Mick

I can't see any reason why players already playing in this Country would not want to play for us next season regardless of Europe. Most players will see our club for what it is now, not what it has been for the last 4 years or so. We are a club who will have 52,000 at every home league game next season and the atmosphere will be as good as it has been for many years. Everything at our club is on the up and every player in the Country will know it. I don't think we're a club who needs to make a trophy signing at this time, a trophy signing will not sell a single ticket as they'll all go anyway. We need value for money, that goes for players who cost next to nothing as well as the big money signings, getting a player like Boumsong for nothing doesn't make him any better than the one we paid a fortune for, he'd still be shite. A trophy signing might sell a few shirts but people like Owen will do that already. We need a squad but we also need special players, we've got at least one and we need to add to that number. If Ashley has £250 million to spend over 5 years then the bulk should be spent at the beginning because that's when we need the most players. I can understand if this year is a year of caution because it doesn't matter what anybody says, Allardyce is unproven when it comes to spending large sums of money. You can afford to get 20 players for nothing and see a large percentage dissapearing, you can't do that when you're spending £millions, we know that because we've been through it with Souness, no I'm not trying to say Allardyce is another Souness.

Good call, it looks like he reads your posts so the e-mails are not needed.

Informed or complete guess?

If you don't like reading something then don't read it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Sports_Investment Abramovich is rumoured to have a 15% stake in MSI, that really would be a conflict of interest if the owner of Chelsea was also the co-owner of somebody playing for the opposition although is that not what happens when a player is on loan anyway?

This lot seem to think they own him, trying to buy him would be a nightmare as you'd have to identify the true owner first. http://www.mediasportsinvestments.com/

To muddy the waters again: http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2080572,00.html On a day when the Tevez affair took on an international angle with the presidents of both Fifa and Uefa stepping into the dispute, it emerged that, under the terms of his four-year playing contract, only West Ham will benefit from the forward's sale.

This is all I've found so far: http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/premiership/article2617382.ece Now the intention is to pair the two in a new-look strike-force with Carlos Tevez almost certain to leave the club once a fee is agreed with one of the clubs - primarily Real Madrid and Chelsea - who have registered an interest. It is thought that Tevez could cost as much as £32m. West Ham will not receive any of the transfer fee.

I've read that West Ham get nothing but I have no idea as something changed after the inquiry. I don't know if he was bought or officially loaned. I've seen quotes from the West Ham chairman saying that he's not for sale, I've no idea.

I agree, this compensation news has changed the picture a lot. For starters, we could buy a good player committed to Newcastle even before his transfer fee. We could and buy someone like Tevez, a young top class player with his whole career ahead of him. He should really now tell us exactly what his intentions are, although the silence says a lot. The club will know however, and if he wants to go they should actively seek to offload him asap safe in the knowledge that we haven't now lost so much money. That would be like every Christmas and Birthday coming at once, if Owen goes for £9 million and we get £10 million compensation then we could add another £5 million as a first bid. I've seen figures mentioned about him going for as much as £34 million but that seems way OTT.

mackems.gif So predictable, any reason why you took exception to me mentioning the extra penny per share when far worse was said against Shepherd? Was anything about him hanging on for the extra money not factual?

All I know is that 100p wasn't good enough, 101p was. It doesn't matter that Ashley upped the offer to 101p, he'd only do that after the initial offer was rejected, Shepherd had to have his 1p per share more than the Hall's. That equates to £300k that the club can't spend on players because other costs will be fixed unless we extend the Gallowgate and leave £300k's worth of seats out or something like that.

Wrong, Boumsong.

I wouldn't say they were all shit, Hottiger wasn't that bad and went for more than we paid for him. Barton was at the club for about 7 years, he struggled when he first arrived but improved. Fox blew hot and cold but left for a profit and Asprilla left for the same as we paid. We probably only lost £2 million between the four of them, the biggest and only loss was on Barton who stayed long enough to justify any loss.

I'd have to probably say Gazza at Italia '90 although that may be based on some of the hype, but if it was the best I'd seen actually live then it would be Keegan who I watched many years ago at Wembley in a home international against Northern Ireland. We won 4-1 and I missed 3 of our goals for different reasons, I did see Keegan score but missed one from Terry Mac, I think.

I had to look twice.

Other than two keepers I'm struggling to name any, Hislop and Hooper are the only two I can remember.

I'd be over the moon if you won.

Am I missing something? They were our players, nowt to do with Allardyce.

You do know they were our players, don't you?

I''ll bet you every penny I have that Allardyce doesn't finish his time here with a better transfer record than Keegan.

I don't know where the Allardyce list comes from or what they actually were, ie trials. You can hardly class some of Sir Bobby's as his signings, Des Hamilton coming back from trial is hardly his fault, some of those are also kids who have returned from loan, Gary Caldwell is on four times.

Can't you gather, from the fact that he's forced to sign trialists from the likes of Bishop Auckland, Communicaciones, Tivoli Gardens and Village United, that he had a pretty s**** transfer budget and was merely trying these players out? Have you EVER heard of these players other than the fact that they're on the signings list? With us, atleast before Big Sam, we signed Albert Luques and Hugo Vianas for £8/9/10m, on £50k+a-week wage packets, who stayed on the agenda for three years and more! Sir Bobby's signings list would be an interesting read for you, tbh, if this is your criteria for how well a manager does in the transfer market. You haven't a clue what you're on about, mate. I think you need to get a grip to be honest. Why shouldn't he question the transfer activity of the person now conducting ours? All he's done is point out that Allardyce has been less than perfect, he's not branding him as anything other than being fallible.

mackems.gif Trust you to put two and two together and come up with something other than 4. Going by your powers of perception I must be seething about Ashley because he's got loads more money then Shepherd yet that doesn't appear to be the case. I guess you must be wrong yet again, something’s never change. NE5, officially defender of Shepherd's faith.

If my firm was going to pay me off then I'd take every penny I could get, I don't claim to be a fan of my employer. Shepherd has made something in the region of £50 million through his association with the football club yet he haggled for what? 1% of the offer price, he's made a fortune from the club and has now raided the transfer kitty while you've lost money from your purchase of shares. He must really be a true fan acting like that and doing so for the good of the club. Fan first, chairman second my arse. Give your head a shake and think about it.