Alexander Isak - International C*nt

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Just now, lovejoy said:

Would depend how we spent it. 
 

it would put us in a terrible negotiating position for replacements though.

Think you’d have to spend the bulk of the Isak fee to get anywhere near a replacement anyway. 

[junkhead]

1 minute ago, duo said:

This is a test for PIF more than anyone else - if they really want us to be No.1 how they handle this for me is a bit of a sliding doors moment.  

 

Don't think anybody from PIF is involved in micro-decisions like this at the club right now. So my guess is they'll continue to do nothing which kinda puts the ball is in Isak's court.

[sushimonster85]

This is the main reason we can't sell him. There's no way to replace him. At least not a way that doesn't involve having to make big changes to how we play, which will likely need spending in other areas as well as striker.

[duo]

21 minutes ago, junkhead said:

 

Don't think anybody from PIF is involved in micro-decisions like this at the club right now. So my guess is they'll continue to do nothing which kinda puts the ball is in Isak's court.

You say that but looking at the Amazon doc they seemingly have to approve every bid and provide the ceiling of how much they are willing to pay.

 

 

Edited July 20, 2025 by duo

[Sibierski]

5 minutes ago, loki679 said:

 

£100m cash plus Ramos?

Hell no. New deal and 2 more seasons out of him before we reach 3 years left on his deal again is ideal scenario for me. Club either has progressed by then and he wants to stay long term, or we are similar and we can part ways on good terms and a very good fee.

[junkhead]

44 minutes ago, duo said:

You say that but looking at the Amazon doc they seemingly have to approved every bid and provide the ceiling of how much they are willing to pay.

 

Tbf you have a point. Imo, that's what Eddie was referring to towards the end of the season when he said we needed to act fast. 

 

And losing one of the best strikers is hardly a "micro decision", but I fear it is for Rumayyan.

 

 

Edited July 20, 2025 by junkhead

[gdm]

7 minutes ago, junkhead said:

 

Don't think anybody from PIF is involved in micro-decisions like this at the club right now. So my guess is they'll continue to do nothing which kinda puts the ball is in Isak's court.

I think this is why Howe’s made these comments. 

[junkhead]

Just now, gdm said:

I think this is why Howe’s made these comments. 

 

Yeah, I know we sometimes go too far with the etymology analysis on Eddie. But the fucker NEVER says anything that could endanger the position of the club or even generate more noise like this without good reason.

[Gawalls]

17 minutes ago, Dr Venkman said:

take Matt Targetts wages when his contract is up as we never play him anyway and he’s no loss, sit Isak down and negotiate his contract, offering him this much more.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

5 minutes ago, junkhead said:

 

Tbf you have a point. Imo, that's what Eddie was referring to towards the end of the season when he said we needed to act fast. 

 

And losing one of the best strikers strikers is hardly a "micro decision", but I fear it is for Rumayyan.

Wasn’t it already reported that he stepped in say Isak’s not for sale? 

[WinstonFC]

49 minutes ago, Goldbossed said:

Wirtz is a midfielder, you’ve not got Ekitike there. Liverpool have raised £55mil so far in sales. Add Elliott £40mil, Nunez £60mil, Diaz £60mil, Morton £15mil, Tsimikas £10mil. Thats £240mil in total sales which almost covers entire spend including Ekitike. They can spend another £200mil on top to get Isak and Guehi 

 

 

 

Wirtz is down as a forward on Liverpool website that's what it's copied from i know hes a mid. Not all of those sales are pure profit and its still more outgoings than incomings.

[junkhead]

Just now, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Wasn’t it already reported that he stepped in say Isak’s not for sale? 

 

Haven't seen any reliable quotes. I doubt he knows the transfer window is open.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Just now, junkhead said:

 

Haven't seen any reliable quotes. I doubt he knows the transfer window is open.

Let’s hope he does, isn’t he our chairman?

[Keegans Export]

27 minutes ago, Goldbossed said:

That’s countered by any new players that would come in. Looking at 100k plus wages for them. You then factor in that the club will be trying to tie down the likes of Tonali, Livramento and Hall to new contracts as soon as possible 

Sorry, what I mean is that extending/increasing Isak's contract doesn't necessarily have to have any substantial impact on the current expenditure on the accounts. Obviously new players are going to add to the expenditure, but if the net cost of extending Isak's contract is close to zero then it would have minimal impact on our incoming transfer business. 

 

Players wanting rises themselves is a different issue but one that we're going to have to deal with regardless. Isak is widely regarded as one of the best in the world and has two seasons of consistent production. Once we see that from the others then we can talk about parity. Having said that, assuming Isak is off next summer then that naturally creates some room in terms of wages and PSR.

[Ikon]

Not exactly the noise you want just before the season. 

