macphisto

We have the money, there is no need to keep any back. That's not saying spend £500 million this summer but £200 million would be more than reasonable.

Exactly, so they aren't key words. Not an issue as it stands will be even less of a one when we sign new commercial deals. In an ideal world yes we need more than 4 players but I honestly don't think our squad is as weak in relation to other teams as we think it is.

Talking about the 1st team, not boosting the squad, Targett was a great signing but I think we now have enough at that level and if we introduced a player of similar pedigree then it would not improve the team. For want of a better way of putting it, we now have a team of Targetts and need to step up in terms of quality.

I said there would be exceptions to any price band if you read my original message. You can have decent scouting but you will still buy as many bad players and good in the £20/£30 million bracket. Look at our January transfer window, it is no coincidence that our best player by far, a level above all the other players we bought, was over £30 million and will probably end up closer to £40 million.

We could get away with 4 players of top quality in my opinion. If not £200 million then not far off it, the evidence is in front of our eyes: 1) For PIF to go through the hassle of buying us for over a year, how they were almost publicly humiliated by the delay (at least in their eyes) 2) Al-Rumayyan attending a few matches (he doesn't waste his time and signifies the importance of Newcastle) 3) January transfer window spend that was already high and could have been much higher with the public bids for Carlos, Botman and Ekitike (say another £60-£80 million though maybe we wouldn't have bought Burn) 4) Publicly stated aims to be challenging in the next 5 years 5) Regional prestige of PIF in relation to Qatar and UAE 6) PIF absolutely minted Despite all of the above, do you really think PIF are going to mess around with free transfers, contract clauses and "bargains". Yes some clever transfers will come in handy but they'll also throw serious money at the club too. The main consideration for them will be to ensure they don't get ripped off in the process, spending a lot of money won't be the issue apart FFP.

As I said, I just used him as an example but if the club think he would be an improvement then go for him. That was the main point I was trying to make.

Trippier whilst a good player is 31. As you said, Bruno was more than £30 million and will probably end up closer to £40 million with addons which is the minimum price bracket we should be looking at in general as there are always exceptions. I understand people thinking we need to address the overall quality of the squad but I actually don't think the squad is that poor now. I could see us shooting up the league if we buy 3/4 real quality players, on a lesser scale but not too dissimilar to when we bought Robert and Bellamy under Robson. I would much rather go for quality over quantity as we can cover some of the holes in the squad that would be left over.

These are just examples, I'm not advocating we go for these players but Philips from Leeds or Abraham from Roma. We might be in with a shout for either of those players and they would both cost £60 million-ish. If the club thought they would improve the team then why not go for them?

I agree that in general we have had up and down times in our transfer history but the times we have challenged was when we relatively spent a lot of money. I am not saying getting ripped off, the key is value for money. I just don't know why some people are wanting to go down the free transfers, last year of contracts route only. There is a place for them but the key principle under these owners should be value for money. If a good player for £60-£70 million wants to come then go for it. All the players you listed are decent solid players, people like Targett and Burn I could see being around the 1st team for a few seasons ahead. The thing is though is that we can't have too many of that standard in the team overall, if we had the equivalent of those players elsewhere in the team then we wouldn't be much better than we are now.

I could also give you a lot of others, many more than you listed, who are in the price bracket and would not improve the team. Just have a look at the transfers for this season. If we have the money then why not go out and buy the best players you can who are willing to come? It's like some people have been Ashleyized and are frightened to spend big money. Stuff this slowly, slowly approach. That is not to say there is not room for free transfers, buying cheap older players for experience like Trippier, but in the main to make significant improvements to the team we'll have to spend big money. Who knows what our scouting system is at the moment but even if we had the best setup then we'd still recruit as many bad players as good in the £20/£30 million bracket.

I don't think you can get any decent players for £20-£30 million anymore. We'd pretty much be trading like for like; Almiron, Willock & Wood are all players in that bracket. Obviously there are exceptions in any price band but £20-£30 million buys you bang average players in the main. I'd reserve £20-£30 million for exceptional young players where there is also a risk but if it goes our way then they could become great players.

I'm interested in seeing where the CEO fits into the club? Stavely and Ghodoussi in their interview with Caulkin a few weeks back said the following "We want a CEO that can help us grow and put Newcastle on the global map. That doesn’t mean Mehrdad and I will step back because we won’t. We’ll just have more people to do the work.". I wonder if it's as simple as Stavely and Ghodoussi having the CEO and Director of Football report to them in the following areas: Ashworth= football side of the club CEO=commercial side of the club In a normal setup, I would have thought the Director of Football would report to the CEO. I suppose it might not be too dissimilar to Newcastle under Hall where he was fairly hands on and the Chief Executive was Freddie Fletcher. Only difference back then is we didn't have a Director of Football.

It's his coat that is even more strange. Am I right in thinking part of the design incorporates the waist of a pair of trousers that are unbuttoned?

