Phoenix711

Right now if we used only what Ashley left us (£90m profit over three years) and what the EPL allows (£15m loss over three years), we can lose £105m over three years assuming no change to out income/ outcome. Remember, that's losing £105m for everything i.e. wages, agent fees, signing on fees, bonuses etc. It's not just transfer funds. The £105m can be stretched with clever accounting like amortisation (transfer fee spread over life of contract), paying transfer fees in instalments etc, but if we spent only what the club physically has, it's only £90m - slightly less for transfers because we need to account for wages etc. To spend any more, someone needs to provide the cash and this is what the owners will do (hopefully). The only thing tying their hands is their is a limit to how much they can put in over the three years (£30m/season) called FFP and thus we need to find ways to add revenues. Man City "cheated" this by getting over inflated sponsorships e.g. imagine Etihad airlines sponsoring Sunderland for £500m while Liverpool only have a £200m sponsorship - they are clearly not paying market value and that is why they tightened the rules. We could easily spend £500m+ over three years if we are successful (get European football) so we can get more sponsorships but ultimately someone needs to pay that money - all of it will be debt that the owners wipe off or convert to shares. FFP will simply state we didn't lose more than £35m for any given year but in reality the owners will have haemorrhaged a lot more. Why would they do this? To make Newcastle and subsequently them, a media darling. They may also look to inject money into the city to make money from property like Man City have done in Manchester.

I don't know about Newcastle but it's common practice for owners to inject funds into the club just like you would a business. FFP allows £5m/season loss for three consecutive financial years. This means we can lose £15m over three years on the balance sheet. BUT, the owners can inject £30m/season on top of that - that is where the £105m loss over three seasons comes from. That £30m is straight from the owners pockets. The owners can also inject unlimited funds to non playing causes e.g. infrastructure. In all likelihood, the owners transferred a sizeable sum into the accounts of Newcastle but for accounting reasons we can only claim £30m/season directly from them to use on transfers - the rest needs to come from other areas such as merchandise sales, sponsorships, gate receipts etc. As for the money put in by the owners, they either write it off as losses (usually tax reasons) or convert it to more shares in the club. Edit: Here's an article showing how Man City's owners put a huge chunk of cash into the club 10 years ago. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/aug/26/manchester-city-sheikh-mansour Can't find the article, but a few years ago, Man City's owners didn't have to inject £30m/year into the club anymore because they were self reliant. PIF and co would have to do something similar.

I've seen that story a lot, I think it's Napoli trying to drum up business because they need the money. €100m for Osimhen is way too much. He's injury prone and never had a prolific season. He is strong and powerful but I thought Napoli overpaid for him (€80m) and now they're trying to profit. He is a good striker but the current him is around half that value (€50m) imo. My only doubts on Fabian is whether he can cope with the physical aspect of the EPL. If we play possession based football he could be another David Silva. Regardless, I'm not sure either would be convinced to come to us at this stage and I like the rumours linking us with Botman and Darwin Nunes more. My favourite striker at the moment who we might be able to get is Schick. I also like Lille's David but first we need to survive before we can start playing the transfer window game again.

ASM was terrible against Watford bar his goal and he did much of his best work against Leeds in the second half (e.g. squaring ball to Willock in 6 yard box). In the Watford game he lost the ball when he failed to beat his man an awful lot and twice it led to potential goal chance counter attacks. He also doesn't help the LB out at all and Dummett and Joelinton had to cover for him. ASM's problem is the same as Traore - decision making. It's not that he tries three step overs and fails, it's that he always wants to beat his man and then pass. Sometimes you just need to shift the ball half a yard and then cross - Beckham made an entire career doing that. Problem is, is ASM is he is one footed (Right) and so can't play as a Winger on the left but as an inside forward. If he ever gets to the bye line he can only play weak square balls along the ground or dink it in - both are easy to defend. So as a defender you know he wants to cut in so have to show him the line. I'm not trying to slag off ASM because he is the most creative player in the team, but I hope he plays more like he did in the second half against Leeds than he usually does. If he wants to learn how to play inside forward he should look at Raphina at Leeds. However, I agree if there is a LB to support him like Manquilo did against Leeds, we could see the best of ASM and hopefully Targett can do that because Dummett has no offensive output.

