macphisto

As the rules claim to be about financial sustainability, I find it crazy that the key metric is not external debt.

That is a huge presumption without a previous example in the past. Those regional sponsors, in the case of PSG and Man City, hugely inflated their deals as a way to boost growth to the point where the clubs did become organic. In the case of Newcastle now, we have two commercial partners from Saudi Arabia, they're hardly banging down the door to sponsor the club. @Jonas 100% agree with what you say but the initial growth isn't organic that's the point I was making, maybe cross wires.

100% and it's always been like that, certainly in the Premier League era and introduction of 4 Champions League places.

How do the current rules prevent organic growth?

You can't get to that level without a massive initial investment.

Will City's legal fees be counted in their FFP calculations??

Did we, who?

Also applies to RW not being feasible without shifting Almiron. This is why Howe is doing a great job, so many of our players are bang average, evidenced by the fact we can't find buyers.

Doesn't fully explain the difference but I wonder how much it has to do with the players at their clubs? An extreme example would be Son at Spurs who must have a huge Korean following online. Regarding Newcastle, it would be interesting to see what impact a modern day Asprilla or even Solano would have on our social media followers.

Just picked up the long sleeve shirt in Thailand. Thought it interesting that it got almost the same number of likes on Instagram at Thailand's specialist football store as Man U's George Best collection.

I do view 7th as average, not troubling top of the table and not in the relegation battle.

Is it not a case of form is temporary, class is permanent with many of our players? A lot of them were never going to be able to keep up the form from two seasons ago.

So have plenty of other teams. We still have a lot of average players, the fact at can't find buyers for many of our players speaks volumes.

No, but a mixture of some players getting older and that it isn't realistic to expect pre-takeover players to continue their improved form over more than 12-16 months is why we are a mid-table team. When I say mid-table, we might get a lower European place but that's about it.

Do we? This is what we are, a midtable team. We'll win in style some days and be atrocious on other days.

I don't understand people using the example of nearly selling Gordon to illustrate how our strategy wasn't fit for purpose. It was the very same strategy that lead to us buying Gordan in the first place.

People are overestimating City's domination due to money. Obviously played a big part but Pep is the reason for their success. Interesting to see what happens when he leaves.

When did Howe say that?

A good manager calls a spade a spade behind closed doors. He'd also recognise that the previous people in charge, Staveley & Ghodoussi, were inexperienced and if any mistakes were made then they were made in what they believed was the best insterests of the club at that time. He should also know that without the same people he criticised he wouldn't even be at the club as we'd still be owned by Ashley.

It's basic management 101 at any organisation to not openly criticise people still at the club. There is nothing to gain from it other than getting people's backs up; people you have to work with. All he had to say was that they've recruited well but there's always room for improvement or even say we have to be even smarter in our recruitment as the the FFP rules are directly aimed at Newcastle to create a siege mentality at the club to pull every one together.

Have to disagree, a team that doesn't win anything over 3-4 years can not be considered a top team. With regards to the pen, you can say they were unlucky, just like you could say they were lucky to beat Ajax but over a 3-4 year period luck does not come into it. Even if we want to use Spurs as an example, they weren't a threat before the period we are talking about, never won anything at their best, and are now pretty much what they were previously. That is the best you can do through organic growth. You'll have some good and bad years but never be a real threat. Only thing that might change them in the long term is their stadium. One other thing about quoting Spurs and Liverpool when they sold Coutinho. Is that route possible now? A lot of those transfers happened when Madrid, Barcelona and PSG were spending crazy money. A completely different landscape now, would we be happy selling our best players to other PL teams?

What I'm saying is that organic growth to achieve the stated aims of our owners is not possible. PIF will need to either pump money into the club or abandon what they said they were going to do. We are no where near spending what we can as third-party deals are allowed, we're just choosing not to use them. One thing about bending FFP rules, was Odysseas Vlachodimos not an example of what we can do when we really want to? I know that's player trading but I'm sure if we applied the same spirit to commercial deals that we'd be a lot better off. If PIF do not invest significant sums then the other option to me is not organic growth but rather hovering in mid-table/possibly threatening a Champions League place if the stars align every now and again. I can accept this scenario, as that's the way the PL works, but PIF should be a little more clear in what they say and not raise people's expectations.

No there's not, look at the list of winners for the League and Cups, it's pretty much been the same four/five teams for a long time now. Regarding Spurs, so the best team we can come up with as an example of organic growth is Spurs who came close but never won anything. You could argue they are now reverting back to their traditional position of just above mid-table but never threatening the very top of the table.

OK, so my original point still stands that no team has competed at the top through organic growth because in the example of Spurs they weren't even trying to compete for trophies or leagues. I'm not trying to be a dick, but look back at the history of the PL league and any teams trying to seriously overhaul the status quo: Blackburn Leeds (briefly under Ridsdale) Newcastle Chelsea Man City They all chucked money in at the beginning to get going, you can't get away from it. An initial big investment is the only way to get anywhere if you truly want to challenge at the top of the table.