Dunno if anyone can answer this, I'm not an expert on owt much and the stadium situation at Newcastle puzzles me. Does the fact that the ground is worthless make a difference to a prospective purchaser? West Ham was sold, quite quickly, and it was always obvious they would get a very good price for the land where Upton Park sits. SJP is an ugly stadium, despite what the Mags will always say, with limited scope for improvement and would cost the club more to knock down than it's worth if they wanted to move. Don't get me wrong, I've nothing against 'traditional' grounds like Villa Park but SJP has no real character, it's like 4 sides of 4 different grounds cobbled together. Sunderland built an 'ordinary stadium' for peanuts having sold the Roker Park land for housing. The SOL is at least modern, able to be extended and perfect for concerts etc even if it's a bit 'samey'. Just wondering about SJP tbh, I have great memories of going there but wonder if only an 'Ashley' would buy a club with no ground. Are the Mags stuck with Ashley in the same way they're stuck with the ground? After all, they could never afford to move, or could they?