Alexander Isak - International C*nt

[Rich]

Just now, r0cafella said:

Yeah it's the stuff sold every damn transfer 

Douglas effectively runs PR for us at this point.

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, Stifler said:

He kept getting robbed for things like watches and other small personal items that had just bought. They knew exactly where these items were hidden in the house, and that they would be there when he was out, I mean who the fuck buys a brand new watch costing thousands and doesn’t wear it outside and leaves it in the house?

His agent has massive ties to organised crime both in Sweden and across Europe.

Are you seriously suggesting that it wasn’t an inside job?

You should inform the authorities 

[NUFC_Chris]

We needed him gone but I feel allowing the move rewards both Liverpool and Isak for the underhand way they’ve gone about it. It leaves a bitter taste, and it will not be forgotten.

[Stifler]

1 minute ago, gbandit said:

Calm down man

There is no way it wasn’t an inside job, especially as it was him who was repeatedly targeted as well.

[The College Dropout]

4 minutes ago, Shadow Puppets said:

As has been proven time and time again, only time will tell if it turns into good business.
 

I, personally, truly don’t care that he’s going or that the fee is “only £130m”. It’s still a massive fee.

 

Wissa or Strand Larsen + Nick W is absolutely a risk, but has every chance of being a master stoke 12 months down the line.

 

As always, this place breeds negativity, which is not really part of my personality, so I find some of the reactions in here really really over dramatic.

 

Just see what happens.

The premise of major sales is that it regenerates building the squad with quality. This won’t have done that we’ve just replaced the player. That might be successful and that’s cool.  But due to selling fairly cheap and buying high we’ll not have used the money for a rebuild.  As we’ve panic bought and sold. 

[BGRM]

It's just mad. Footballers like Isak (and to some extent Wissa) should be role models for young boys and girls. What fucking message does this all send out to them? Throw your toys out of the pram, take a hissy fit and you will get your wishes. It's just disgusting really. 

 

 

Edited September 1, 2025 by BGRM

[Pandamninator]

4 minutes ago, Stifler said:

He kept getting robbed for things like watches and other small personal items that had just bought. They knew exactly where these items were hidden in the house, and that they would be there when he was out, I mean who the fuck buys a brand new watch costing thousands and doesn’t wear it outside and leaves it in the house?

His agent has massive ties to organised crime both in Sweden and across Europe.

Are you seriously suggesting that it wasn’t an inside job?

 

Guy is getting 10% of Isak, but going to risk it all for a fucking watch and an iPad.

[toon25]

He got what he wanted. That sticks in the throat tbh, irrespective of the rationale behind getting rid of him 

[Nucasol]

5 minutes ago, Rich said:

Bingo. Would still believe over TCD any day of the week out of principle.

Classic Douglas. Get some know-nowt cunt to spout off to fill his word count and offer nothing of value.

[Vinny Green Balls]

37 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Really? At the very least there would have been a risk of it happening (like I said).

 

And not sure on being bullied. Bullied would've been a sale straight off the bat before we've got our own ducks in a row, imo. We might have another signing lined up which has initiated this acceptance otherwise I dunno why it didn't break the second Woltemade was done.

We didn't get all of our duck in a row. We couldn't even live up to the conditions of our statement, unless we really do have a signing lined up. 

[The College Dropout]

7 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

We’ll still have UCL money coming in, PL and sponsorship flowing in on top of the Isak cash.

That’s outside of the Isak cash though.  
 

The standalone benefit is the Isak cash is Nick W and JSL/Wissa. That’s poor. 

[andycap]

4 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Isak was amortised for 6 years at 60m. He played 3 season so has a book value of £30m or so.  Wages at about £5m per year.  
 

So the PSR headroom for a £130m sale is about £95/100m.  
 

Nick W signed for £70m and can be amortised over 5 years. £14m per year. Then let’s say £6m in wages for such a fee. That’s £20m per year and £60m over the next 3 years.  JSL/Wissa for £55m over 5 years = £11m per year and let’s say £4m in wages. £15m per year. £45m over the next 3. 
 

 

That’s all the Isak PSR headroom spent. 
 

Everything else aye we could sign anyway. 
 

We don’t have a large sales funnel like the cartel clubs.  I don’t see an easy £130m we can sell every year like they can. 

How do you know that the woltemade deal wasn't within our psr limits before isak was sold? 

[Pilko]

4 minutes ago, Stifler said:

He kept getting robbed for things like watches and other small personal items that had just bought. They knew exactly where these items were hidden in the house, and that they would be there when he was out, I mean who the fuck buys a brand new watch costing thousands and doesn’t wear it outside and leaves it in the house?

His agent has massive ties to organised crime both in Sweden and across Europe.

Are you seriously suggesting that it wasn’t an inside job?

 

These large European organised crime groups definitely spend most of their time nicking watches and jewellery from people's houses when they're out. There's just no money in the drugs or arms trade anymore. Think you might be onto yet another winner of a post here Stifler.

[Nucasol]

1 minute ago, Vinny Green Balls said:

We didn't get all of our duck in a row. We couldn't even live up to the conditions of our statement, unless we really do have a signing lined up. 

This. Big and tough talk in the press leaking but just throw it all out the window at the finish. I’ll judge at 7pm but we’ve got some absolute blaggers at the heart of the club.

[Shadow Puppets]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

The premise of major sales is that it regenerates building the squad with quality. This won’t have done that we’ve just replaced the player. That might be successful and that’s cool.  But due to selling fairly cheap and buying high we’ll not have used the money for a rebuild.  As we’ve panic bought and sold. 

You’re shouting about something you have little knowledge of, as things stand, though 🤷‍♂️

 

We don’t know what will happen today, and how that will play out over the season. 
 

