NUFC Transfer Rumours

[Coffee_Johnny]

16 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

We can’t deflect or lie about the funding available, the club’s accounts are a matter of public record and we know the PSR rules.

Well, you could be right. In that maybe the real implications of current accounts are transparent to some people. Still seems open to interpretation to me/most.

[WilliamPS]

The PSR question has been answered many times in this thread. It’s a rolling 3 year period in which max losses are 105m. The club had a crunch at the end of 23/24 to comply for years 21/22, 22/23 and23/24 and had to flog Anderson and Minteh to make it.

In 21/22 the club made a big loss of 70m, that now drops off the calculations so it’s now much easier to comply for 22/23, 23/24 and 24/25. Plus revenues are now higher.

 

Given the interest in Olise at like 60m there is evidently money to spend. IMO they haven’t found the right targets at a price they think is fair.

[nufcjmc]

Still hurts my head this so appreciate the actual or amateur accountants here. If in this financial year 3 or 4 more sponsorship partners are announced namely training kit and training ground start effectively this season does that mean it goes into the accounts this year for this summer and Jan transfers or is income reported next year and would help next summer?

 

 

Edited July 31, 2024 by nufcjmc

[Unbelievable]

39 minutes ago, tarie4 said:

Interesting, very interesting.

 

"The good news is that £70m now drops off going into the new cycle so we have got that chance to know what our available headroom is."

 

Any thoughts what that might be?

 

 

 

Are you a student per chance?

[Nucasol]

24 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Aye it’s Waugh with his weekly copy and paste job. 

Talk about dialling it in the lazy shite.

[Unbelievable]

8 minutes ago, WilliamPS said:

The PSR question has been answered many times in this thread. It’s a rolling 3 year period in which max losses are 105m. The club had a crunch at the end of 23/24 to comply for years 21/22, 22/23 and23/24 and had to flog Anderson and Minteh to make it.

In 21/22 the club made a big loss of 70m, that now drops off the calculations so it’s now much easier to comply for 22/23, 23/24 and 24/25. Plus revenues are now higher.

 

Given the interest in Olise at like 60m there is evidently money to spend. IMO they haven’t found the right targets at a price they think is fair.

 

Firstly, the max allowed loss over a 3 year period is only part of the PSR rules that restrict us. Secondly, not only player trading feeds into that P/L, or more precisely our cost level has risen more significantly than our revenue level over the last few years, so a big chunk of that 70m people think we could now spend is already being spent on amortised transfer fees and wages of players and staff already here (amongst other things).

 

We could perhaps afford a 60m transfer fee plus let's say 150k per week wages for one player, but we would very likely then have to sell players and/or increase commercial revenue significantly before PSR deadline day 24/25 to get back to a position of PSR compliance.

[kingxlnc]

Sometimes I feel NUFC are too perfectionist and trying to get the perfect player when all they need is an improvement across the board.

You can't raise the ceiling with every signing. For example for RCB, that Hujisen that Bournemouth signed, it was 12.8m. No brainer for a 19 year old with the same passing range profile as Schar. Schar can still be first choice and Hujisen can be back up. Milenkovic at Forest would be another in the same price range. Would have solved the position, with Botman due to come back as well as Lascelles, and Kelly and Burn who can slot in too. We would have 3 RCB and 3 LCB. Job done with little damage done after Tosin fell through.

 

For the RW, literally Chiesa is available for 25M. Even if thats another 10m committed in wages,  it makes sense, especially if we get rid of Almiron for that amount. I do understand he would expect to start so maybe he is not quite right. Matias Soule was also available for that amount, as a back up RW,  sure. Chiesa and Soule for 50M would sort out that RW for less than the price of Olise. 

If you want to go big, a Kubo (and all the additional income he would bring) would be available for the Olise money. 

For back up striker, Ben Bereton Diaz was a good third choice, we could even keep Wilson as No. 2. 

That would have sorted out the entire window for us, and probably even left enough money for a James Trafford. 

[gdm]

54 minutes ago, Paully said:

Having missed out on top target Michael Olise to Bayern Munich, despite meeting his Crystal Palace release clause

if true, money is there then

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Nucasol said:

Talk about dialling it in the lazy shite.

They just don’t seem to be on the pulse at all, or maybe they are but the information they have is sourced directly from the club and can’t be shared. 

[Yorkie]

I have some sympathy for the likes of Waugh. There's an expectation on them to get scoops but information coming out of the club is so locked-down these days that it must be very hard to deliver anything meaningful to their editors. I pray for Caulkin now Staveley is out of the building. 