To be fair, you couldn't do a more perfect job to screw Everton over than Rafa did (not that he meant it, it's just the way happens sometimes). Let's look back: - Rafa hired and given no transfer budget - Bought a gem in Gray - Got off to a flyer and all was good - Results got worse and then they were starting to go from top 4 to bottom 4 - Just when the board was thinking about the sack, he gets a fluke win over Arsenal (90th min long shot from Gray) and Everton board appeased - Falls out with their best LB (Digne), sells him and buys 2 unproven full backs - 'Wastes' one loan slot on El Gazhi - Results go from bad to worse and lose to Norwich dragging them into the mire - Sacked the following day New manager comes in with best LB and one loan slot gone, the latter meant they may pay up to £40m for Alli! Like I said, I don't think Rafa meant any of this and DCL being injured as well as some other key players hurt Everton, but the position Lampard is in now is pretty tricky and so the meme "Agent Rafa" was born. From a Newcastle point of view, I'm grateful for what Rafa did but am now looking forward. Hope Howe and co can galvanise the team to start picking up wins as we need them fast.

He's a very good LB in EPL. I wouldn't rate him worse than 7/10 but I know why some people don't rate him. However, Villa fans voted him their player of the season last year beating out the likes of Grealish, Watkins, Mcginn etc. It's a bit like how most of the world think Joelinton is completely useless but most toon fans know he's now a decent CM now albeit still needs to improve in the final third. All of my ratings are just guesses, time will tell. Wood could end up getting 10 goals! [which I would love]

Personally, For the signings: Trippier: 9/10 - other than him being 31 a great signing. CL ready. Wood: 5/10 - expensive and wrong side of 30. He's someone we need though and there weren't many options. Weghorst is obviously a better striker but apparently has attitude issues too - still annoyed Burnley got him because Weghorst will get 5-10 goals I recon Guimaraes: 10/10 - marquee signing, ticks all the right boxes, good age and CL ready, Burn: 7/10 - solid CB. Could be an aerial threat but suprising doesn't score much (2 in last 4 seasons with Brighton). Left footed and can play ball out so good short term option/ squad player. Newcastle fan is a plus Targett: 8/10 - quality EPL LB. Good supply and as good as we could hope for. Not quite CL ready hence lower rating than Trippier and Guimaraes but could be a massive coup for us. Overall 7.5/10 window for me. -1 for no marquee CB e.g. Botman, Carlos etc -1 for no reliable goal scorer e.g. Zapata -0.5 No extra attack loaned e.g. Lingard, Alli etc However, I will give PIF and co 10/10 for effort and 10/10 compared to previous regime. Pre PIF I would bite your hand off at this, being a little greedy now as I want to be as ambitious as City and PSG were but just hope we avoid relegation.

I agree. Zapata seems out of the question as they would need a striker. Apparently they want Origi but there's no time for them to get their deal done.

I would normally agree but the deal is crazy. Apparently it's a FREE transfer with £20m after 20 games played and £20m performance related pay. If Everton get relegated, they won't be playing him 20 games. I doubt we can swoop in, but a loan with obligation to buy would probably be enough for Levy to accept and hand choice over to player. But seeing how he is having a medical, I think it's too late.

We wouldn't get a medical done today. IF we sign anyone now we would just get the paper work done and say "subject to medical" in the legal documents. As long as paper work is submitted before 11pm tonight we can register them.

Brentford offered the asking price (£20m) but Forest are refusing to sell. They [Forest] are gambling they'll make the EPL with him but they just lost to Cardiff 2-1 on the weekend. If they don't get promoted then he'll leave for less than £20m as he'd only have 12 months left on his contract.

This is what the media has reported so take it with a grain of salt (you can google for more info): 1. Lingard didn't want to come to us on loan last year because of location (went to West Ham) 2. Didn't want to come to us at the start of the window 3. Kieran Trippier who became good friends with him whilst they were in the England squad (apparently they are from the same/ similar area) convinced to come on loan 4. Ragnirick agreed but Joel Glazer (son of Manure owner) wants to fleece us with survival fee 5. On/ off saga with fee as you've seen 6. Lingard pleads to leave and now it's up to Manure board to agree on price That's the gist of what's going on according to the media - again there are probably some discrepancies (because of media inaccuracies) but overall picture is about right - Lingard wants loan but Manure pricing others out

Someone was asking why not jut pay the £15m or whatever to buy Lingard outright now with a relegation release clause. I was explaining why Lingard doesn't want/ won't take that option and the reason is not because of money but lifestyle.

It's not a pay day as some have said, otherwise we can just offer him the money. It's lifestyle, he likes clubs etc and London suits him more than Newcastle. He's only giving us a chance because Kieran Trippier convinced him. His plans are simple, 6 months at Newcastle and then decide if he likes it here or would prefer London or somewhere else. If he signed and we stay up, he could be unhappy off the field and that's why he didn't want to sign until he sees what Newcastle is like.