“Newcastle United couldn’t survive at the moment without Mike’s money, it’s as simple as that.
If Mike and the banks weren’t willing to cover the cost of relegation Newcastle may well be in a Portsmouth situation. It is costing Mike £500,000-a-week this season to keep Newcastle running without making further cutbacks, yet some people are saying the club should be able to wipe its own mouth, that it should be able to run by itself with the income coming in.
“You can not lose £50m in revenue and expect not to have to take a hit, particularly when you have the overheads Newcastle have. The wage bill was reduced, but it’s still way too big for the Championship.”
First of all, why does The Journal continue to print these stories from the club without a source and without question? To give the men who have admitted they "intentionally misled the press, public and the fans of Newcastle United" this kind of platform even when they're unwilling to put their name behind the comments and choose to hide behind the guise of a "senior united source" is to let down the supporters that read the local paper.
We're all interested to hear the latest line in 'public relations' from Llambias and Ashley, but it should always come with the reminder that the sources have confessed themselves to be liars.
Onto the claims themselves...
“Newcastle United couldn’t survive at the moment without Mike’s money, it’s as simple as that." - This is remarkably similar to a statement made in December when 'a source' said "“Without Mike's input, the club would be broke. Simple as that." which I wrote about here and commented was like saying Josef Fritzl deserved credit for supporting Elizabeth Fritzl all her life.
"If Mike and the banks weren't willing to cover the cost of relegation Newcastle may well be in a Portsmouth situation" - Mike Ashley has given no impression whatsoever that he's "willing" to do any such thing. Like a rat on a sinking ship (the rat that gnawed through the hull) he's had the club on the market during almost every transfer window he's been at the club (or has claimed to have it on the market). He's often referred to his desire to cut his losses and sell up. Mike has been forced to cover the cost of his own mistake and nothing more. This is no act of altruism we're seeing. It's pure business. He knows this club is worth more than the current value he's dragged us down to....and a great deal more than Portsmouth who are a far smaller club with an average gate less than half the size of ours even in the league above.
"It is costing Mike £500,000-a-week this season to keep Newcastle running" - I'll bookmark this one until the accounts for the season 09/10 come out. We can't say either way at the moment but I doubt we'll post a £26m loss, given the halving of the wage bill, the parachute payments and having maintained Premier League attendances.
“You can not lose £50m in revenue and expect not to have to take a hit..." - Was this something completely out of their hands? Do they think we've forgotten that the man looking for sympathy here is the man that blew that income by getting us relegated?