Gawalls

Yes they would- clubs have been known to defend pdeo’s and other criminals as long as they score. One of the top strikers is not going to get turned down by many if we came out and said okay he’s available and they had the funds.

They’ve always said 50 to be fair, quoted Forrest that weeks ago

Yeah we’re in the realms of “I always thought he was shit”, just like when you got dumped and said “I always thought she was ugly”

It’s basically £15m per season he has left - way too much

As much as I want him - at £50m they can fuck right off, we need to not let them make an example of us otherwise it will be a field day for other clubs.

So did I, wasn’t a dig at you, just some are seeing everything as negative, you can either want him and be disappointed we moved on or didn’t and be happy. It was a statement at people who are being disappointed at both.

NUFC to buy Wisse: everyone in here - what are we doing he’s too old, we can’t buy him NUFC move on to other targets: everyone in here - what a mess, this is looking comical now

He’s from that area I believe and still lives in that area with Burnley, came from Man City and returned to them. No brainier for him really, this is fair enough.

Final say maybe but I read into that - she snd Mehrdad still did the legwork others wouldn’t or just can’t be arsed to get said deal done. Seen no evidence Mitchell has done that.

This money is a drop in the ocean to them, probably the equivalent to me buying a new coat or something of that value. They’ve since moved onto bigger things it seems like Saudi Football and funding other sporting events. I’m not sure how much they ever had to do with us and think that early days success was all Staveley (from the board room level I mean).

I went looking a few hours ago and found stupid typical articles dating back start of the year on it - saying 10% but just stupid online stuff.

Fair enough I was wrong on that but say sell on is correct and at 10% - all I was saying was to the posts saying “we’ll get these for 265 - isaks sale we may get them for £115”, that’s not going to happen.

Plus the reportedly sell on fee

I don’t mean lose money I mean the first 44m + sell on fee is gone

wages on top of that to consider as well

Kelly and longstaffs cover isaks sell on clause

Said this in another thread - after sell on and amortisation we stand to lose around 44m plus whatever 10% we sell Isak for.

Even still - that’s not possible

So just around the £350m spent then?

Sell him less than £130m - id evrn say that’s too cheap.

Honestly don’t think we can afford to, this has to be all about us now, get enough to get say three players in - the first 11 may be weaker but the squad could be stronger.

Present it on their phones probably- doesn’t look as attractive these days.

Say it’s a 10% sell on. We must owe around 45M amortisation so we can’t afford to sell for less than £150M. If he went for £120M for conversion sake then 12M sell on plus 45M amortisation is 57M, only leaves us with around 60 - 65M. Just can’t do that.

Maybe because we have to and are trying to stretch it, with this and all of a sudden no striker then who knows.

You genuinely think you’re gonna persuade him to live in Saudi to play for a non CL club when hes in this form, his stock is so high and in his peak? He’ll turn that shit down in seconds regardless of money I reckon.