The College Dropout Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 3 hours ago, Zero said: Even AV fucked it up as well, the Luiz sales obviously not part of their original plan. Why don’t just admit our management fucked it up as well? Some people here really can’t accept those that they like (the management/Howe etc) would make any error. Aye. I was saying Villa fucked up having to sell Luiz for cheap. It’s the same for having to sell Minteh now without a buy back. Im ok with the Anderson deal though. In retrospect I do think Plan A was selling Bruno with the release clause. This was the plan from January. Otherwise it doesn’t make sense not selling Tripps and co. when we had the chance. Selling Minteh and some others is the plan B. But there’s no way the club could’ve planned to sell Minteh specifically in August or Jan. he’s progressed faster than expected. I think it’s an Ok plan B. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 The big things now are clearing out those not on the next step of the trajectory to bolster the war chest - Wilson, Almiron, Targett, Dubravka, dare I say Tripps - and genuinely trying to get 1 or 2 youngsters in and around the team. Thinking Shahar, Harrison and Sanusi this season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawalls Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 There is other ways as well though - cutting down on outgoings, I know we have another year left on a lot of peoples contracts but we really need to get the likes of Fraser, Hayden and co off the books - maybe even just say to Man U “look you can have ashworth for 10m” as that also saves his wages and we can look for his replacement and tackle this with a full team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAK Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 (edited) Need to make good on those threats of legal action we made via Lee Charnley right after the takeover about self sponsorship. No other route to dramatically increase income. If big name sales are a possibility we’ll never catch up with the Cartel. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/2900252/2021/10/20/inside-incredible-premier-league-meeting-what-it-means-newcastle-beyond/# Edited June 30 by SAK Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 1 minute ago, Gawalls said: There is other ways as well though - cutting down on outgoings, I know we have another year left on a lot of peoples contracts but we really need to get the likes of Fraser, Hayden and co off the books - maybe even just say to Man U “look you can have ashworth for 10m” as that also saves his wages and we can look for his replacement and tackle this with a full team. Fraser we probably can get off the books - I’m sure Soton would take him for most. The likes of Hayden are a problem, because we’d either need to buy his contract out - which doesn’t resolve the problem - or subsidise his wages - which is less of a problem, but means those outgoings are still there. Building an academy which produces both saleable players and competent young players who can cover for the first team is another way around it - and the club does seem to be making big strides in that direction (though again, I sort of expected that a new training ground / academy would have been in the planning stage at least by now). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 15 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: Not quite - it’s not 5x spending. The problem has existed for some time - we’ve got around £100m of amortisation and £200m of wages on the books, with a likely income just above that. The new adidas deal will only offset the loss of CL money next season - and it isn’t clear that there is a lot of easy growth to come; some of us have bleated on for a while that the club is moving at a glacial pace re some of the low-hanging commercial fruit (training ground & kit sponsorships, for example). We’re nearing our ‘natural’ income ceiling at this point - so something needs to give if further growth is achievable. Lots of folks appear to get very upset at one obvious route - a new stadium. Otherwise, something needs to happen re the PL rules re related sponsorships etc, or were basically reaching the edge of what is ‘naturally’ achievable. Aye. Some people seem to think the first teenager window under new ownership ‘drops off’ now. It’s not the case as you’ve pointed out. there was a lot of ‘the club would never let this happen’ talk yesterday. But while the rules are the way they are this is the new normal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 All the player wages for Hendrick and the like won’t save us the 10s of millions we need. We need a consistent revenue close to Spurs. We can’t do that ‘naturally’. until then we’ll have to sell players we don’t want to sell to be PSR compliant. me and @r0cafella have been debating if PIF see us as a proper key sportswaahing exercise. They don’t seem to be trying that hard to destroy the cartel rules like others in the league. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 1 minute ago, The College Dropout said: Aye. Some people seem to think the first teenager window under new ownership ‘drops off’ now. It’s not the case as you’ve pointed out. there was a lot of ‘the club would never let this happen’ talk yesterday. But while the rules are the way they are this is the new normal. Yes - and I think that the club’s approach to this has been reasonable. I think it was worth the gamble in January to see if we could qualify for Europe - and we only narrowly missed out. There was some dismissive comments re UEFA cup / Conference League qualification, but ultimately they bring in revenues. And as many have pointed out, a club triggering Bruno’s clause would have meant no other sales were required. No-one did, so the club had to sell to others to meet PSR requirements. So they sold a kid they’d signed for that exact purpose, and a lad who is sixth choice for what seems to be his primary position. Doesn’t seem that bad an outcome to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 (edited) If these were the prices we got when we were staring down the barrel of a points deduction in 48 hours, I think it’s fair to assume that we would have gotten more in an open market with some leverage. It’s not necessarily a problem that we had to sell these players. The problem is that we put ourselves in a negotiating position where we absolutely had to. Edited June 30 by oldtype Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said: Yes - and I think that the club’s approach to this has been reasonable. I think it was worth the gamble in January to see if we could qualify for Europe - and we only narrowly missed out. There was some dismissive comments re UEFA cup / Conference League qualification, but ultimately they bring in revenues. And as many have pointed out, a club triggering Bruno’s clause would have meant no other sales were required. No-one did, so the club had to sell to others to meet PSR requirements. So they sold a kid they’d signed for that exact purpose, and a lad who is sixth choice for what seems to be his primary position. Doesn’t seem that bad an outcome to me. Fair point but it's been proven the PSR rules are definitely holding the league back, Man City will walk the league this season and Arsenal will piss second but it looks like even them are having to sell the stadium to comply. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said: Yes - and I think that the club’s approach to this has been reasonable. I think it was worth the gamble in January to see if we could qualify for Europe - and we only narrowly missed out. There was some dismissive comments re UEFA cup / Conference League qualification, but ultimately they bring in revenues. And as many have pointed out, a club triggering Bruno’s clause would have meant no other sales were required. No-one did, so the club had to sell to others to meet PSR requirements. So they sold a kid they’d signed for that exact purpose, and a lad who is sixth choice for what seems to be his primary position. Doesn’t seem that bad an outcome to me. I think the Bruno clause explains the January activity. As even if we finished in wurope we still would’ve needed to sell and we didn’t know at the time we could shift Minteh for £30m+. We’ve been fortunate with the Minteh situation. If not him we would’ve had to sell a purple. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt1892 Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 6 hours ago, r0cafella said: I do not believe we were offering Gordon to anyone. And won’t until I see some verified sources say so. There is an article about it on the BBC, who only post football news that they have been told that is correct, so would have got this information from Liverpool. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c720wjxzz9ro Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miggys First Goal Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 Fuck this shit. Fuck the cartel six. Fuck the PL. Fuck UEFA. Fuck the entire system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Checko Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 (edited) 19 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: All the player wages for Hendrick and the like won’t save us the 10s of millions we need. We need a consistent revenue close to Spurs. We can’t do that ‘naturally’. until then we’ll have to sell players we don’t want to sell to be PSR compliant. me and @r0cafella have been debating if PIF see us as a proper key sportswaahing exercise. They don’t seem to be trying that hard to destroy the cartel rules like others in the league. Agree on the revenue. Spuds' commercial revenue is big. Plus they make a lot more from matchday as well. Re: destroying the rules - I suspect if our owners came in and immediately went 'c'mon everyone let's get rid of these rules so we can massively outspend all you motherfuckers' there might be some pushback. The optics of them coming in and threatening legal challenges etc. wouldn't be good. Edited June 30 by Checko Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 12 hours ago, Optimistic Nut said: Posters like you really are Grade A pricks. Been negative since day one. Prick. No need for the emotional outbursts and insults. You would talk to me nicely IRL so behave yourself behind that screen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 Just now, Checko said: Agree on the revenue. Spuds' commercial revenue is big. Plus they make a lot more from matchday as well. Re: destroying the rules - I suspect if our owners came in and immediately went 'c'mon everyone let's get rid of these rules so we can massively outspend all you motherfuckers' there might be some pushback. The optics of them coming in and threatening legal challenges etc. wouldn't be good. Second point. It’s been 2.5 years now. And others are saying it and pushing it. There’s no indication our ownership have any desire to change the status quo or circumvent it. We might need to sell a couple purples and finish 11th before that happens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 4 minutes ago, Checko said: Agree on the revenue. Spuds' commercial revenue is big. Plus they make a lot more from matchday as well. Not going to happen whilst the handwringing around leaving SJP is still going on. Usual argument of “well Chelsea’s ground is only 40k and they still compete” whilst having 20 years of turbo charged financial doping to build a world class squad, academy and revenue streams. If people want to complete them sacrifices will need to be made - be that players or the stadium. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 The optics aren’t good for city. But they don’t care. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 29 minutes ago, Miggys First Goal said: Fuck this shit. Fuck the cartel six. Fuck the PL. Fuck UEFA. Fuck the entire system. If the £35m for Anderson deal is true, I think we might just have done all of the above. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
astraguy Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 What other clubs are fucked by the psr deadline then? Seems it's just us in a rush before tomorrow Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 I’d like to thank the Premier League for achieving exactly the opposite of what they set out to do. They’ve managed to overheat transfer fees even further than they previously could have imagined. Congratulations to PSR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE27 Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 (edited) 3 minutes ago, astraguy said: What other clubs are fucked by the psr deadline then? Seems it's just us in a rush before tomorrow All the other clubs mooted (Chelsea,Everton,villa,forest) have done transfer work in the run up to this deadline tbf. The other posters may have been onto something with the Bruno clause putting the brakes on any potential sales until it was certain he was staying. Or, we fucked up. Pick your poison. Edited June 30 by NE27 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/live/c98qv3gww28t Welcome to PSR transfer deadline daypublished at 08:59 08:59 Good morning, I know what you are thinking, it's too early in the summer for a transfer deadline day. And you would be right - the transfer window does not close until Friday, 30 August, at 23:00 BST in England and 23:30 in Scotland. However, profit and sustainability rules (PSR) in the Premier League have forced clubs to reassess their transfer policy in a bid to balance the books. The aim is to do that by a cut-off point in the financial year - 30 June is the key date when the 2023-24 season officially ends and the 2024-25 campaign begins. Clubs in danger of breaching PSR are trying to sell players by this new 'unofficial transfer deadline day' to avoid charges and possible points deductions when the new season begins. PL monitoring deals, but they created this false window. What did they expect? Arsehole amateurs ruining our game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 2 minutes ago, astraguy said: What other clubs are fucked by the psr deadline then? Seems it's just us in a rush before tomorrow Yeh it’s just us for this year. Everton, Chelsea, Villa, Leicester, Forest settled their issues a little earlier. Chelsea have been proactively closing their gaps for months. I think we owe Forest a favour in the next period mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bondedcrown Posted June 30 Share Posted June 30 1 minute ago, The College Dropout said: Yeh it’s just us for this year. Everton, Chelsea, Villa, Leicester, Forest settled their issues a little earlier. Chelsea have been proactively closing their gaps for months. I think we owe Forest a favour in the next period mind. We don’t owe anybody anything! You really think other clubs are doing us any favours? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now