Unbelievable

Same, now on the brink of breaking the N-O top 100 finally..

12-16m i reckon. who is Bony? Wilfried Bony from Vitesse I believe.

Excellent shout! A player in the Walcott mould who has publicly stated this is his last season at PSV. Could do much worse.

Racist!

Why the self-enforced "2 windows on the trot" rule? You can't be p*ssed off at 1 transfer window and expect them to correct it sharpish? As it stands, we're a player up and a player down in this window. We need at least 2 top players in before February 1st. Last summer we lost players from the squad and the wage bill but as usual decided to take the risk and test the bare minimum we could get away with. And why have they ignored the centre back position since Sol Campbell left? This is the FOURTH window since then and we've basically chanced our luck with 3 centre halves (1 top class, 1 ropey if you're being charitable, and 1 with a proven track record of spending half of most seasons recovering from injury) and also a jack-of-all-trades in James Perch who has filled in at times. Since we got promoted Mike Williamson has played in the league 29 times, 22 times and 17 times so far this season. That's not good enough. You seem to be blinded by the fact that we've managed to bring a few good players in, while conveniently forgetting that a lot of the other players are some of the worst s**** we've ever had in the top division. Why did we go 1 window without replacing Sol Campbell, never mind get on to the 4th window with the manager saying he doubted we could afford both a striker and a centre half? The irony is that most or all of the good signings that you're clinging on to for the sake of your argument will leave out of frustration at the lack of even moderate ambition shown, the fact they're playing with s**** players every week, battling relegation. And that's without the manager issues. There's a chronic lack of investment, even a net spend of around £10m a season would have plugged the gaps and kept us ticking over, but we always seem to find excuses for not spending any money whatsoever and leaving ourselves criminally short. I'm f***ing sick of turning up to matches and watching Shola, Williamson et al, the fact that you're not can only be down to you being such an all-seeing, all-knowing, NUFC fan-hating bore of a person.

I especially love the attempted cover up..

neesy

Exactly, the argument about 'supporting a balance sheet' is a waste of time, we're discussing transfer policy which is inherently about money. Not really. If our only hope for some much needed investment in our squad (if we want to challenge for Europe, which should be our level of ambition) is Ashley may fear his investment will suffer from relegation at the midway point of the season I think we're going about this the wrong way. Again, this is a football club, not a sportswear store. it's a football club that is also, like it or not, a company that has to survive financially. How many football clubs you know have little or no debts and regularly post a profit?

Exactly, the argument about 'supporting a balance sheet' is a waste of time, we're discussing transfer policy which is inherently about money. Not really. If our only hope for some much needed investment in our squad (if we want to challenge for Europe, which should be our level of ambition) is Ashley may fear his investment will suffer from relegation at the midway point of the season I think we're going about this the wrong way. Again, this is a football club, not a sportswear store.

Shame we don't support a balance sheet. Aye, but at the end of the day we haven't got a couple hundred million invested in the club. He's coming from a totally different angle to us lot, understandably (and sadly). Which, indeed, goes back to the question I asked (myself) when I just bumped this thread: why did he buy us in the first place?

Shame we don't support a balance sheet.

Way to ignore a post too. It was quite obvious that by gravy train in the context of my post I meant Premiership (TV money etc). Yeah but you're still arguing that the owners are leeching the money out, or that someone is feeding on this giant treasure trove of cash we have, or will have. Someone still has to be on that gravy train or there's no problem. If the club are on the gravy train then great, but you seem to think it's the owners, personally, who are benefiting I'm not arguing that at all. My argument is this club currently seem happy just to be a side show in the Premiership and run a small profit.

Way to ignore a post too. It was quite obvious that by gravy train in the context of my post I meant Premiership (TV money etc). Fair enough, but where is the money going? Honestly wasn't having a go, I just don't understand who is on what gravy train. Oh, do you mean us just trying to stay up? If so I totally missed that. Yep.

