Froggy

What was our bad season outside of the Amorim one? The 8th place finish where we played in the Champions League and won the FA Cup? Even the Amorim season we got to a European final and made £60m+ from the Europa League alone. Remains to be seen how much of a set back this season will be for you as well.

Your revenue has grown 140% since 20/21, ours has grown by 35%. If you narrow that down to the last three seasons where we've been poor and you have been excellent (relatively speaking), your revenue has grown by 34% and ours has grown by just 2.9%. The gap is closing, and closing fast.

Aye identical budgets would never work. If a club invests in its academy, expands its stadium, grows a global fanbase, has huge commercial deals and generates hundreds of millions more revenue than another club, why shouldn't it be able to spend more? If every club had the same budget, you're basically telling clubs that's all a waste of time as there's little reward. Clubs with bigger fanbases, stadiums, histories etc. would still have advantages in attracting players as well. If Man United had £150m for transfers and £150m a year on wages, and Hull City had the same, it's still very unlikely a player is going to choose Hull. You'd likely end up with many of the same clubs near the top anyway, just with a lower overall quality of football as all of the best players would be in other leagues. Not that I have any bright ideas on how to sort it, but I think what we have now is much better than nothing at all.

Maybe so. It's not the impression I've been given from numerous debates on here. I think Newcastle is a great club and a great city. It's not like I'm making up arguments to have a go. If you don't watch PSR abolished entirely, what alterations would you make where it would be seen as fair in your eyes?

The fact you have to go back 70 years to try and negate my point should tell you everything. If the league wasn't competitive, clubs like Palace, Brighton, Bournemouth and Brentford wouldn't be breaking their historical ceilings on a regular basis. Chelsea, Spurs, Man United etc. are finishing in the bottom half of the table. 8 different Premier League clubs have won major trophies since 2025. I also said the league is more competitive than it has ever been. Competitiveness isn't just about first place. Not sure how complaining about clubs having global support can be considered a mic drop. It's pretty weak to be honest. I won't take lectures from someone about my support when I spent thousands of pounds watching us labour to 15th. This isn't so weak. I agree with this (aside from a lot of fans wanting to be able to spend what PIF are capable of spending).

The league is more competitive now than it has ever been.

You're getting there. Just imagine.

They were very happy to sit back and not lift a fucking finger while we were subjected to a leveraged buyout. No other clubs kicked up a stink about that did they?

I feel like there should be a salary cap or something along those lines. I'm not a financial expert but I feel like there should be a better solution than what we have now. At the same time I think total removal of PSR would be a disaster for modern football. I don't want teams to be unable to spend money they have, but I also don't want teams to be able to spend all of the money they have.

Next time I'm in Newcastle I'd genuinely like to sit down and talk to about this stuff properly over a pint. Things come across so much more aggressive with text.

You really think this? I know Chelsea have swindled the rules to avoid punishment (similar to yourselves), but we were absolutely restrained by PSR and have undergone massive cost-cutting measures to try and become more financially compliant. Not entirely convinced Villa need to sell Rogers, I think they're just willing to sell him because it's an insane amount of money for an overrated player. Nobody was forcing them to pay £200k a week for Rashford and Sancho. If they are in financial difficulty I would say those sort of decisions are more of a factor.

When you're talking about Liverpool's spend last summer, it's £450m. When it's Newcastle's spend, the net spend tool comes out. You have spent a lot of money since PIF came in. You're up there with the biggest spenders in the league despite your revenues being half the size of the others. You will grow and grow even under PSR rules, as your owners can pour money into infrastructure and continue increasing commercial deals. You will be able to spend more than anyone else eventually.

Nah, I'm not. This is usually how it goes when you're hit with things you don't like.

I have picked that up over time on here to be fair. I've never seen a fanbase hate as many clubs as the Newcastle one.

Your fans complain that PSR protects clubs with the biggest revenues, but your solution is a system that protects clubs with the biggest owners. I'm not convinced that's an improvement. Your suggestion of completely removing all profit and sustainability rules is madness. You suggest this would mean a level playing field, but I massively disagree. Not saying the system is without flaws, but it's absolute removal would be a disaster for football with the money now involved from foreign states.

Leveraged buyout. Thankfully there's rules in place to stop this happening again. But again, this line of thinking shows that you would happily see great clubs in ruin and American bankers walking away with their money. No care for the actual footballing landscape.

I've literally answered this in my post. You want nothing to do with historical significance or organic growth. You want a straight shoot-out between clubs with the deepest pockets. Most posters on here think I talk sense until I say something they don't agree with, then I'm clueless all of a sudden. We need sustainability rules, and you know it. If Sunderland were owned by PIF, and Newcastle were owned by Mike Ashley again, how would you feel about PSR then? Would you still be calling for it to be removed so everyone was on a "level playing field?" Of course not. You want rid of it now because nobody would be able to stand in your way.

This is the thing with all this embarrassing "cartel" craic, and it is embarrassing believe me. The "cartel" argument falls apart the moment you ask what Newcastle fans actually want instead. You don't want a level playing field, you want no restrictions on the wealthiest owners in world football. The established clubs built huge revenues over decades through success, fanbases and commercial growth. You can argue that gives them an advantage, but your answer is essentially "our owners are richer than yours." Like Veruca Salt in Willy Wonka, a lot of you are shouting "I want it now!" Almost like you're blocking out the already huge amount of investment from your owners, or the fact they can continue to pour money into your stadium, training facilities and youth facilities without affecting PSR. Your growth in the five years since they've taken over is colossal. Doubled revenues, won a trophy, regularly competing in the Champions League yet still complaining about the "cartel." Your owners have invested far, far more than ours have. If PSR disappeared tomorrow, you wouldn't be getting rid of a "cartel" You would simply replace it with a system where the club backed by the deepest pockets wins. Dick all to do with sporting merit, just a different route to financial dominance. Without PSR, Qatar could buy Burnley and make them title challengers in a couple of seasons. That's not saving football, it's reducing it to a bidding war between states. You're complaining about unfair advantages while demanding the biggest unfair advantage of all. The real debate is whether PSR is the best way to regulate spending, not whether clubs should be allowed to spend unlimited sovereign wealth fund money. Should there be sustainability rules though? Abso-fucking-lutely.

All rules are made up. Murder is a made up law. He's making a very valid point in that you generated £130m accounting profit by selling your stadium to yourself. Blatantly gaming the system to fund Wissa and Elanga.

Went for Barnes against Leeds.

Incompetence. Not corruption. PSG's chairman is on UEFA's board is he not? Why would it be corrupt towards Arsenal?

Doesn't matter how their honours came about. It's the reality of the situation now that I'm talking about. Chelsea have been regularly winning trophies for over 20 years. If Newcastle or Aston Villa offered the same money to players, the vast majority are going to choose Chelsea or Man City. That being said, I can at least understand the likes of Chelsea or City being debated in terms of prestige. The likes of KaKa suggest there's no pull to the likes of us or Liverpool without money though. Which is utter nonsense.

Early bird catches the worm.