Colos Short and Curlies

I reckon getting through 1 or 2 knockout rounds and remaining competitive domestically will be a bigger magnet this year than limping out of the league stage and qualifying again. World cup summer as well so its a disrupted market. Now that we've lost Isak I think the next buffer is in 2 summers for the top players potentially looking to leave unless this year is a disaster on all fronts

49

Is they Liverpools new centre half getting away with a new brand of defending a corner? And now I feel dirty putting Mr Perfect anywhere near Liverpool

I'm banging the drum again for Viptonik at Swansea. 3 goals and 1 assist in 4 champo games plus another for Slovenia. Could have had him for under £5m in the summer, a much better project than Osula. He'll go to someone in the premier league for £15m-£20m next summer

What a fucking thread title like. And the sandwich of games Wolves - Barcelona - Bournemouth. One looks a bit out of place

Thursday should be fine, that's a decent gap between games and the players will be on adrenaline for Barcelona. It's Bournemouth on the Sunday where Howe and the fitness guys need to manage things

Fast start, early goal and they will crumble

Remember when people thought he would flop as Italians don't translate to the premier league very well?

Big Jam is one of the squad who I reckon deserves to decide where his current and next moves are. If he wants to stay and help the squad/youth then go for it, if he wants to play then I'd not be looking for any sort of fee that gets in his way.

Is it just Big Joe a big doubt along with a ? on Big Wis?

Just the casual 31 shots from Norway

I'm in no way denying that if we shift up a few gears (or go fucking nuts in my language) then we should be leveraging everything we can to do so. My point is that unless we are going that way there is no benefit to increasing PIFs sponsorship this year in a way that pushes the shite boundaries that exist. In the way the club has approached transfers (solid buys, not £100m buys) we have the headroom to do what we want to do without any big new sponsors this year. We need them for maybe summer 27 and definitely after that. We should also see natural growth this year from our CL campaign. And of course we should be striving to close the commercial gap on the rest, but its only worthwhile doing that if we are going to spend it. Our PSR losses should be £105m for each 3 year period, increasing revenue to reduce this is reducing our overall financial effectiveness - I don't think PIFs aim is to follow Spurs's strategy. You've got to remember that any PSR headroom from a given year is lost after 3 years when it rolls out of the calculations so there is no benefit at all to building up reserves when you are in a position where access to cash is not a factor. 2027/2028 I'd expect to see big deals on shirt sponsor, training ground/kit and potentially parts of the ground (Saudi stand for example), the groundwork will be laid to allow any justification of deal size in the interim

But why would you create financial space when you don't intend to use it? Max out the PSR losses then game the system. We lost Anderson on the cheap because we maxed out PSR and didn't look to pump up the revenue. Pumping up the revenue when you haven't maxed out PSR is just as daft for different reasons. We aren't going to need to sell assets on the cheap next year under the current transfer strategy, use the time to fill in the smaller gaps and get as many non PIF sponsors in as we can of course but that's all that is needed over the next couple of years - again unless we want to go nuts

We've got £40m of p&l space to play with from the Isak fee over the next 2 years - we could add £20m this year which then also hits next year or hold off this year then add £40m next year. That maximises our PSR position. You can do a lot of damage to the wage bill with that, or bring in another record signing next summer and raise the wages on the key squad members without pumping in new money. My point isn't that we don't need to bring in new money, but rather there is a window now where we can do what we need to do without it (Isak cash) and then bring on the PIF sponsors as the PSR headroom is used up. We need cash injected, but the best way in the next 12 months is through capital and then new deals in 18-24 months time. Ultimately why show your hand before you need to, but of course if it looks like rules are changing again or we want to go fucking nuts in the market that 18-24 month window shrinks right down

It's not resting on your laurels but any sponsorship deal with a PIF company is simply moving money around the group for them, why would they do that when there is no benefit to us or the group? We've got the Isak profit which gives us decent headroom for the next 3 years, we should milk that for year 1 and 2 whilst quietly filling out boots on the lower value deals. Then come 2027 you have the 3 big ones - shirt sponsor, training ground and training kit. We've now got the sponsorship structure on place where going big here is of more benefit. Ground name to follow on due course when the revamp or new build is complete. Of course if we wanted a £400m.summer next year you move now but you max out the PSR allowance first

There is a timing aspect to this now. We've got a £90m windfall that offsets losses in the next 3 years. Unless the plan is to go crazy on transfers there is little value to pumping the revenues this year and quite possibly next. If things go well we at least be a European qualifier for 3 out of 4 years, potentially back to back champions league qualification with a second phase achievement. That puts FMV (which will still exist but maybe slightly adjusted again) everyone challengeable due to that status. And there are plenty of sponsorships that we could do that would not really challenge FMV as they are relatively small. I'm talking official tractor, official accounting package, official sausage roll type things.

