macphisto

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.

I can see where you're coming from but I'd like to think with the right people in place and a vision to sell that next summer we could be in for say Bellingham (just using him as an example). You're then talking about £80 million+ a player by next summer. It shows you how football prices have risen that £30-£40 million potentially doesn't get you much. It's a risky price bracket where you'll hit and miss. Willock was £25 million and he's an average player. I know you can point at Bruno but you're not going to get many Brazilian internationals for that price and also we're all getting carried away with him, myself included; we don't know how he's going to settle long-term. Another thing to consider is that should we spend say £100-£150 million this summer on 4-5 players then we'd be struggling to significantly upgrade the team next summer if we stuck to that same transfer plan. Personally, I hope we spend in the region of £150 million on three quality players this summer who would really raise the standard of the team. There's always a risk, but in general the more you pay the greater the possibility they'll be a success. I know these figures are ridiculous, easy for me to say £150 million but we've all heard where the owners want to be in the future. Also, based on my knowledge of Saudi Arabia, they're not going to mess around.

Fair enough, every other top club has it wrong. Salah and Mane were four and five years ago, they would be a lot more now. I have mentioned Rob Lee numerous times as an example of players we can also aim for but you just ignore it. What would Van Dijk and Allison go for now? An example where they had to spend big money, it's unavoidable if you want to win things. I am not saying this summer but we'll definitely have to start spending a lot of money next year if we want to reach the owners stated ambitions. As daft as this may sound, £30/£40 million pound players will only get you so far in this league. I doubt it would get you competing consistently for Champions League positions and you certainly wouldn't be anywhere near winning the league. Name one club that has consistently competed in England without spending a lot of money? You can't as there isn't a team like that unless you go back to before the Premier League. FA cup winners: Usual top spenders apart Everton 1995, Wigan 2013 and Leicester 2021 Premier League winners: Usual top spenders apart from Leicester 2016 Champions League: Almost always the top spenders qualify and certainly the top spenders win it.

I think this used to be true but I honestly think it's changing more and more and this is where Ambramovich and Abu Dhabi distorted the market. Chelsea and Man City have no qualms about throwing money at it until they do get success. Look at how much Man City spent on full backs until they got the right players. Personally, the best model to follow is the Liverpool model in my opinion but at times they have still splashed the cash when they had to.

How is that ridiculous when every team we will be competing against will have a few players, possibly more than a few, worth £100 million???? You can't get to the stated aims of the owners, starting from where we are without doing that in the next year or two. Also why are you ignoring what I said, I'll repeat for the 3rd time that yes you'll need smart recruitment like Rob Lee but we'll also have to spend a lot of money. The four best strikers I have seen in my lifetime are Beardsley, Cole, Ferdinand and Shearer. Based on your thinking we would never have signed Ferdinand and Shearer when we did. You can quote Everton, but I'll give you this list from the last 10 years. Some teams have won more than others but that's when structure, philosophy and managers come into play. The top 10 highest spending clubs in world football 1. Manchester City - £1.38bn – 260 arrivals 2. Chelsea - £1.33bn – 342 arrivals 3. Barcelona - £1.28bn – 156 arrivals 4. Manchester United - £1.24bn – 167 arrivals 5. Juventus - £1.24bn – 533 arrivals 6. Paris Saint-Germain - £1.17bn – 177 arrivals 7. Atletico Madrid - £940m – 216 arrivals 8. Real Madrid - £920m – 133 arrivals 9. Arsenal - £890m – 195 arrivals 10. AS Roma - £870m – 508 arrivals Liverpool are not on the list but they spent when they had to on Van Dijk and Alisson. It's dreamland to think we can somehow buck the trend of every other successful team.