[r0cafella]

Just now, Yorkie said:

I have some sympathy for the likes of Waugh. There's an expectation on them to get scoops but information coming out of the club is so locked-down these days that it must be very hard to deliver anything meaningful to their editors. I pray for Caulkin now Staveley is out of the building. 

I hear ya Yorks but he’s a journalist, if his sole sources are within the club then he’s not very good at his job. 

[Nucasol]

9 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

I pray for Caulkin now Staveley is out of the building. 

He doesn’t do transfers, he’s a misty-eyed ‘all the feels’ article writer, not a transfer type. Waugh is neither.

[WilliamPS]

To me this window looks like the Isak window. In that summer the club had a look at loads of players, and there were plenty of rumours but the club didn’t seem to view the fees as appropriate.

 

In the end they went back to Isak as even though he had a bigger fee than they really wanted to pay, he actually represented value at that fee - better to spend 60m on a 60m player, than 40m on a 20m player. Olise was viewed as worth it and the bid went in.

 

IMO the club are still looking for a RW available at a fair fee for the ability. Some selling clubs might get realistic with pricing in August and we might have to wait until then for a RW.

[sushimonster85]

3 minutes ago, WilliamPS said:

In the end they went back to Isak as even though he had a bigger fee than they really wanted to pay, he actually represented value at that fee - better to spend 60m on a 60m player, than 40m on a 20m player. Olise was viewed as worth it and the bid went in.

 

It's not quite the same. It was the injury to Wilson that prompted us going back in for Isak. We were (by all accounts) on the verge of signing Joao Pedro until Wilson picked up that bad injury. 

[Unbelievable]

4 minutes ago, WilliamPS said:

To me this window looks like the Isak window. In that summer the club had a look at loads of players, and there were plenty of rumours but the club didn’t seem to view the fees as appropriate.

 

In the end they went back to Isak as even though he had a bigger fee than they really wanted to pay, he actually represented value at that fee - better to spend 60m on a 60m player, than 40m on a 20m player. Olise was viewed as worth it and the bid went in.

 

IMO the club are still looking for a RW available at a fair fee for the ability. Some selling clubs might get realistic with pricing in August and we might have to wait until then for a RW.

Agreed, if the right player becomes available for the right price we will move. Equally I think realistically we will go without RW upgrade again if that opportunity doesn't come up, because, using your anology, it doesn't make sense in our position to panic buy a 20m player for 40m.

[TheBrownBottle]

31 minutes ago, nufcjmc said:

Still hurts my head this so appreciate the actual or amateur accountants here. If in this financial year 3 or 4 more sponsorship partners are announced namely training kit and training ground start effectively this season does that mean it goes into the accounts this year for this summer and Jan transfers or is income reported next year and would help next summer?

 

 

 

It’s in this year (24/25)

[Bondedcrown]

33 minutes ago, kingxlnc said:

Sometimes I feel NUFC are too perfectionist and trying to get the perfect player when all they need is an improvement across the board.

You can't raise the ceiling with every signing. For example for RCB, that Hujisen that Bournemouth signed, it was 12.8m. No brainer for a 19 year old with the same passing range profile as Schar. Schar can still be first choice and Hujisen can be back up. Milenkovic at Forest would be another in the same price range. Would have solved the position, with Botman due to come back as well as Lascelles, and Kelly and Burn who can slot in too. We would have 3 RCB and 3 LCB. Job done with little damage done after Tosin fell through.

 

For the RW, literally Chiesa is available for 25M. Even if thats another 10m committed in wages,  it makes sense, especially if we get rid of Almiron for that amount. I do understand he would expect to start so maybe he is not quite right. Matias Soule was also available for that amount, as a back up RW,  sure. Chiesa and Soule for 50M would sort out that RW for less than the price of Olise. 

If you want to go big, a Kubo (and all the additional income he would bring) would be available for the Olise money. 

For back up striker, Ben Bereton Diaz was a good third choice, we could even keep Wilson as No. 2. 

That would have sorted out the entire window for us, and probably even left enough money for a James Trafford. 

Why bother with the set up we've got if it's all that easy? 

[jonny1403]

35 minutes ago, kingxlnc said:

Sometimes I feel NUFC are too perfectionist and trying to get the perfect player when all they need is an improvement across the board.

You can't raise the ceiling with every signing. For example for RCB, that Hujisen that Bournemouth signed, it was 12.8m. No brainer for a 19 year old with the same passing range profile as Schar. Schar can still be first choice and Hujisen can be back up. Milenkovic at Forest would be another in the same price range. Would have solved the position, with Botman due to come back as well as Lascelles, and Kelly and Burn who can slot in too. We would have 3 RCB and 3 LCB. Job done with little damage done after Tosin fell through.

