ponsaelius

I wonder if that was why we didn't go for him? Doubt Pope is on that much.

Diaby and Sarr are the only ones that have really been mentioned repeatedly.

I'd say they've probably already been approached if the club are doing their own structural investigations. They're basically threatening with the shovel at the ready at the moment - because they know their development kills a SJP extension. I'd be amazed if there isn't a sale before 2023.

And there's a reason for student accomodation in the city centre. It's to try and move the market away from the grip of slum landlords jamming 8 bedrooms into single houses Heaton and Jesmond. Thus freeing up more family housing in more traditional suburbs. All housing is good for the housing market - even student rental accomodation.

Ultimately though it's simply a case of taking what a private developer wants to do with a site or a unit. If a building is sitting empty in the city and a developer wants to turn it into an office because their business case says it will be a success you won't say no just because you think it should be a restaurant. Obviously there is some control towards what should happen to certain areas in policy terms but that is long term. Actually development and planning is mostly case by case and market led. And in Newcastle we can't afford to be picky. Investment and development of most kinds is good and makes the city more vibrant. If people want to build it actually means you have a city that is doing OK.

If you want a vibrant city centre you need people living and working there. That's why development like those on Pilgrim St are good for the city. The Reuben brothers aren't stupid. City centre office demand is up as a result of the pandemic because businesses don't need large out of town office space anymore - with smaller and more flexible spaces with a better postcode providing better bang for your buck. We all want more green spaces too in the city too but that's always going to be an entirelt philanthropic venture for a private landowner and simply isn't going to happen on a site like this. But this isn't London, so any development is always more of a gamble. Which is why I'd be surprised if they weren't open to an easy sale and says profit.

It's the city centre. Dense development of offices and resi on a dead space like a car park and right next to a metro station is exactly the sort of thing that should be getting built there. It's an embarrassment to a city like Newcastle that these pockets of land have been so underutilised for decades - and shows to a depressed economic state. The fact they've eventually become seemingly viable for development is a good thing. Obviously on a personal level I'd far rather see SJP extended but I have no issue with the development in principle. Certainly not to protect 'views' of the stadium for no reason or benefit at all.

To be honest I don't think Stifler is wrong. There's definitely a very reasonable chance that is what they are doing. If you wanted to sell the land to the club you wouldn't want to give the slightest indication that you actually did so or that the site development wasn't full systems go.

Like I said the other day - they're still pressing on ahead for a supposed start in the new year. Or at the very least making it seem like they are to drive up a sale price. It might seem like a charade to submit an amended application but it would all be about keeping a poker face.

Think if Mane had stayed they would have let Salah go. Think it's sensible to cash in on one of them but also avoid losing them both as it would be too much of a transition in one go - even indicative of decline.

If Sarr was playing in the Bundesliga he'd probably be putting up much higher figures for goals and assists and we'd get very excited about signing him for 25-30 million. It's his career path and familiarity which probably makes him slightly underrated and feel underwhelming. But it also makes him a pretty safe bet as he's been in England for 3 years already. I'd fancy him to be a player who could get 8-10 goals a season in our side from the right. He got 5 in 22 for a desperately poor Watford side last year.

I think Sarr would be mildly disappointing because I hope that we'd get a higher profile wide player - but I also think he'd actually be a very solid signing, an upgrade on current right sided options and a player with scope to develop.

Yup. Signing somebody like Eriksen is not free. It will be a signing-on fee and then high wages for the length of the contract. Once you take into account full cost and wages for life of contract the overall cost of signing Eriksen on a 'free' would probably be more than the cost of signing somebody like Sucic for 20 million. Plus free agents at 28+ essentially have a nil value come the end. I'm not opposed to older players as free agents as part of a balanced squad building but they're usually not the bargains they're made out to be. In fact they're often the most financially draining types of signings because of the sunk cost and lack of end value. If we had unlimited spending power this wouldn't matter. But with FFP we have to essentially make sure most of our signings are sensible investments as much as they are good players.

Thing is we've made huge strides but all of our signings other than Bruno have been solid defensive additions. Wood was a pragmatic signing up top to secure survival. I think going for at least one marquee player in forward areas is necessary tbh. Both to make a statement but also to drastically improve the team where it is currently weakest. The hardest and most expensive signings to make are those in the forward areas.

I still think we're looking at holding out for Ekikite. I get the impression the financial package for him was pretty reasonable considering the upside they see. Obviously the agent demands stepped it up to a cost that made it less suitable.

Got to go big on a wide attacker for me if that is the remaining budget. Forward you can get a bit more creative and explore potential loan market, loan to buy options etc.

It is ace like. Joma do really good shirts in general I find. I've got a Whitley one which is obviously just an off the shelf template job done by the club but the quality is good.

Take stock of what. We desperately need attacking players and will surely have targets identified.

We're trying to get a kickabout going in the morning at the the new foundation building. We're short of numbers so would be keen to get others involved!

Indeed. But the owner has planning permission for a development which could potentially restrict extension and therefore removes any use of the land of to the club. So they have a strong hand. And like I say they seem to be going on business as usual at the moment with intention to start on site. The potential for a new Gallowgate extension and associated club related development (superstore etc) on the car park site could be incredible - bringing the metro station to life too (perhaps even incorporating entrances into the stadium?). Under any other ownership the engineering and land ownership issues of extending the Gallowgate I would have said were a complete no go simply due to cost and benefit. Not sure that is the case now.

When you have a sportswashing project with unlimited funds next door the potential sale value far outstrips the normal market value of city centre land in Newcastle and the potential profit margins. I'd be amazed if they don't want to sell.

You know for a fact that the club will want to buy the land back. And it would easy return for the developers with none of the effort or risk. But they seem to be ploughing on ahead at the moment - got to wonder if it's one big game of poker.

Semantics as the development is adjacent to Strawberry Place. That's the one I meant and it's an issue if the developers do build it.

The main barrier to the Gallowgate expansion is that the Strawberry Place development has resi facing out - which in terms of outlook and light could scupper the whole thing because you'd have to build more or less right up against it. At the moment the developers seem to be pressing on ahead with works to the site. There's even a new planning application in to amend the scheme. Whether this is all a ruse to to drive up the land value and then sell back to the club... who knows. Certainly if you're a developer it is much lower risk to just cash in than to build a load of offices and housing right now.

You will struggle if you don't have a membership. With membership, now limited to 1 per ticket, you will be absolutely fine.