I just can’t be done with the negativity. We’re one good striker away from the squad looking really good and balanced, in my opinion. If that happens today, fantastic… it’ll have been a great window IMO.

[The College Dropout]

8 minutes ago, Rich said:

‘Selling Alexander Isak is a medium-term “silver bullet” for Newcastle United’s financial outlook, freeing them up to potentially spend up to £250m on new players in future transfer windows.

 

That is the view of finance experts who believe the club’s first big sale since their 2021 takeover opens up “huge possibilities” for the next three to four trading periods.’

 

…

 

‘Due to the way the rules work – incoming signings are amortised over the length of their contracts – this gives Newcastle the capacity to make five £50m signings if they are penning five-year contracts.

 

“It would certainly be a game-changer,” Wilson says. “It gives them flexibility and headroom because any players they bring in are amortised over the length of their contracts. 

 

“This isn’t a case of bringing in, say, £120m or £130m for Isak and then you can only spend the same amount. Your capacity to spend is increased over a number of years. We know because of their revenue levels it’s difficult to spend heavily at the moment but this does unlock that, to an extent.

 

“Newcastle fans won’t want to hear it but they need to accept that to progress they have to be a trading club for a few years – buy them cheap, sell them high. 

 

“It might mean your prized assets go but the reality is you can buy three or four very good players for the value Isak brings in and it has a material impact on the future.”’

This isn’t really true. 
 

We could sign 5 £50m players and that would be fine for 1 season.  The following season we would have PSR costs of about £70-£90m to fund again.  The Isak money would be gone.  
 

One off sales aren’t that great in any shape. Unless that sale is so great it can fund multiple signings over multiple years. You need recurring sales revenue. 

[Steve Charlton]

Getting the delousing experts in is the first thing the club should do today

[Menace]

10 minutes ago, Stifler said:

He kept getting robbed for things like watches and other small personal items that had just bought. They knew exactly where these items were hidden in the house, and that they would be there when he was out, I mean who the fuck buys a brand new watch costing thousands and doesn’t wear it outside and leaves it in the house?

His agent has massive ties to organised crime both in Sweden and across Europe.

Are you seriously suggesting that it wasn’t an inside job?

 

His multimillion pound agent set Isak up to get robbed for 50 grand

 

Right.

[stozo]

16 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

Every club will know that too and if selling will add £10+million to the price.

It’s just the same as this window. This window we’ve operated largely restriction free because of a circa. £40m PSR profit on Almiron, Kelly and Longstaff. The Isak sale probably gives us another two summers where we could buy four quality players (e.g. Elanga, Thiaw, Ramsey and Woltemade) without needing to make major sales. 

[Shadow Puppets]

2 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

That’s outside of the Isak cash though.  
 

The standalone benefit is the Isak cash is Nick W and JSL/Wissa. That’s poor. 

Errr… one of the two purchases has very little to do with the Isak money, though. We were always going to spend £50m ish on a striker this summer, and had the budget to do it, regardless of the Isak money.

 

So in theory Isak going for £130m, and us signing a striker today for £50-£60m still leaves plenty for the future?

[Terraloon]

10 minutes ago, Ghandis Flip-Flop said:

No, that’s widely been debunked. There are court cases challenging some of this stuff, but I doubt Liverpool would’ve been keen on him blowing up the £300m+ of investment this summer either

 
if me memory serves me correctly he is 25 years old and signed his current contract with you in 22/23 so at the end of season 24/25 he was under 28 and his contract had run for three years ( all football contracts have an end date of 30/6)

 

Had he within 15 days of your last game of the season (25 May?) Made the club aware he wanted to end his contract then he could , and I say could not would, have torn up his contract

 

There is a very rarely used clause in FIFAs Articles that came about because of a Scottish player . 
 

In effect a player who below the age of 28 can after 3 years of their contract and  over 28 after 2 years , can buy themselves out of their contract and fulfils the description of leaving outside the protected period and with sporting just cause.

 

Whilst no fee would be payable at present there isn’t any fee payable but compensation would be payable . At the moment there is a joint and several liability held by the player and any club he signs for. There is as you say court cases going on in this regard and the European Courts have ruled that the current way compensation is calculated and by whom isn’t in accord with EU law. 
 

FIFA will have to adapt but the changes could well be only relevant in the EU . Some have said that the values Iberian clubs have to insert in players contracts may be the answer. 
 

What we do know currently compensation wouldn’t be close to any fee that you would normally expect nor is there any set formula that CAS , who are at present the final decision maker .

 

Sorry about the long post but you are right as of now because no notice was given but wrong that it can’t happen 

 

 

 

[Boey_Jarton]

13 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

No but we won’t.  We’ll make £100m/105m in PSR headroom available to us over 3 years. That will be taken up entirely by Nick W and the second striker. Nick W will cost £20m per season.  The second guy about £15m per season if they cost £50-60m. Thats all the PSR headroom gone over 3 years. 
 

We don’t have an easy £125m to sell next season so we can’t spend it all in one PSR season.  We won’t have the funds to pay for years 2 and 3.  

The main reason we are not in a place to fully benefit from this situation from a PSR perspective is the need to replace two strikers.

 

Allowing strikers to age (Wilson) and retire with no residual value is expensive. 

 

 

[Vinny Green Balls]

This PSR spreadsheet wanking is far beyond tedious at this point.

[Mattoon]

Quite ironic that a rat should join the bin dippers

[r0cafella]

Just now, Shadow Puppets said:

Errr… one of the two purchases has very little to do with the Isak money, though. We were always going to spend £50m ish on a striker this summer, and had the budget to do it, regardless of the Isak money.

 

So in theory Isak going for £130m, and us signing a striker today for £50-£60m still leaves plenty for the future?

So your saying our transfer budget this summer was 175m?