macphisto

Very good point but that wouldn't be the main reason as it applies to all scenarios. The main reason for my suggestion is that it doesn't make sense to have a situation where people either see all of our home matches or none at all, best to spread it around where people can attend between 5-10 matches.

@AyeDubbleYoo is right about finding creative solutions. Is the fairest solution not to issue anymore season tickets that create a situation that's all or nothing? I wonder if they could do something similar to the London Olympics where you say bid for 5-10 games (max group of two or three people) before the season starts and are assigned random games throughout the season? This would allow more people to attend, plan their travels before the season starts and allows the club to collect their money upfront.

One of the reasons they bought PSG was to win Platini's support for the world cup via pressure from Sarkozy.

I also wouldn't be surprised if some of these comments are helping to set the stage for someone like ASM being sold under the guise of FFP.

What do you mean by prioritising fans?

Everyone else in the team is a Newcastle player, Targett would be a new player. If Howe thinks he can get a player more suited to what he wants then it would not make sense to buy Targett.

It would have been interesting to compare Targett to Trippier if the latter had played more games. When I read the ratings given to Targett and words like "stunning", "excellent", etc. then it makes me think how would people describe Trippier?

Yeah, you're not wrong and you get discounts if you're a Nike member. Liverpool's commercial department are really good, I'm in Thailand and the amount of Liverpool stuff you can buy at their most popular sports shops Supersports is crazy.

Cool, it did seem very odd. I'm used to seeing club items on sportswear websites, see Nike for Liverpool.

Am I missing something? I just went onto Castore and they only have 4 Newcastle related items, is that right?

I'm sure I read somewhere it might also have something to do with Brexit too (talking about English football in general), not sure why?

The get out clause if you read a lot of the articles closely is that the budget is based on current commercial deals. I'm sure that will be the "out" to save face for all parties when we spend a lot more than what's being quoted.

Good shout, I forgot about him

I too like it for what it symbolises more than anything else. Who was the last England squad player we bought who I was either at their peak or entering the peak years of their career? I can't think of many, don't exactly fit my criteria but would it be one of Batty, Speed (I know he's Welsh), Dyer (had he even had a cap when he joined?) or even Parker? I get the argument about better value overseas but you do also need some good quality home grown players in the team too.

You're right and it's obvious the Trust don't have the experience to do due diligence on the various charities. The obvious solution is to give the money to the Community Foundation who specialise in helping charities in the region.

Saudi women's team played their first match this year. Small step but shows how the country is changing. Personally I hope the change in Saudi Arabia happens over a long time, revolutions in that part of the world from Iran to the Arab Spring haven't exactly gone according to plan.

I liked that post because is it not stating the obvious? In the post itself he didn't state that was a problem.

The highlighted part is the sportswashing part of it. That's the message they want to convey to the world as opposed to the current mostly negative/neutral views of the country. Twitter/social media and traditional media would be the means to convey that message.

On the contrary, probably the best time to do it and get the issue out of the way as it was bound to come up at some point. They know we are not a very active supporter base, see Ashley years, and the furore will die down soon enough, particularly with a few decent signings. It also sets the scene for future developments such as sponsorships, promotional videos, etc. Personally speaking this pales into insignificance when compared to us being sponsored by a payday loan company and a betting firm in recent times.

Good post and you're right about not viewing it in simple terms. Saudi Arabia has acknowledged that it wants to modernise so it is moving in the right direction and we are part of the process in helping the country to do that.

Sportswashing is basically positive PR, the actions of our fanbase have nothing to do with it. Saudi Arabia wants to be associated with a successful Newcastle and other sporting events so those stories dominate people's perceptions of Saudi Arabia and not the stories people currently associate with the country. It's the reason none of the Gulf countries have bought an established top club, say Man U, as their success would not be so closely associated with the ownership and wouldn't really be a "story". The column inches generated by football and sport in general probably dominate more than any other area of the media and are read by supporters all over the world; it is fantastic publicity. It's also worth noting that outside of Europe and North America, most people only think about Islam and oil when it comes to Saudi Arabia (in general people in Africa/Asia don't think about the human rights issues (just anecdotal evidence based on my travels and living in different places)) and the Saudi's now want to be known for more than that. The success of Newcastle will also not attract anywhere near the kind of negative scrutiny in those countries like we've seen in England. In the medium-term, the Saudi's will want to use Sportswashing to increase tourism in the country/create a travel hub. We are all used to Europeans using Dubai as a bridge to Asia but it's much more than that. For example, from Sudan down East Africa through Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Tanzania, Uganda and Rwanda, all of the upper middle class families in those countries travel to Dubai once or twice a year to do their annual shopping. I'm sure the Saudi's want a bit of that and Jeddah is only about an hour from some of those places as opposed to four hours to Dubai. Long-term the Saudi's will also be looking to attract foreign direct investment through sportswashing.

Almost no sports journalist, apart from possibly those at the Athletic, are in a position to lecture anyone about morality when their front pages print lies on a daily basis in support of this government. Never mind phone hacking and some of them working for the son of a former KGB agent and Murdoch.

Amortisation also plays a apart too. Another thing to add is that in the example of the £50 million player, extending a player's contract by 2 years (7 years in total) can also ease FFP by spreading the payments further. I am no expert on this but it's not as simple as money in and money out. The example of Di Maria in the video below who cost Man U £59.7 million and was sold a year later to PSG for £44 million is a good one because under amortisation Man U made a profit of £22.7 million in their books.

A net outlay of £150 million from where we are won't get us into top 5 in my view by the season after next. That's only £60 more than our January spend. The teams above aren't going to standstill and they will bring in a lot more than we will through sales. It's also relying on every signing coming off. No matter how good we are, some of our signings won't work out.

Maybe they'll start to show matches at the cinema again I totally agree about future generations, I say that as a "victim" of the Keegan years who couldn't attend matches. Horrible experience, that's why if the club has to move to substantially increase capacity then so be it. What was it the other weekend? 75-ish thousand attended matches for the men and women's teams.