Jump to content

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, 80 said:

Yes, but if it was a sale of pure choice it would've been more beneficial to wait 24 hours and do it today - the first day of the new PSR period. That way we'd still feel the benefit of the profit in June 2027. As it is, that profit will expire in 25/26 - a straightforward negative for us.

 
True. The business is run on money as well as PSR rules though. We haven’t lost 68m down the back of a legal sofa, we now have it to spend. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Adam P said:

 
True. The business is run on money as well as PSR rules though. We haven’t lost 68m down the back of a legal sofa, we now have it to spend. 

That's fair enough, the money will be welcome, but it just would've been even more welcome 24 hours later is all, which looks like a smoking gun to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently City see Bruno as their priority.

 

If that's true, we are a bit fucked. It's the one club where I don't think we can deny Bruno the move.

 

Let's hope we stand firm on a big valuation, which sees them move on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If City come in, even for 80m we've got problems. Naturally Bruno will want the move and we will have to talk to them. We may get more money but the point is that we would lose Bruno.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

He doesnt want the move. He wants to be captain here, man. 

The newest addition to the Marvel Universe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, STM said:

If City come in, even for 80m we've got problems. Naturally Bruno will want the move and we will have to talk to them. We may get more money but the point is that we would lose Bruno.

 

Personally, if we've agreed to put a release clause in his contract (assuming it was Bruno's side pushing for it), nobody has met it within the well-publicised time limit, then a team has come in offering less than the amount even later in the window, I'd be a bit pissed off if the player started pushing for the move.

Link to post
Share on other sites

City will absolutely piss the league this season, Arsenal might run them close but only if they purchase a 20 goal striker.

Link to post
Share on other sites

City will absolutely piss the league this season, Arsenal might run them close but only if they purchase a 20 goal striker.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SUPERTOON said:

I reckon 70/80 million would do it.

I don’t think so. I think we would need the clause value at least. He’s got a long contract and they have form for paying out clauses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

He doesnt want the move. He wants to be captain here, man. 

I reckon so. I'm a bit nervous after the last few days, but it looks like we've cleared our decks successfully and I believe we've got room to do some pretty serious spending for the rest of this summer. I don't think he'd be trying to force his way out for a lowball offer in those circumstances, I think he's ready for another big season with us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with a lot of what you've said @80. The sales happening for 1 July strongly indicate that we needed Minteh, Anderson + at least +£1 to be confident of PSR compliance.

 

And we clearly SCRAMBLED to get there. The scramble can't have been the plan from January. We did the most "PSR Deadline Day" business out of everyone right? 3 transfers out basically. Like the actual transfer window, you would want to sort it earlier than later.

 

The thing that makes the most sense - in January - is selling Bruno for his release clause. That clears all PSR concerns and gives us some leeway to buy a player or two. We must've known getting good money for Almiron, Wilson & co. might prove difficult. That might've been the preferred route but the Bruno route might've been the most realistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I agree with a lot of what you've said @80. The sales happening for 1 July strongly indicate that we needed Minteh, Anderson + at least +£1 to be confident of PSR compliance.

 

And we clearly SCRAMBLED to get there. The scramble can't have been the plan from January. We did the most "PSR Deadline Day" business out of everyone right? 3 transfers out basically. Like the actual transfer window, you would want to sort it earlier than later.

 

The thing that makes the most sense - in January - is selling Bruno for his release clause. That clears all PSR concerns and gives us some leeway to buy a player or two. We must've known getting good money for Almiron, Wilson & co. might prove difficult. That might've been the preferred route but the Bruno route might've been the most realistic.

 

Well in that case I'm glad we didn't do it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted 3 hours ago

 

"Regardless of whether they had managed to get players out before June 30, Newcastle were always going to be able to spend from July 1 — but recouping more than £60million gives them a greater capacity to invest, as that permits breathing space across the new three-year rolling PSR period.

With 2021-22, the first season post-takeover, dropping off the books, that means a loss of £70.7m is removed from the calculation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, r0cafella said:

Nah if Bruno wants to leave we will sell that I’ve got no doubt. 

 

When the release clause was agreed with Bruno there would have been discussions to come to an agreement on the minimum value we would be willing to let him leave for, as well as that window of opportunity we had in place.

 

Even if Bruno did want to leave, I cannot imagine him forcing us to take less money, at an inconvenient time for us.

 

And so if they weren't willing to meet the clause during the window that was available, and think they can come in later for less money or even for equal the clause, it ain't happening.

 

The later they leave it, the greater the disruption to us, and so the higher the price above the £100 million clause.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...