 

For the RW, literally Chiesa is available for 25M. Even if thats another 10m committed in wages,  it makes sense, especially if we get rid of Almiron for that amount. I do understand he would expect to start so maybe he is not quite right. Matias Soule was also available for that amount, as a back up RW,  sure. Chiesa and Soule for 50M would sort out that RW for less than the price of Olise. 

If you want to go big, a Kubo (and all the additional income he would bring) would be available for the Olise money. 

For back up striker, Ben Bereton Diaz was a good third choice, we could even keep Wilson as No. 2. 

That would have sorted out the entire window for us, and probably even left enough money for a James Trafford. 

 

Why do people keep mentioning Chiesa as a no brainer when he's exactly the opposite. Injury prone, in poor form, huge wages and has never played outside of Italy. It's such a lazy suggestion based on his name and nothing else.

[Vaj]

We have got where we are today by being ‘perfectionists’. One mistake in the transfer window can be catastrophic for us, we need pretty much all our transfers to be perfect if we want to compete thanks to PSR. 

[JP]

Chiesa is a no-go purely for wages alone. He'd break our wage structure when the likes of Bruno, Isak etc have earned the right to be top earners.

 

[Rocker]

12 minutes ago, Vaj said:

We have got where we are today by being ‘perfectionists’. One mistake in the transfer window can be catastrophic for us, we need pretty much all our transfers to be perfect if we want to compete thanks to PSR. 

 

Sounds pretty tight to be honest.

 

I'm hardly wet in anticipation, put it that way. 

[Ash]

41 minutes ago, kingxlnc said:

Sometimes I feel NUFC are too perfectionist and trying to get the perfect player when all they need is an improvement across the board.

You can't raise the ceiling with every signing. For example for RCB, that Hujisen that Bournemouth signed, it was 12.8m. No brainer for a 19 year old with the same passing range profile as Schar. Schar can still be first choice and Hujisen can be back up. Milenkovic at Forest would be another in the same price range. Would have solved the position, with Botman due to come back as well as Lascelles, and Kelly and Burn who can slot in too. We would have 3 RCB and 3 LCB. Job done with little damage done after Tosin fell through.

 

For the RW, literally Chiesa is available for 25M. Even if thats another 10m committed in wages,  it makes sense, especially if we get rid of Almiron for that amount. I do understand he would expect to start so maybe he is not quite right. Matias Soule was also available for that amount, as a back up RW,  sure. Chiesa and Soule for 50M would sort out that RW for less than the price of Olise. 

If you want to go big, a Kubo (and all the additional income he would bring) would be available for the Olise money. 

For back up striker, Ben Bereton Diaz was a good third choice, we could even keep Wilson as No. 2. 

That would have sorted out the entire window for us, and probably even left enough money for a James Trafford. 

 

Being perfectionist (or as close to it as possible) is exactly how we should be operating and how we have to operate. Just bringing in players to simply improve on what we have now doesn’t work as we’re then in the same situation a year or two down the line when they then need replacing and we can’t shift them on because of the salary they’re on or the price we want to improve our PSR position.

 

If PSR wasn’t a thing then bringing in Huijsen (if he matches the positional profile we’re looking for) maybe happens at that price point but he might not tick enough boxes. If he did, I’m sure we would have made a move for him at that price but I’m guessing we have someone more suited and more transformational lined up. For what it’s worth I’d like to see us sign some younger players in that kind of price range to pad the squad out, especially next year when we’re likely to lose several players. At the minute, though, it simply isn’t possible because of our PSR restrictions. 

 

Every penny we spend has to be accounted for and needs to represent value for us in not just the short-term but also medium to long-term. Using Chiesa as an example is actually ironic as that is exactly the type of deal we should be avoiding. His wages are probably on the high side of what we want to be paying and there’s also huge doubts about his fitness and quality these days. If we sign him on a four-year deal and he flops, that’s an expense we cannot afford to carry year-on-year. 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

But when we sign people like Hall we get accused of not upgrading enough, it's hard to win. 

[WilliamPS]

10 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

But when we sign people like Hall we get accused of not upgrading enough, it's hard to win. 

I think the Hall business was also/mainly about people getting fed up watching BDB at LB, rather than about Hall. Had Targett been fit then Hall might have gone a bit more under the radar.

 

I hope having Kelly, Hall and Targett frees us from that misery this season!

[tarie4]

1 hour ago, Unbelievable said:

Are you a student per chance?

No, however, I do see some significant gaps in the calculations provided, with emphasis on SIGNIFICANT. I will refrain from elaborating on this matter due to the apparent arrogance displayed by you and others in your arguments. I believe time will reveal the this, and I will revisit this topic in the near future. For now, I will remain silent regarding this.