[Goldbossed]

20 minutes ago, WinstonFC said:

Wirtz is down as a forward on Liverpool website that's what it's copied from i know hes a mid. Not all of those sales are pure profit and it’s still more outgoings than incomings.

Trent, Kelleher, Quansah, Elliott, and Tyler Morton are all home grown. That’s over £100mil that helps with PSR 

[duo]

Interesting comment from Eddie that makes me think whether this a destabilising tactic from Liverpool knowing we are not interested in selling  -

 

“Has there been any approach for Alex? No, there's been no formal approach."

[TheBrownBottle]

1 hour ago, Goldbossed said:

Newcastle can’t afford to give him a “ decent wage rise” because of PSR. The release clause you’ve quoted is also what he would go for anyway. 

They absolutely can - even the reduced overhead of the reamortised transfer fee would ‘zero cost’ from a PSR perspective.

 

NUFC signed Isak in the 22/23 season for £63m.  So that means £63m / 5 =£12.6m per season amortisation

 

We’re now in 25/26 - so three seasons have already been amortised; so 3 * £12.6m = £37.8m.  So the new five year deal would be £37.8m / 5 = £7.56m amortisation per year.

 

£12.6m - £7.56m = £5.04m difference.  So NUFC could give Isak an extra £100k per week and our PSR wouldn’t move at all. 

[r0cafella]

2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

They absolutely can - even the reduced overhead of the reamortised transfer fee would ‘zero cost’ from a PSR perspective.

 

NUFC signed Isak in the 22/23 season for £63m.  So that means £63m / 5 =£12.6m per season amortisation

 

We’re now in 25/26 - so three seasons have already been amortised; so 3 * £12.6m = £37.8m.  So the new five year deal would be £37.8m / 5 = £7.56m amortisation per year.

 

£12.6m - £7.56m = £5.04m difference.  So NUFC could give Isak an extra £100k per week and our PSR wouldn’t move at all. 

What's why I said the can't give him a new contract in more money is expectation management and we want to sell. 

 

Really wasn't expecting us to sell this summer though

[junkhead]

20 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

Sorry, what I mean is that extending/increasing Isak's contract doesn't necessarily have to have any substantial impact on the current expenditure on the accounts. Obviously new players are going to add to the expenditure, but if the net cost of extending Isak's contract is close to zero then it would have minimal impact on our incoming transfer business. 

 

Players wanting rises themselves is a different issue but one that we're going to have to deal with regardless. Isak is widely regarded as one of the best in the world and has two seasons of consistent production. Once we see that from the others then we can talk about parity. Having said that, assuming Isak is off next summer then that naturally creates some room in terms of wages and PSR.

 

There's no doubt that the wage bill should continually rise (ideally while remaining structured) but a 70m contract extension, albeit amortised, is going to have an impact on our spending like.

 

If I have to guess, the main hurdle in any contract negotiations would be that that the "going rate" for such a top striker would probably be double of Bruno's salary and I doubt we'd do that, even for Isak. He might settle for lower ~200k wage with a fixed release clause in order to move next summer. But we don't need a new contract for that, so I understand why we've been reluctant so far. If Isak and his agents are putting out noises though, we'll have to make a decision.

 

 

Edited July 20, 2025 by junkhead

[Keegans Export]

2 minutes ago, junkhead said:

 

There's no doubt that the wage bill should continually rise (ideally while remaining structured) but a 70m contract extension, albeit amortised, is going to have an impact on our spending like.

 

If I have to guess, the main hurdle in any contract negotiations would be that that the "going rate" for such a top striker would probably be double of Bruno's salary and I doubt we'd do that, even for Isak. He might settle for lower ~200k wage with a fixed release clause in order to move next summer. But we don't need a new contract for that, so I understand why we've been reluctant so far. If Isak and Isak and his agent are putting out noises though, we'll have to make a decision.

I'm probably misunderstanding but where are you getting £70m from? 

[Yorkie]

Dunno about anyone else but I rather hope we beat Liverpool a couple of times next season.

[BennyBlanco]

It’s just dawned on me that we will probably get to keep him for another season/he may even sign an extension - and the top brass/arse licking journos will spin it to us that this is a good transfer window. So Ashley/Pardew/Llambias era it’s untrue🙈

[junkhead]

1 minute ago, Keegans Export said:

I'm probably misunderstanding but where are you getting £70m from? 

 

Yeah.. reading the calculation above, I might be wrong with how contract amortisation works but 280-300k on a week for five years is ~70m

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, BennyBlanco said:

It’s just dawned on me that we will probably get to keep him for another season/he may even sign an extension - and the top brass/arse licking journos will spin it to us that this is a good transfer window. So Ashley/Pardew/Llambias era it’s untrue🙈

 

In first with the 

 

 

Edited July 20, 2025 by AyeDubbleYoo