Because any player who does well is going to be tempted away by clubs with more ambitious salary scales, and it's only the bargains that turn out not to be bargains that will stay? Until that starts to happen regularly then that's conjecture. Ba is the only person who has shown any real desire to leave and he was apparently offered terms that would've almost gave him parity with our highest earner. I don't quite understand why the board are coping flack for adopting a sensible wage structure. We've been down the road of paying grossly over inflated salaries to players whose performances and/or ability haven't justified them. It got us into trouble and was clearly unsustainable. Why do it again? Our position in that wages table is being obsessed over but whether 1st, 13th or 20th, it's completely moot. The figure that does count for something is wages to turnover. 70% is hypothesised to be the tipping point between a club that can cope and one that is in danger and we're not a million miles off that. The only way we can really begin to pay more is to increase turnover. I think there are some very justified criticisms of the board, for example the extremely ponderous way we approach transfer windows which seems to be borne out of a belief we can come out on top in the sagas that pass for negotiations nowadays when all evidence points to the fact that clubs are getting wise and preferring to play hard ball with us, but our wage structure? Christ, it's one of the things the current owners have got very, very right. It's flexible enough to allow us to reward players who perform well (as we did with Tiote in his first season and Krul last year) but won't see us get taken for mugs. What prize do we win for having the lowest wages to turnover ratio? Well done, you've missed my point. No I haven't. Wage total in absolute numbers is a pretty good predictor for league position as tollemache correctly argues, wages to turnover ratio isn't. Wages to turnover matters because it's the only figure that gives you a real indication of whether the club's policy is conservative, reasonable or reckless. Agreed on that count, I didn't say it doesn't matter at all. I challenged your statement that wages in itself in absolute terms is a moot point, and that wages to turnover is what really matters. In actual effect, a football club should in my mind try to maximize its revenue whilst trying to spend as sensibly as it can (note: not as low as it can) in order to offer its fans (customers) the best experience possible (note: not hang on to the gravy train as long as they can). In the context of the discussion that is being had about our wage structure I think it's the most relevant figure. If you care not about what happens on the pitch you are 100% correct..

Way to ignore a post too. It was quite obvious that by gravy train in the context of my post I meant Premiership (TV money etc).

Because any player who does well is going to be tempted away by clubs with more ambitious salary scales, and it's only the bargains that turn out not to be bargains that will stay? Until that starts to happen regularly then that's conjecture. Ba is the only person who has shown any real desire to leave and he was apparently offered terms that would've almost gave him parity with our highest earner. I don't quite understand why the board are coping flack for adopting a sensible wage structure. We've been down the road of paying grossly over inflated salaries to players whose performances and/or ability haven't justified them. It got us into trouble and was clearly unsustainable. Why do it again? Our position in that wages table is being obsessed over but whether 1st, 13th or 20th, it's completely moot. The figure that does count for something is wages to turnover. 70% is hypothesised to be the tipping point between a club that can cope and one that is in danger and we're not a million miles off that. The only way we can really begin to pay more is to increase turnover. I think there are some very justified criticisms of the board, for example the extremely ponderous way we approach transfer windows which seems to be borne out of a belief we can come out on top in the sagas that pass for negotiations nowadays when all evidence points to the fact that clubs are getting wise and preferring to play hard ball with us, but our wage structure? Christ, it's one of the things the current owners have got very, very right. It's flexible enough to allow us to reward players who perform well (as we did with Tiote in his first season and Krul last year) but won't see us get taken for mugs. What prize do we win for having the lowest wages to turnover ratio? Well done, you've missed my point. No I haven't. Wage total in absolute numbers is a pretty good predictor for league position as tollemache correctly argues, wages to turnover ratio isn't. Wages to turnover matters because it's the only figure that gives you a real indication of whether the club's policy is conservative, reasonable or reckless. Agreed on that count, I didn't say it doesn't matter at all. I challenged your statement that wages in itself in absolute terms is a moot point, and that wages to turnover is what really matters. In actual effect, a football club should in my mind try to maximize its revenue whilst trying to spend as sensibly as it can (note: not as low as it can) in order to offer its fans (customers) the best experience possible (note: not hang on to the gravy train as long as they can).

Great finish Puncheon

Holy shit!

Well yes, problem is for some reason or other we can't "afford" them.

Because any player who does well is going to be tempted away by clubs with more ambitious salary scales, and it's only the bargains that turn out not to be bargains that will stay? Until that starts to happen regularly then that's conjecture. Ba is the only person who has shown any real desire to leave and he was apparently offered terms that would've almost gave him parity with our highest earner. I don't quite understand why the board are coping flack for adopting a sensible wage structure. We've been down the road of paying grossly over inflated salaries to players whose performances and/or ability haven't justified them. It got us into trouble and was clearly unsustainable. Why do it again? Our position in that wages table is being obsessed over but whether 1st, 13th or 20th, it's completely moot. The figure that does count for something is wages to turnover. 70% is hypothesised to be the tipping point between a club that can cope and one that is in danger and we're not a million miles off that. The only way we can really begin to pay more is to increase turnover. I think there are some very justified criticisms of the board, for example the extremely ponderous way we approach transfer windows which seems to be borne out of a belief we can come out on top in the sagas that pass for negotiations nowadays when all evidence points to the fact that clubs are getting wise and preferring to play hard ball with us, but our wage structure? Christ, it's one of the things the current owners have got very, very right. It's flexible enough to allow us to reward players who perform well (as we did with Tiote in his first season and Krul last year) but won't see us get taken for mugs. What prize do we win for having the lowest wages to turnover ratio? Well done, you've missed my point. No I haven't. Wage total in absolute numbers is a pretty good predictor for league position as tollemache correctly argues, wages to turnover ratio isn't.

