Teasy

In comparison to £10m

Man City will only see £6-£8m of that though.

Not sure on the exact amount going to the council actually. SSN said Man City were getting £100m for a 10 year deal and that because of their current deal they'd have to pay £4m per season to the council for the next 5 years. But that may just be because there current deal with the council only lasts for 5 years. Any new deal and they may have to keep paying, so it could end up as £4m per season for 10 years to the council.

They've changed the name of their stadium and the whole area around it to "Etihad" for £10m per season for 10 years (with £2m a season going to the council who still own the stadium). Eastlands is now the "Etihad arena"...

Like I said recently, I haven't seen much of Long. But I have to admit I like the look of him from Youtube (Yeah I know ). He looks like the right kind of player to play with Ba, fast, direct and a bit of flair about him to.

£4.3m compensation?, not a chance IMO.

Agree This forces us to move to plan c though, who won't be any better than Erding. We're only going to get worse from here. Doesn't always work like that. Logically it does though, we'll see. Logically it should, the reality is often very different, yeah we'll see.

Agree This forces us to move to plan c though, who won't be any better than Erding. We're only going to get worse from here. Doesn't always work like that.

Would the club be more marketable as a bunch of bargain basement nobodies kicking around with the dregs of the premier league, or being on foreign TV every week playing good football with exciting players? Seems like the kind of people willing to invest in a football club are not really people who get their excitement from balance sheets alone. Yeah I'm not excited at all by the prospect of Ben Arfa, Marveaux, Cabaye, Ba and Tiote next season, bunch of bargain basement nobodies with no hope of playing good Football.. I'm not saying that's what we don't have good players, I'm trying to explore this suggestion that marketability has a direct corrolation to the amount of debt cleared and nothing else - that the best way to court a buyer is through agressively reducing the debt. That it's as simple as buying an asset like a good player for £9m makes us 9,000,000 marketability points less attractive, while putting that money into clearing debt makes us 9,000,000 markability points more attractive. Reducing debts no matter what the consequences isn't the way to improve the clubs marketability no, but I don't think anyones suggested that.

Would the club be more marketable as a bunch of bargain basement nobodies kicking around with the dregs of the premier league, or being on foreign TV every week playing good football with exciting players? Seems like the kind of people willing to invest in a football club are not really people who get their excitement from balance sheets alone. Yeah I'm not excited at all by the prospect of Ben Arfa, Marveaux, Cabaye, Ba and Tiote next season, bunch of bargain basement nobodies with no hope of playing good Football..

If he wasn't dicking us around he'd just say point blank "I'm leaving". Staying quiet and refusing to discuss anything is dicking us around.

Until last season Long looked like an average to poor Championship striker. Has he really improved so much all of a sudden at 24 or might he just be a one season wonder? I really have no idea myself, haven't seen much of him, but I can't remember ever being impressed when I have seen him (of course all those times would have been before last season).

This is of concern to me also. If our squad is thin (outside a good 1st 11) and the bench weak how long do they keep buying, 'next transfer window/next season' stories. Doubly worse if we sell the likes of Tiote as soon as a 15m bid comes in. £15m?, think it would cost more than that to get Tiote like..

Bit tenuous but ok, we'll see how it develops.

I'd probably just pay the price IF I was in charge (or at least offer £11m ). But unlike past regimes I think the current board look at every signing as a business deal, so the players contract will have a definite effect on what they value that player at. Also I think £20m minimum is a bit of an exageration, Young just went for £16m and he's at least as good as Zog. Something else to consider is that nobody else has made a £12m bid for Zog yet. So if he's worth that and its just us not willing to pay what he's worth, then why hasn't he gone elsewhere? You might say because its only June, well its also only June for Newcastle United, we may yet make that bid.

Have I missed something?, what's happened to suggest we aren't?

And vice-versa. wink wink. Not vice versa at all. You're telling me there aren't people on here who take any chance they get to take a swipe at the board? Common man you know there are.

Of course it should, and usually does. Do you reckon we'll get Enrique's true worth with him wanting to leave and only having one year left? I never said it wouldn't affect what the selling club might get for him, I said it shouldn't affect what the buying club are willing to pay for him. There's a very crucial difference. If your Man City or Chelsea maybe. But any club that's actually trying to get value for money will see a pretty big connection between what the selling club should be able to get for a player and what they're prepared to pay. I understand what your saying, if we need the player we should just pay whatever and get him in, and that sounds great, but at the risk of starting a nasty discussion, this isn't Freddy Shepherd land anymore.

It should and usually does in many cases, of course the effect it has on the fee depends on how in demand the player is. But if the player only has 1 year left clubs can be inclined to wait until January when the selling club begins to get desperate to get anything for a player who can leave in 6 months time. I mean do you reckon we'll get Enrique's true worth with him wanting to leave and only having one year left?

Obviously yeah.

I guess it depends on your definition of a major signing (personally I don't think finance comes into it) , but signing a current French International, who has just been a key part of a team that has done a domestic double in France and has a great reputation is a pretty major signing on paper in my opinion. Fair enough, as I said I don't know the player so I can't judge. What I do know is what Nolan contributed, and he's gone. If Cabaye provides the same then I'm sure everyone will think he's better. If he could score anywhere near as many goals as Nolan without being an immobile lump then he'd be a big improvement.

Better than Pele. About as good as Pele is now, he'd score 8 in the Championship IMO.

Yeah has to be joking really.

Apparently scoring 8 goals in 37 in the Championship qualifies you as the best teenager in the world now