The Faroes Vs Gibraltar is a heavyweight clash for the ages. Probably the most entertaining of the qualifiers tonight, saying this after not watching a second of it!

Been trying to square the Brighton thing for a little while and I can't see how or why we'd follow their approach at all. Their model is based on buying low, on the first team for a season or two then sell high, reinvesting the funds on a player at the level of the one they have sold but when they bought him. It's a cycle of essentially inching forward. That's us buying Isak for £60 and selling him for £130, or doing the same with Tonali etc. Minteh did not follow the Brighton model as we bought him, sent him on loan then sold him. That's Chelsea lite. Where we need to be is the cartel churn of reserve and young players where we can sell 2 a year for £20-£40m after they've played 5 cup games and a season in league 2. We get there through then long haul of developing the academy so it has stature, win a couple of youth cups and getting a shit load of youth/u21 caps in the development squad.

Out boy didn't look threatening at all but they brought on two fresh strikers against tired legs with 2 defenders on yellow cards. With an instruction to be a bit more direct in their running it would have taken some effort to not be more threatening.

That's 3 goals in 4 games for Vipotnik this season, was available for a few million this summer, going to be £15m+ next year.

Trying to an xi based on individual moments that stand out GK Hooper (Klinsmann penalty save) RB Trippier (Everton Free Kick) LB Bernard (Getting poleaxed by Robert) (should be Bez for the 2 champions league goals but Bernard is funnier) CB Albert (5th goal in Howay 5-0) CB Burn (Cup Final goal but also the 'I'm getting my suit' interview) CM Bruno (Cup winning captain) CM Tiote (Arsenal Goal) RW HBA (Bolton goal) LW Robert (See Bernard but also grey underpants) ST Cisse (Chelsea Goal) ST Bellamy (Champions League goal)

Nah that's not fair tbh. I do this shit day in, day out and have done for 22 years and still need to check myself. Add to that, there are loads of ways that how you spend a windfall impacts clubs ability to sign players in the press. Very little of it is totally true, most has an element of truth to it. Basically journalists don't understand finance and economics (or choose to dumb their reporting).

Just thought, did the 5 year rule come in after we bought him? If so the ammortisation saving runs to 27/28 and covers Wissa on that year as well. Numbers change a little bit principal remains the same

With the caveat that it is late I think you're right. Starting position is that as of the 1st July there was 2/5 of the original fee left to amortise, £25m, over 25/26 and 26/27. By selling Roland what we are doing is increasing our costs in 25/26 by £12.5m (ammortisation), decreasing them by the salary saving and increasing revenue by approx £115m - £120m after deducting RS sell on fee (plus whatever else has to be distributed elsewhere where) With the 25/26 ammortisation as well the profit is around £90m which we carry for 3 years to offset the 3 year losses. For 26/27 the cost base is reduced by the £12.5m ammortisation brought forward to 25/26 and the saved wages. This covers Wissa. For 27/28 the cost base is reduced by the savings on wages only. This partly covers Wissa. Come the start of 28/29 there are no savings and the sale profit drops off the calc. There is nothing to cover Wissa, needs to come from inside the club From the table on the previous page our 3 year loss at the end of 26/27 is around £65m so we can add £40 million by then. Note this dops off in 27/28 so would need to find internally That could be done by an increase of £20m in 25/26 (which repeats on 26/27), or nothing this year and £40m in 26/27. £20m is around £75m in fees plus wages (in both years), double it for £40m. Risk with the £40m option is you need to fund it for longer with the sale dropping off That is on top of this summers business based on these tables which is say is pretty transformational

Both of them In reality its going to be Wissa starting then Big Nick on around 65 minutes