Keegans Export

Just a comparison of the current MCFC complex with the proposed area next to the Racecourse.

Not sure if I'm misunderstanding here, but £20 is too much but £35 for two games (£17.50) is decent?

Adjusted for inflation, thats £30/£20 today

I think the reason the £80-90m budget is probably accurate is essentially because many of the players we really want are currently CL-standard and want to play CL (or at least European) football. Obviously there are going to be exceptions like Trippier, Bruno & Botman but if we have our hearts set on the likes of Osimhen and Diaby then we're just going to have to wait. If I had to guess what our overarching strategy is, I'd say it's try and sneak into Europe with as little outlay as possible, then be prepared to spend big should those dream targets start to show interest in coming aboard down the line. We'd be in a better position to do that (FFP-wise) if we haven't spent a load of cash on players we like, but don't love.

@JonBez comesock is right though, it doesn't really matter what they want. The rules have been laid down specifically to stop an obscenely wealthy owner from upsetting the apple cart.

Broja wouldn't need to be named in the 25 either would he, if he's only 20? There are players I'd have above him on my shortlist but if its in the £20-25m mark I think it would be decent business. Still, this week will be all about outgoings I reckon. Need to start shifting some deadwood.

Hendrick is on £50k apparently. Depends on which sources you trust but supposedly Gayle, Clark, Richie are all on £40k plus.

I'd take Sarr (18 G&A, 50 games) or Harrison (25 G&A, 71 games) on the basis that they have both been productive in poor teams in the Premier League, rather than a top team in a (in my opinion) poorer league. Nobody is looking at our forwards and thinking "We need more assists" Also, I'm sure you didn't mean it but that last sentence makes you sound pretty condescending.

Goals >>> assists If you had two wingers, one had 12 goals & 3 assists, the other had 3 goals & 12 assists, which one is going to demand the big transfer fee?

If we need goals from RW the stats suggest he isn't the guy. Six seasons at Porto and he hasn't scored more than three in a season. Sarr would be my pick, assuming the £35m is roughly accurate. He suffers because he's a known quantity, not some shiny new thing from abroad with an impressive selection of YouTube highlights videos.

I'm not really into bald men, but hey, whatever floats your boat

I'm convinced either the RW, CF or CM will be a loan. Makes sense that we are waiting to see what business is done elsewhere and who may end up available that isn't currently. Agree with @The Prophet - Diaby will be playing CL football next season, at Leverkusen or elsewhere.

I don't think being "content" with our CM is an outrageous position in fairness. We've got our best player (Bruno) and our POTS (Joelinton) in there. I'd be happier with those two plus Shelvey/Willock/Longstaff than I would see us playing Fraser/Almiron on one wing and Wood as the only backup to Wilson. If we get good players at RW and striker that's a solid window and I'd back us to achieve the lower-end of our expectations (8th/9th). More quality at CM would obviously improve us (add Eriksen to RW & striker and I reckon we could really push 6th/7th) but I can see why that's third on the list after the other two positions.

There are limits to how many sponsors you can have and where.

If there is/was a problem with the medical why are the club confirming the deal on Twitter ?

Contract expires at the end of this coming season according to Transfermarkt

Popped into the club shop today. Quality of the material is definitely superior to the Puma kits I have (11/12 and 12/13) but not as good as the heritage kit (or whatever it was called) they did last season. Crest stitching is fine. Not as good as the retro/remake '96 away kit but still prefer it to the stick-on badges we've had. The white kit is a beauty. You can just about make out the "map", I think if it was any more obvious it wouldn't look as neat & clean.

I'm not sure a 30-year-old who scored 26 goals between 19/20 and 20/21 is comparable to 51-year-old with two dodgy knees who hasn't played professional football for 17 years

Well he scored 10, 10, 14 & 12 in the four seasons before he joined us so...?

If those figures are accurate, it gives us a good idea of what constitutes "fair market value" for us currently - still behind the very top deals, but not by much.

Just on the topic of our transfer budget - now I'm not saying this is the case, just partly playing devils advocate and partly trying to better understand how our ownership model works. Could it be that our issue is not entirely FFP but essentially cash in the bank? We know PIF have access to huge funds. The Reuben's are very wealthy but that's more asset-heavy. We don't know how much available capital Staveley/PCP have. I wonder whether the issue isn't the Saudi's funding their 80%, but Staveley funding her 10%. As I understand it, if the Saudi's invest £80m, the Reuben's and Staveley will have to chip in £10m each. Is that how it works? If so, that would also explain why we are trying to spread transfer fees out and avoiding lump sums (because we know that doesn't make a difference to the FFP calculations). Hopefully someone can enlighten me on this.

"Newcastle's new shirt sponsorship deal with PIF is worth £200m per season and will see their home, away and third kits emblazoned with 'Fuck Richard Masters'"

Hopefully at an extortionate rate

"Keep budget expectations realistic" could be for us as fans, or for selling clubs...

The last sentence of the last Tweet sums it up - "As always, it is likely to benefit the richest the most"