Boey_Jarton

Halcyon days! They had this at Perdu if I remember correctly with the card game and the buzzer.

Very good player but highly dubious source. Aren't teamtalk the same outfit that ran premium rate phone lines with transfer rumours advertised on Teletext in the 1990s? Remember begging my dad to ring to hear about a link with Jay-Jay Okacha. Obviously it was complete bullshit!!

David Unsworth moved from West Ham United to Aston Villa for £3 million, but within a month, he went to Everton for the same fee.

It's correct. The profit on sale of a fixed asset must consider the book value of the asset (cost less depreciation). In the case of Chelsea selling their hotels, the book value of these assets would have been minimal because they were acquired decades ago and would likely have been fully depreciated whilst property values have increased. Similarly, in the case of women's football teams, the book value of these assets is likely to be very low, as the 'asset' and associated 'goodwill' has been developed internally and unlikely to have involved significant capital expenditure.

This is not true or at least misleading. Whilst the purchase cost of 'non-footballing' expenditure (e.g. infrastructure capex) is likely to be an allowable PSR expense (i.e. it does not count towards PSR losses), the subsequent sale of the non-footballing asset would only trigger a PSR profit to the extent that the sale price exceeded the book value on the balance sheet.

If the 'main company' restructures so that it absorbs assets that were previously sold to a related party (such as a women's football team), the 're-acquired' asset would be subject to its own valuation for FFP purposes and then any subsequent sale for further profit (profit meaning sale proceeds in excess of the 're-acquired' price) would also be subject to FFP valuation. Unless significant value had somehow been added during the interim period between reacquiring the asset and selling it on again, it would be highly difficult, if not impossible, to justify the recognition of further profit. In other words, selling the women's team is likely to be a trick that can only be played once, assuming the loophole remains open.

We have operated on a comparatively clean basis, given the potential opportunities afforded by PIF ownership. Of course it is a choice to not use the loophole of selling the women's team (for example) right now, but that is at least partly due to the fact it would be commercial suicide to try to cash that chip in at this point in time, given the immaturity of our women's team compared to our peers, because like nearly every other aspect of the club, it was neglected for 14 years.

Mike Ashley's reign over the club contributed to chronic neglect across every aspect of the club including infrastructure and the women's team and so our opportunity for creative accounting is restricted in comparison to our competitors. I also suspect that Newcastle have made a conscious strategic decision to stay as squeaky clean as possible until the outcome and repurcussions of the Man City case are clear.

Thought he was superb last night. So comfortable on the ball and has bags of energy and drive

Parrish will be honoured to see him take his next steps at such a magnificent football club.

I agree he was fantastic for us. My point was that he continued to be excellent after leaving, winning the PFA Player's Player of the year for Spurs. What Dalglish did to such a decent team in a short space of time was mind boggling

Ginola was superb for spurs after leaving Newcastle. Borderline unplayable in 1998/99

Whilst those facts are true, the feelings he talks about have some merit. Stavely and Mehdrad leaving has left a vacuum at boardroom level communication and it has been difficult for Eales to fill that void given his pending departure. You then add on the Ashworth and Mitchell issues, combined with the pantomime of last summer's transfer window, and things do 'feel' off. As an institutional investor, PIF understandably is distanced from the day to day, but it is on them to fill that void and I think it's fair to say that the leadership and vision of the club does not 'feel' as inspiring since Stavely's departure, despite out best season in decades.

Chelsea are of course a decent proposition for any player. They can pay big wages and win trophies on a regular basis. The annoyance is that their PSR headroom, which is already miles above the likes of Newcastle due to pre-PSR investment by a Russian oligarch, is artificially inflated by the sale of hotels and women's football teams to sister companies.

It was sarcasm. I have no idea of Andy Howe's credentials and am cynical that the best person for the job just so happens to be the bosses' nephew. That said, Eddie clearly trusts him and their transfer record is decent.

Andy Howe almost certainly has the necessary skill and experience and is the best man for the job. The fact he is Eddie's nephew is coincidental.

On the verge of opening talks designed to progress Newcastle's planned pursuit of being in a prime position to be one of João Pedro's preferred suitors

He seems to carry the ball very well down the left side and have an ability to take players on down that side. But I agree he would likely be equally good down the right now he has found his form This is the very reason we should hold on to him bar for an insane offer. The ability to play two positions to a very high standard is worth its weight in gold

Not specifically about this game but whoever commented about the strong negative correlation coefficient between Gordon's hair length and the quality of his performances was spot on.

I acknowledge in my post that the Glazers are terrible owners. As a publicly listed company, their mistakes are for all to see in the financial statements, as well as your league position.

The damage Ashley inflicted on NUFC during his 14 year tenure destroyed the enterprise value of the club to the tune of hundreds of millions, if not billions. It is the very reason why NUFC could be bought 'five times over'. Ashley's NUFC financial starting point was similar to that of Spurs. He then inexplicably oversaw zero growth in commercial revenues, ran the stadium and infrastructure to the ground, masterminded two relegations, appointed Joe Kinnear, and used the whole club as a vehicle to sell tat via his sports shop, paying zero in advertising. In masterminding this shit show, one could argue that Ashley took nothing out of the club, beyond recouping loan repayments that he lent the club and the ultimate sale of the shares to PIF/Reuben brothers. If you think this makes Ashley a good or better owner than the Glazers, who I also think are terrible owners but for different reasons, then you either do not understand football finance or are just so blinkered by the issues at MUFC that you fail to understand what is happening at other clubs.

I agree and was not suggesting that Jamal is the answer. We do need some explosive power and pace at the back though as the Schar/Botman/Burn combo lacks it

Had totally forgot that Lascelles played that game. I actually think we have missed having someone like Jamal as a defensive option. Obviously he is limited on the ball and has his flaws but his athleticism and ability in the air offers something different to our other centre backs. An athletic centre back has to be a priority this summer. Many are not convinced on here but I really like Guehi.

I agree that is also ridiculous but the fact that this is applying to the final decisive game of the season, taking place outside the outdated 3 pm blackout, is utterly ludicrous. It's 2025. Just give people the option to watch every game. If the service was good, people wouldn't bother with VPNs and firesticks, in the same way I am no longer using Napster.

So in the UK, there is no legal means of watching Newcastle play a decisive final game of the season with a champions league spot on the line? Utterly ridiculous if correct.