Alexander Isak - International C*nt

[Jackie Broon]

1 minute ago, healthyaddiction said:

Obviously people rightly point out related party transactions don't count under uefa rules. But am I not right in saying transfers between clubs in a multi club model do. So could we not just decide al hilal and nufc are part of a multi club model?

 

I don't think that is right, the UEFA rules don't allow infrastructure sales, like Chelsea's hotel, to be included in income for FFP but I think they're less restrictive than the PL's rules for other related party transactions (or associated party transactions as the PL defines them).

[Ronson333]

19 minutes ago, huss9 said:

It's quite clear what Liverpool are doing.

Told isak and his agent to hang in there.

We buy wissa and sesko. 

They bid 100m for isak as we can't afford to keep all of them.

 

Basically we now can't buy sesko until Liverpool stump up for isak.

 

#reservoirdogsscene

Don’t ever play poker

[SUPERTOON]

11 minutes ago, JT24 said:

What's the real reason though?

Andy Howe ?

[healthyaddiction]

Just now, Jackie Broon said:

 

I don't think that is right, the UEFA rules don't allow infrastructure sales, like Chelsea's hotel, to be included in income for FFP but I think they're less restrictive than the PL's rules for other related party transactions (or associated party transactions as the PL defines them).

Fair enough.

[gdm]

5 minutes ago, Wandy said:

 

They dont disregard it, as far as I'm aware anyway. You just get fined as punishment.

Am I losing my mind here? Why would they get a punishment if they don’t disregard it ?

[wyn davies]

Club hierarchy adamant he's not going for less than £150m, so whomever comes in are gonna have to cough up.

[gdm]

3 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

I don't think that is right, the UEFA rules don't allow infrastructure sales, like Chelsea's hotel, to be included in income for FFP but I think they're less restrictive than the PL's rules for other related party transactions (or associated party transactions as the PL defines them).

From what I can see there is nothing stopping two clubs with the same owners transferring between themselves. UEFA will only step in if the transfer fee is inflated which it won’t be 

[PauloGeordio]

Just now, wyn davies said:

Club hierarchy adamant he's not going for less than £150m, so whomever comes in are gonna have to cough up.

So new contract and he goes next season.

[JT24]

2 minutes ago, wyn davies said:

Club hierarchy adamant he's not going for less than £150m, so whomever comes in are gonna have to cough up.

Club hierarchy were also adamant he's not for sale and here we are with the same club hierarchy talking about selling them to a team they also own.

 

You'll forgive me if I don't quite believe them.

 

 

Edited July 25, 2025 by JT24

[Wandy]

2 minutes ago, gdm said:

Am I losing my mind here? Why would they get a punishment if they don’t disregard it ?

 

I mean, eufa would allow the transfer fee to be paid to us etc, but we'd then get a fine for breaking the related party rules. Which again sounds trivial but I just dont think PIF would break any kind of rule. 

 

 

[Wandy]

2 minutes ago, gdm said:

From what I can see there is nothing stopping two clubs with the same owners transferring between themselves. UEFA will only step in if the transfer fee is inflated which it won’t be 

 

Aye thats what I meant, I thought it would be inflated. You think eufa will value Isak at £150m?

[Belfast Boy]

Can someone summarize who determines fair market value and how?

 

Liverpool have already made it very clear they are willing to start talking at £120million so it must be above that. Maybe a Saudi bid of £130million is a tactic to keep them interested and build a fair price rather than blow them out the water and be told it's too much to count?

[JT24]

Just now, Wandy said:

 

I mean, eufa would allow the transfer fee to be paid to us etc, but we'd then get a fine for breaking the related party rules. Which again sounds trivial but I just dont think PIF would break any kind of rule. 

 

 

We'd get a fine because we are over the permitted amount for UEFA FFP. Similar to Chelsea and Villa were, they paid a fine and I think a settlement was they had to make a certain amount on player sales?

[Kooiman]

Liverpool fans advocating playing funny buggars with a contract to get a player? Well slap my arse and call me Trent, I never thought they'd stoop so low. 

[gdm]

3 minutes ago, Wandy said:

 

Aye thats what I meant, I thought it would be inflated. You think eufa will value Isak at £150m?

I think it’s widely accepted in football he’s worth between £130m & £150m I don’t think it would be an issue 

 

 

Edited July 25, 2025 by gdm

[Wandy]

Just now, gdm said:

I think it’s widely accept in football he’s worth between £130m & £150m 

 

You think? Not so sure myself. Just cos Liverpool offered 120m doesnt mean eufa will agree with that kind of value.

[The Prophet]

1 minute ago, Kooiman said:

Liverpool fans advocating playing funny buggars with a contract to get a player? Well slap my arse and call me Trent, I never thought they'd stoop so low. 

 

I genuinely thought Arsenal fans might overtake them in the cunt stakes, but they're just the pretenders. Liverpool will always be the OG cunts, it's not even a contest.

[Kooiman]

Just now, The Prophet said:

 

I genuinely thought Arsenal fans might overtake them in the cunt stakes, but they're just the pretenders. Liverpool will always be the OG cunts, it's not even a contest.

Every football fan should see the special in their club, but the second you start pushing that as your 'brand' or 'identity' you slip into dangerous territory. They may no longer be living on past glories, but anyone that's been to Anfield knows the volume button doesn't always work. 

[gdm]

1 minute ago, Wandy said:

 

You think? Not so sure myself. Just cos Liverpool offered 120m doesnt mean eufa will agree with that kind of value.

Wirtz was £120m or whatever it was what makes him worth that and Isak not work £130m for example. 

[Jackie Broon]

8 minutes ago, Wandy said:

 

I mean, eufa would allow the transfer fee to be paid to us etc, but we'd then get a fine for breaking the related party rules. Which again sounds trivial but I just dont think PIF would break any kind of rule. 

 

 

 

The related party transaction rules only require that the transaction is a fair market value, UEFA are not going to dispute that £130m is FMV. 

 

 

Edited July 25, 2025 by Jackie Broon

[duo]

1 hour ago, JT24 said:

Unsettle him and then don’t bid because you’re skint as fuck? 

They need to shift Nunez and ney one wants him - unless PIF bail them out he is going no where 

[Dava1892]

1 hour ago, RodneyCisse said:

All our targets have gone to bigger clubs, unless we’re all being naive here.

From a Newcastle point of view we’ve been flying the past few seasons, in my opinion more than Chelsea for example, we’ve won a trophy and bettered them. They just beat us to players though. Need to improve

[Pearljam10]

Hope PIF pretends to submit a bid on Nunez, then withdraws it at the last minute

 

 

Edited July 25, 2025 by Pearljam10

[RodneyCisse]

1 minute ago, Dava1892 said:

From a Newcastle point of view we’ve been flying the past few seasons, in my opinion more than Chelsea for example, we’ve won a trophy and bettered them. They just beat us to players though. Need to improve

I said bigger, not better.

 

Because they’re bigger and have 15+ years of growth on us, they can offer our targets 100k more a week.

[Toonpack]

4 minutes ago, RodneyCisse said:

I said bigger, not better.

 

Because they’re bigger and have 15+ years of growth on us, they can offer our targets 100k more a week.

 

50 years growth, they were financially doped in the 60's/70's made them what they are.

 

Edit - oops thought you meant the scouse

 

 

Edited July 25, 2025 by Toonpack