This Tweet from @Le_Danny0 says a lot about Pardew's mentality when it comes to a positive mental attitude and where he falls short in comparison to other competitive managers. I found it more interesting based upon the fact I could not imagine what reason he would have to think such a thing.
The full quote, from August last year was:
“You look at a club like Southampton, and they’re in a much stronger financial position than us in terms of purchasing players.”Which spurred me to compare the major figures from both clubs' latest accounts.
So Newcastle are pulling in £24 Million a year more than Southampton and the difference in profits is £17.3m in Newcastle's favour.
The ONLY thing the small club on the South coast have over Newcastle is their debt which is less than one sixth what Mike Ashley has built up. However, as we're so frequently told, the debt is interest free and has no bearing on the day to day running of the club.
Mike Ashley (£3.3bn) is worth more than the Southamton owners (£3bn) so Pardew could not have been referencing the financial clout behind the reins. I'm at a total loss to think what he could have been thing about.
All of that said. The interesting news from Southampton last week was that they were in some trouble financially...
New Southampton director Hans Hofstetter says the club's board has inherited a "difficult financial situation".But that:
The Liebherr family, represented by non-executive chairman Katharina, injected a further £12.5m during the financial year, with another £2.2m in September 2013 bringing the total investment to £52.7m.
However, £37.9m of that has been converted into equity shares, bringing the club's net liabilities down to £1.6m from £32.4m in 2012.So, Southampton are in financial bother, but are better off than us, but Lee Charnley says we're "financially strong". Southampton's owners are writing of vast swathes of debt to keep the clubs debt reasonable, while Mike Ashley (with more personal wealth) loans whatever he injects into the club to pay for his own mistakes on top of the existing loan, then claims he's the best owner in all the land, simply for not charging any interest.
I think Pards could have come up with a better example.