Jump to content

NUFC Transfer Rumours


Optimistic Nut

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

This is referencing the Portuguese press that have said we have bid 60 million for Ramos

 

 


Probably the last position on the pitch we should be spending 60m on :lol:. Good player but lost his way this season after a spectacular World Cup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, McCormick said:

Good head on his shoulders if he’s rejecting them. Youth player graveyard.

That Etitike kid disappeared there. From the most promising young striker in the World to obscurity.

 

 

Edited by cranna

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some journalist on Talksport claiming we are definitely looking at a left winger despite him agreeing with H&J that we seem to be already strong and overstocked in that position.

 

Also said he thought if the fee was £30m we would still find it too expensive.

 

Sounds like we see him similar to as we did Maddison 12 months ago. If we see big value we will throw our hat in the ring but if it becomes a bidding war and fee much north of £20-25m we’ll sit it out.

 

 

 

 

Edited by LFEE

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

This is referencing the Portuguese press that have said we have bid 60 million for Ramos

 

 

Not gonna happen , they always try to screw purchasing teams I believe , so we will walk away and move on .

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

This is referencing the Portuguese press that have said we have bid 60 million for Ramos

 

 

Not convinced about that ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kanji said:

The cost of transfers can usually be spread out in instalments over a number of years but this one would require a hefty and immediate cash outlay. It had deterred other suitors, including Newcastle United, given the implications in terms of meeting financial fair play (FFP) requirements

 

This comes up from time to time and yet I've never read anything on FFP that indicates the payment terms (e.g. paid up front vs. in installments) has any bearing on how it would be calculated. You can still amortize the fee over the length of the contract.

 

The only thing I can think of here is we did not want / could not afford to have a purchase hit our 2022/23 accounting year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

This comes up from time to time and yet I've never read anything on FFP that indicates the payment terms (e.g. paid up front vs. in installments) has any bearing on how it would be calculated. You can still amortize the fee over the length of the contract.

 

The only thing I can think of here is we did not want / could not afford to have a purchase hit our 2022/23 accounting year.

It would be good to have clarity as I had argued the reason we would miss out on Slob (if we were really serious on him) was the exact scenario the Athletic reported weirdly but then I remembered I was corrected on here (maybe even by yourself?) and told the need to pay the majority/all of the fee in one go would not affect us on the FFP front.

 

I hold my hands up and have little to know real knowledge on accounting or FFP apart from possibly some very primitive basics.

 

Didn’t we have to create a load of shares to cover the Gordon Fee for example? What was all that about?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LFEE said:

It would be good to have clarity as I had argued the reason we would miss out on Slob (if we were really serious on him) was the exact scenario the Athletic reported weirdly but then I remembered I was corrected on here (maybe even by yourself?) and told the need to pay the majority/all of the fee in one go would not affect us on the FFP front.

 

I hold my hands up and have little to know real knowledge on accounting or FFP apart from possibly some very primitive basics.

 

Didn’t we have to create a load of shares to cover the Gordon Fee for example? What was all that about?

 

 

You can pump loads of money into the club, you just can't spend it I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't understand the Harvey Barnes link, he's as LW as a LW can get whilst we have Saint Max, Gordon, Joelinton and even Isak and Anderson who can play there. (FWIW I don't want Isak on the left, he's our future through the middle. And I don't especially rate Anderson but the one performance of his where I've been impressed with him was Forest away where he was on the left). On top of that, Joelinton and Willock interchanging on the left was brilliant at times for us last season.

 

A RW is what we need. Would be both an upgrade and competition for Murphy and Almiron. Diaby, Raphinha, Lindstrom, Kudus; that ilk. Only issues I can really foresee is the fee it would take to get any of those given FFP constraints.

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

This comes up from time to time and yet I've never read anything on FFP that indicates the payment terms (e.g. paid up front vs. in installments) has any bearing on how it would be calculated. You can still amortize the fee over the length of the contract.

 

The only thing I can think of here is we did not want / could not afford to have a purchase hit our 2022/23 accounting year.

All i can think is that maybe clauses such as extra money fir European qualification, numer of appearances, goals etc aren't counted against  until they are activated, but they also cant be used to force a release clause in a contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, HaydnNUFC said:

Don't understand the Harvey Barnes link, he's as LW as a LW can get whilst we have Saint Max, Gordon, Joelinton and even Isak and Anderson who can play there. (FWIW I don't want Isak on the left, he's our future through the middle. And I don't especially rate Anderson but the one performance of his where I've been impressed with him was Forest away where he was on the left). On top of that, Joelinton and Willock interchanging on the left was brilliant at times for us last season.

 

A RW is what we need. Would be both an upgrade and competition for Murphy and Almiron. Diaby, Raphinha, Lindstrom, Kudus; that ilk. Only issues I can really foresee is the fee it would take to get any of those given FFP constraints.

Only reason I can see us getting Barnes is if we are shipping ASM away for a much bigger profit and using that to go for a bigger RW like Diaby. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, kocunar said:

Our main goal should be to qualify for UCL again. (EPL will probably have 5 spots next year in the expanded format) Given that the contracts we spent on short amorisation times to save ourselves from relegation will be gone soon, we would be able to go big next summer.

Depends on transfers. As it stands, I would take any European football. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, LFEE said:

It would be good to have clarity as I had argued the reason we would miss out on Slob (if we were really serious on him) was the exact scenario the Athletic reported weirdly but then I remembered I was corrected on here (maybe even by yourself?) and told the need to pay the majority/all of the fee in one go would not affect us on the FFP front.

 

I hold my hands up and have little to know real knowledge on accounting or FFP apart from possibly some very primitive basics.

 

Didn’t we have to create a load of shares to cover the Gordon Fee for example? What was all that about?

 

 

 

That was probably to get cash in to the business to pay for him but no impact to FFP. 

 

 

Edited by Hhtoon

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, LFEE said:

It would be good to have clarity as I had argued the reason we would miss out on Slob (if we were really serious on him) was the exact scenario the Athletic reported weirdly but then I remembered I was corrected on here (maybe even by yourself?) and told the need to pay the majority/all of the fee in one go would not affect us on the FFP front.

 

I hold my hands up and have little to know real knowledge on accounting or FFP apart from possibly some very primitive basics.

 

Didn’t we have to create a load of shares to cover the Gordon Fee for example? What was all that about?

 

 

 

I'm not sure either honestly but, for example, Chelsea paid a huge portion of the Mudryk fee up front but they gave him an 8 year deal for FFP purposes. There may be an angle to this where the fee can be amortised but actual cash outlay needs to be on the books and can cause a problem with profit / loss.

 

This is where some local journos could add real value by talking to experts and laying out all the facts about how this works, but they'd prefer to regurgitate what's already known.

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...