Jackie Broon

Because we're a shit investment. If they're lucky they'd maybe just about break even if they sold us tomorrow (not taking into account ehat they're put in with related party sponsorships) and it's going to take many more years of significant front and back door investment to have any hope of closing financial gap to the big 6 and us comparable in value.

I get that argument, but I'm not sure that's what would happen in reality. It's not like the current situation has prevented cost inflation. At the moment all that is happening it that the transfer market has stalled rather than player costs coming down. More clubs competing at the top and more money coming into the game can probably only be a good thing (well, other than for those clubs already at the top).

Missed Joelinton, I've added him in now. Our latest published accounts from 2023 have it at £89m. The accounts have a breakdown of the costs per year: Since then we've signed: Tonali - £12m (amortisation per year) Barnes - £7.6m Livramento - £6.2m Vlachodimos - £4m Hall - £5.6m Osula - £3m Total 38.4m Contract renewals that have reduced yearly amortisation: Bruno - 7.8 to 4.4 = -3.4m Burn - 5.2 to 2.2 = -3m Gordon 12.9 to 4.7 = -8.2m Total -£14.6m edit, I forgot to add sales since our last published accounts: ASM -£3.3m Minteh -£1.2m That works out at £90.7m for 2024/25 so my estimate is not far off.

I need to get a life I know but I decided to put together a spreadsheet estimating our current squad amortisation costs if it's of interest to anyone but me:

And just look at the long term success of that other midlands based club that footballed its way to brief success.

A nitpicnic?

What was it 80 said about nicpickers. Yes, I understand that there is always a continuing amortisation cost when a player signs a new contract before the end of their current contract, but for Joelinton and Miggy it will be so negligible it is not worth mentioning.

The sale itself is fine IMO, they can't stop clubs selling property that they own provided that it's at market value, which it seems it probably was. The issue is the management contract which it has been reported means they still get all the profits from the hotel going forward. They shouldn't need to change the rules, it's clear as day that a management contract giving them full profits from a hotel they no longer own is not fair market value.

That leaves out a few important factors, that other players included in our amortisation have become fully amortised in that time (Almiron, Joelinton in particular), that when new contracts are signed the amortisation is spread over the length of the new contract (up to 5 years) so, when contracts are extended it will usually significantly reduce amortisation cost for that player, and that when players are sold or released any profit/loss on their remaining amortisation goes straight into the accounts in full. So in 21/22 our main amortisation costs were actually Trippier, Burn, Bruno, Joelinton, ASM, Wilson, Lewis, Willock, Gayle, Ritchie, Murphy and Dubravka all of which bar Trippier, Burn, Bruno are now effectively off the books and Bruno's yearly amortisation cost would have been roughly halved when he signed his new contract (although obviously his increased wags, signing on fees etc. will probably make up for that).

It's unlikely to make a difference in this case. But, Dolly Potter didn't actually stop the 1997 Castle Leazes proposal, John Hall did by withdrawing the application when it was called-in for determination by the government. The Council were almost certainly going to approve the application if they hadn't had the determination called-in. It does seem that this government will be less likely to call-in an application though.

But Gordon is first choice for the left and it's clear that is not going to change, earlier in the season when Barnes was on fire and Gordon was struggling to find form Gordon was still first choice. If he wants starts he's going to have to adapt to a different position.

I like Murphy, and I've defended him in the past when a lot of people have been on his back. I think he can be really effective player and a very useful squad player for us and is in a good run of form, but he is also incredibly frustrating and wasteful a lot of the time, still. Barnes should be seeing the right side as a position to aim to make his own, but I get the impression he sees it as somewhere he doesn't want to play.

He should be able to be a starter on the right, his competition there is Murphy and Miggy, he should be able to fight for a starting position. I don't know but it seems like he is only interested in playing if it's on the left and give him the opportunity to cut inside and score. He should be doing everything he can to try to convince Eddie that he can make the right side his because he's not going to dislodge Gordon from the left.

He's so calm under pressure, such an impressive performance after all of that time out.

Yes, we were 2nd only to Man U in the PL in terms of revenue by 97, and 5th in the world. That was organic growth.

That was completely organic growth, it's a myth that we were bankrolled by Hall. The only money the Halls put in for transfers was for Brian Kilkline, and that was from Lady Hall.

It is demonstrably not true, taking the figures recently reported for 23/24 since the takeover revenue has increased 100%, costs have increased by 75% and revenue growth has been more than growth in costs every year. Yes we probably can't spend £90m without sales, but it's not true that our revenue growth isn't keeping pace with growth in costs.

That's not actually true.

The fees aren't accounted for up-front they just go on to our overall amortisation. The profit from sales (minus the remaining amortisation) are accounted for straight away, so in terms of fees Osula and Vlachodimos are £6m on our overall amortisation this season, minus Minteh's amortisation (if he had stayed) that's about £3.5 in additional amortisation. Minus Miggy and Joelinton, who became fully amortised (or as near as makes no difference over their new contracts), that's another £12 off our our overall amortisation. So our total amortisation figure for this season is at least £9.5m lower than last season. Gordon's and Bruno's new contracts will have also reduced their amortisation, spreading the remaining out over 5 years, particularly Gordon whose amortisation was previously spread over 3.5 years, that will at least cancel out the increase in wages for them.

The arena site is 10-25m above the edge of the river, flooding from the river is never going to be an issue for the site itself.

Flood risk is unlikely to be an issue for the arena site, the site is all flood zone 1 (which is everywhere with less than 1 in 1000 year probability of flooding from rivers and sea). Part of Skinnerburn Road is flood zone 2 (1 in 100 to 1 in 1000 year probability), which could require some mitigation to ensure access but that would probably be pretty straightforward. There would be a flood risk assessment with any planning application and that would take into account climate change, but given the levels of the site there would be unlikely to be any showstopping flood risk issue.

It'll be Leicester.

Reminds me of a story my Dad tells about when, soon after moving to Newcastle, he took a friend from Leeds to see us play Bastia in the UEFA cup in 77. We apparently got torn apart by Johnny Rep and lost 1-3. After the match they were approached by a kid who asked for a tab, my Dad's friend said "sorry I don't smoke" the kid, hearing his (Yorkshire) accent, responded "you're from fuckin' Bastia aren't ya"