I doubt it but that's not what anybody is asking for. What many supporters want to to see is an NUFC that tries to punch its weight, something more ambitious than the small time mentality we have now. A middle ground that reflects the size of the club, not the owners' bargain basement business philosophy. Oh, and get that SD s*** off the stadium. It's very difficult to define that middle point though isn't it? I mean, we already buying people like Cisse and Debuchy... you could argue we have found the middle ground already. As long as we are fielding Williamson in nearly all of our matches so far this season I beg to differ on having found that happy middle ground.

Because any player who does well is going to be tempted away by clubs with more ambitious salary scales, and it's only the bargains that turn out not to be bargains that will stay? Until that starts to happen regularly then that's conjecture. Ba is the only person who has shown any real desire to leave and he was apparently offered terms that would've almost gave him parity with our highest earner. I don't quite understand why the board are coping flack for adopting a sensible wage structure. We've been down the road of paying grossly over inflated salaries to players whose performances and/or ability haven't justified them. It got us into trouble and was clearly unsustainable. Why do it again? Our position in that wages table is being obsessed over but whether 1st, 13th or 20th, it's completely moot. The figure that does count for something is wages to turnover. 70% is hypothesised to be the tipping point between a club that can cope and one that is in danger and we're not a million miles off that. The only way we can really begin to pay more is to increase turnover. I think there are some very justified criticisms of the board, for example the extremely ponderous way we approach transfer windows which seems to be borne out of a belief we can come out on top in the sagas that pass for negotiations nowadays when all evidence points to the fact that clubs are getting wise and preferring to play hard ball with us, but our wage structure? Christ, it's one of the things the current owners have got very, very right. It's flexible enough to allow us to reward players who perform well (as we did with Tiote in his first season and Krul last year) but won't see us get taken for mugs. What prize do we win for having the lowest wages to turnover ratio?

I think you may have misunderstood the point I was trying to make. I think our transfer is very good on a number of aspects: - we are getting value for money - we are buying players just before or in their prime - the characters coming into the club are professional - our first team looks very good on paper ("eleven purples") There are also some quite obvious problems with it: - we do not focus on the positions that need strengthening, but on getting a bargain, meaning we can literally go for years without filling a position - we do not place value in building a squad, so beyond the first team are players with neither much ability nor potential - despite publicly stating we invest heavily in youth we barely ever do and we have no apparent structure to bring young players through My entire point is that if Ashley was willing to trust the football people around him, and back them accordingly to even an average Premiership level in relation to our club size/revenue/potential we could work on the weak points of the policy effectively and be so much better for it. In my opinion Mike Ashley just seems on some kind of mission to prove you can run a Premiership club at a profit, which would be great news if we were shareholders, but is in reality not so much considering we are fans.

Wor Demba scores

Let me start of by saying I applaud the general direction of financial stability, extensive scouting and looking for player value in the transfer policy that Mike Ashley has set out for the club, as I don't think the late spending spree that was overseen by his predecessor was sustainable and the results were hit and miss to say the least. His approach to running a football club has a lot of merits, and when things go well (as they did last season) he will get a lot of credit. However, if you look at our transfer and wage figures compared to other Premiership teams, it becomes clear that "last season" was a flash in the pan, and that our current season is about where you'd expect a club of our transfer activity/wage structure to be. In terms of transfer fees, this is the Premiership league table for nett investment over the last five years, i.e. roughly since Ashley took over: http://i.imgur.com/bBUiA.jpg Source: http://transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/transfer-league-table-last-five-seasons.html In terms of wage total, here's a fairly recent breakdown of wage totals of Premiership teams from the 2010/1011 season teams marked with an asterix are 2009/2010 figures): http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GD4P0rhmO2w/T2hAJj3JJmI/AAAAAAAAFcg/sXBXt61En_Q/s400/23%2BNewcastle%2BWages%2BLeague.jpg Source: http://swissramble.blogspot.nl/2012/03/newcastle-united-life-in-northern-town.html So 19th in terms of nett transfer investment and 13th for wage total. Now, I'm willing to accept that we can't compete with the oil rich sugar daddy clubs like Chelsea and Man City, or traditional powerhouses with huge commercial value such as Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool, but beyond that I fail to see why we shouldn't be able to compete financially for our transfer targets. If we are only willing to pay lower midtable transfer fees and wages, what else can we expect long term other than lower midtable Premiership finishes? Serious questions have to be asked about what Ashley's level of ambition is for Newcastle United and why he bought us in the first place. (Posted these figures earlier in the Remy thread when it went 100mph, so sorry if you've seen them before, but I thought it was worth sharing in the Ashley thread).