This is the biggest myth in football, it virtually does guarantee success; just look at the Premier League, FA Cup and Champions League most seasons. Even when you have a poor manager, no strategy and are considered to be having a very poor season like Man U, being in 6th place is still successful in comparison to nearly every other club. I'd also argue that it wouldn't take Man U for example much to make them into a competitive team again. Closer to home, the most successful team we had in living memory as Newcastle fans is when we spent a lot of money under Keegan. Yes, you can get someone like Leicester winning the League with minimum spend or Everton spending a lot and being in trouble but they are both very much exceptions to the rule. Spending money is by far the surest way to win something in football and is indeed becoming almost the only way to do it, certainly on a consistent basis. In my time, I've seen Leeds, Arsenal and possibly Spurs touted as models to follow in regards to buying young players to develop and it never materialised. You could even say the same about Newcastle and the team under Robson. I'm not arguing against smart recruitment, which is why I mentioned Rob Lee, but you also have to spend big at times. Also, a strange perspective on signing a Haaland-type player, looking at what he would bring commercially rather than what he would contribute to the team. They would only be commercially successful if they were successful on the pitch. It's great where Arsenal, Wolves and West Ham are in the league but that is not the stated ambitions of our owners "to be the best at football and challenge for trophies." Internally within the club I'd like to think they'd be looking to compete with West Ham and Wolves next season if we make some good signings in the summer, bouncing around between 6th to 10th place. To do that will still involve a decent expenditure in the summer time. If we do finish between 6th and 10th and want to seriously challenge those above us after the summer of 2023 then it would be unavoidable that we'll have to spend big money. I don't know why so many people have such a problem wanting to spend a lot of money. No one cared when we did it under Keegan which for 99% of fans who lived through those times is by far the best time supporting the club.

Not all the time as you are taking a risk with Southampton Shearer whereas the Blackburn Shearer was almost guaranteed to score you goals. Southampton Shearer could easily have turned out to be a Sheffield David Hirst who was just as highly rated around that time. In my original message, I got the Ferdinand fee wrong. £67 million was the fee to Spurs, the fee from QPR to Newcastle was nearly £94 million.

Interesting article in the Athletic about what players would go for now. Shearer is estimated to be worth £222 million and Les Ferdinand is £67 million. Personally think it would be nearer £170 million for Shearer and £100 million for Ferdinand. Main reason for bringing this up is that it highlights how much we'll have to spend to compete again. Yes, you can try to find your modern day equivalents of Rob Lee but we will have to start spending big sooner rather than later if we are to meet the stated ambitions of the owners. That's why I think talk of a £50 million budget is laughable.

I can't wait for the summer and talk of £50 million is nonsense, to put that in perspective £45 million would roughly get you Targett and Botman. In the last few days of the transfer window we had bids in for Botman, Carlos and Ekitike that far exceeded £50 million. The owners have mentioned winning trophies in five years time so I fully expect us to have a team to compete between 5th and 10th place next season. One thing I'd like Howe to do is to put down a marker like Keegan did in selling David Kelly after he was the top scorer in our promotion season. That was a brilliant move by Keegan as it sent a strong message that standards were being raised and if you don't keep up then you'll be out. It also signalled that Keegan meant serious business no matter how popular you were as a player. Possibly not all together but I'd be happy to see a few from Lascelles, Wood, Willock, Fraser and Dubravka shown the door.

I agree with what you are saying but I'd make exceptions for the right player (not Bale) who would both contribute on the pitch and possibly more importantly raise standards in training. Just look at the impact Beardsley had 2nd time around and even more recently the impact of Trippier.

I'd sell almost any of our players who were here pre-takeover and Wood from January too if we got decent fees. This could be the optimal time to sell some of them due to their upturn in form under Howe as opposed to what they were worth under Bruce.

I'd put him on par, if not better, with Rice who'll eventually go for a lot more than £60 million. Great, great player.

Another recommending then! Innocent Man by John Grisham if you haven't read it.

Are you referring to Making A Murderer? Only reason I ask is that John Grisham wrote Innocent Man about a guy wrongly convicted and sent to death row.

The ultimate litmus test of being against the death penalty would be the killers of Lee Rigby where you can be certain of their guilt. I am against the death penalty but I wouldn't be in the least bit concerned if they were sentenced to death.