less than average debt for a premier league club under him and the debt has actually increased since then.

    0

You must log in to post a comment.