If there are any holes in the squad then I don't think it will be for the want of trying. I feel the whole "evolution over revolution" is more about us looking primarily overseas and therefore we can't have a whole new team made up of players without PL experience. There is also probably an element of the club wanting to send the right signals out before the transfer window opens in these reports.

What fan pressure? We didn't do anything and still attended matches. There was no fan pressure apart from a funeral procession.....

It might be best to wait until Ashworth and a new CEO are officially in place for those type of developments to be announced. I'm sure things are happening in the background, with Ashworth's unofficial input.

There is that as well, I actually think these backhanders will be a way for us to get round 3rd party sponsorship. The backhander for PIF in business unrelated to football will be to sponsor Newcastle.

I wonder how much our stance is being driven by PIF in not wanting to pay compensation. Based on personal experience, the Saudi's may have a lot of money but they also like to drive a hard bargain and to haggle in negotiations. I imagine in general, Saudi's must be used to companies chancing their luck when an initial offer is made before a more realistic compromise is found. I also used to wonder how much of a tradition it is in Bedouin culture to bargain before a deal is struck.

PIFs connections are so widespread that they'll almost have links with nearly every major international brand so it will be interesting how they look at related parties. Interesting what Stavely said in a recent Athletic interview, "I’m on the FFP committee and I said, ‘you won’t find a raft of related-party transactions because this was not our business plan’. We know we’ve got such a good story that we can attract people and PIF are such good partners that brands are very keen to work with them........I’ve always known we will be able to show fair market value for our sponsorship rights. We’re getting offers for sponsorship that are probably outbidding potential Saudi sponsors.” It's the highlighted part which will get around a lot of the regulations, sponsoring Newcastle will be a way to build relations with PIF in relation to other business deals away from football. There may also be some companies who also want to directly target the Saudi population which is fairly large and wealthy, through Newcastle, particularly as the country modernises.

Was there not some working committee set up to look at the 3rd party sponsorship deals that Stavely was part of? Maybe their recommendations are still waiting to be signed off? I also wouldn't be surprised if they are waiting until relegation is mathematically impossible. The other thing they might be looking at are indirect 3rd party sponsorship deals for want of a better word. There are a lot of companies who work in partnership with PIF and would not be classified as 3rd parties but could sponsor Newcastle as a sweetener to maintain their relationship with PIF.

The £20-£30 million bracket doesn't get you much in general and is a very risky price zone where you'll hit as much as you'll miss. People keep on mentioning Trippier and Bruno but never quote Willock and Wood. Willock is alright but he's nothing special. It is worth looking at the transfer fees for the 2021/22 season, there's not many players in the £20-£30 million zone who would be an upgrade on where we are. This is not to say we can not be smart in our recruitment by targeting unknowns, free transfers and clauses in contracts but at the end of the day as a team we have to start looking at a few £50+ players to raise the standard of the team.

I think we'll get sportswashing thrown at us no matter what we do so I wouldn't worry about it. I actually think the likelihood of Chelsea being taken over by Americans and the promotion of Fulham which could potentially see 11 of the Premier League clubs under American ownership next season is a serious threat. It's the Americans, in my view, driving changes to limit spending so I'd spend as much as we can, sensibly, whilst we can as you don't know what changes are around the corner. It is great to have Statsbomb in place but I'd be amazed if most American owned clubs are not already all over the use of data analytics to help identify players so I'm not sure if Statsbomb is more keeping up with the competition or being ahead.

The Athletic have put up an article on what past Newcastle players would be worth now. Obviously not sure how valid their model is but it still makes some interesting reading. I'll start with the best stat, Marcelino transfer would now equate to £47 million. Some other notables: Asprilla £111 million Duncan Ferguson £75 million Warren Barton £62 million David Batty £55 million Darren Peacock and Albert both £54 million Pistone £50 million Cort £48 million Boumsong £31 million Andy Cole £44 million Rob Lee £17 million Beresford £15 million All a bit of fun but I do think we're underestimating how much we'll have to spend to get to where we want to be or even challenging next season for between 6th-10th place which should be the aim. I also think people underestimate how much we spent in the past under the Hall reign relative to now and we only seriously challenged for a short time. For example, not on the list but someone like Speed's transfer fee would probably now equate to at least £60-70million.

I agree on stages which is why we'll only be able to attract or even be in the hunt for the top youngsters next summer 2023. By then I'd like to think we'll have a good structure in place and a vision to sell. The example you use is where I differ. Next summer I'd much rather have say Bruno and Bellingham (I'm not hung up on Bellingham, just used as an example) as 1st choice with Shelvey/Willock as back up rather than replace the whole midfield with £30/£40 million players who are much of a muchness and then move up a level. It's false economy to some extent and delays the process. Obviously I'm relying on luck to an extent with regards to injuries but I'd risk it. I agree about a striker, going to cost a fair bit.

I wonder if in the long-term, worldwide internet streaming is the next pot of gold. A more direct model of subscription rather than the centralised TV deal we have now? I would have thought it's got to happen at some point in the next 10 years. It's the only real way to monetize most of the fans around the world. I know the international TV deals have grown but internet streaming is surely where the big money is.