NUFC Transfer Rumours

[Jackie Broon]

39 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

It is true - revenues aren’t keeping pace with costs (in line with current and new rules) to allow us to invest significant amount without sales.  
 

last years performance and our behaviour over multiple windows gives us a clue about our financial position.  
 

I can categorically say we can’t spend £90m without sales. That’s the likely cost of a ready made CB + RW. 

 

 

It is demonstrably not true, taking the figures recently reported for 23/24 since the takeover revenue has increased 100%, costs have increased by 75% and revenue growth has been more than growth in costs every year.

 

Yes we probably can't spend £90m without sales, but it's not true that our revenue growth isn't keeping pace with growth in costs.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 13:06 by Jackie Broon

[ExiledGeordie]

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

Think a lot of people were anticipating us being the next Man City and still can't get over it.

 

Personally, I found the Man City thing to be incredibly manufactured and fake. I'm not sure what the satisfaction is with that approach. It's like playing a video game with a cheat code and just stacking your team.

 

The reality is that if we were able to spend as we please, we'd have the capability to spend to the extent that we'd just eventually be on top all of the time.

 

I guess some people actually enjoy that level of dominance through just having much more resources than everyone else, but for me that has nothing to do with any kind of sporting competitiveness or excellence.

 

It is immensely more satisfying bettering teams at the moment having managed to build such a good team with what we are currently able to spend within the restrictions.

 

It may eventually mean a big sale, but even then that will likely land us a major amount of money and room to manoeuvre to likely come back even stronger if we continue to identify players as well as we have done.

 

This is right up my street really. And so it is all quite enjoyable, and fun to follow.

 

The one thing I am very hopeful of is that if we do choose to sell a big player, that we do everything in our power to ensure it is to a club outside of the Prem, so that we don't let any of those competitors benefit.

 

That will be key to then continuing to close the gap on them.

Bruno has the feel of a big player moving on abroad particularly if we win a cup this season. That being said if we get champions league he’ll probably stay. 

[Begbie]

42 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

What else do you want them to do? Simply break the rules of the PL and Uefa by having Aramco sponsor us for hundreds of millions per year, and then getting us expelled from Europe and regelated to the Championship?

 

You have the APT rule for Premier League, but do UEFA have the same rule?

 

Let say theoretical speaking we pumped in hundreds of millions per year from Aramco, wouldnt it just hurt us in the Premier League? Wouldnt PL just devalue our incommings for the PL financial rapport, or is it illegal in the Premier League rule? If its illegal by PL law and not UK law then its a possible law suit which could lead to the APT rule being removed.

 

I would love if the 14 clubs came together(all other than skys top 6) and voted a new FFP/PSR/APT system that was equal for all. More and more clubs will soon understand that the current rules are unfair to them and not only us.

[Sibierski]

50 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

 

The one thing I am very hopeful of is that if we do choose to sell a big player, that we do everything in our power to ensure it is to a club outside of the Prem, so that we don't let any of those competitors benefit.

 

That will be key to then continuing to close the gap on them.

 

I don't mind selling to our competitors if it's on our terms and we know it's the right time having got our mileage.

 

Like Bruno will drop off badly in years to come, when he loses the half yard of his little pace, he's going to look so bad. So getting his best years, then selling to a Prem club who gets 1-2 season before being saddled with 4 years isn't bad. It's losing the ones who are on the cusp which would be hard. Like Isak to a Prem club, rather he went abroad.

[Guybrush]

https://newcastle-online.org/topic/37652-financial-fair-play-profit-sustainability/

 

 

 

 

Edited Sunday at 13:54 by Guybrush

[buzza]

If we don't get champs league this season I could deffo see us getting in 140M plus for Isaak and using that to get us three of four great players to complement the team and bench.

Obvious problem would be replacing him and geeting a decent back up...

If we do get champs league, none of our stars are leaving and with two purples and a couple of youngsters we really could become a solid top four team!!

 

 

Edited Sunday at 13:58 by buzza

[KaKa]

9 minutes ago, Sibierski said:

 

I don't mind selling to our competitors if it's on our terms and we know it's the right time having got our mileage.

 

Like Bruno will drop off badly in years to come, when he loses the half yard of his little pace, he's going to look so bad. So getting his best years, then selling to a Prem club who gets 1-2 season before being saddled with 4 years isn't bad. It's losing the ones who are on the cusp which would be hard. Like Isak to a Prem club, rather he went abroad.

 

Yeah, I hear that.

 

Personally, would still avoid it if at all possible, but yeah, if it's the only option and it's someone majorly on the downturn then not as big a deal.

[The College Dropout]

1 hour ago, Unbelievable said:

Fair play mate. It’s just every couple of days you come on here complaining that our owners aren’t somehow doing enough, which is a bit odd and at odds with being content with how well the club is doing and being run.

Show me where I complained please. 
 

I said I don’t think we’ll do substantial business because our revenues aren’t increasing at a pace that allows us to strengthen the squad significantly without selling at least one of our better players  OR Increasing revenues through other means. 
 

That’s not a complaint, I believe that’s the reality. There’s no emotion - positive or negative sentiment. It’s just where I think we are. 
 

The comment is in response to numerous posters talking about not wanting a ‘project player’ and wanting a ready made guy for the RW and CB spots.  
 

If we sign a RW this window, it’s because we’ve sold Almiron for a similar amount (net remaining small amortisation) to his replacements amortisation and wage cost for this accounting period. That’s likely a sub £35m player than a Tonali/Isak type marquee signing.  Thats Minteh money.  

[macphisto]

1 hour ago, KaKa said:

Think a lot of people were anticipating us being the next Man City and still can't get over it.

 

Personally, I found the Man City thing to be incredibly manufactured and fake. I'm not sure what the satisfaction is with that approach. It's like playing a video game with a cheat code and just stacking your team.

Don't put that on the fans, it was the various owners, at different times, who raised expectations. 

 

With regards to Man City and people talking about natural growth. We've just released a 30 year old shirt celebrating when we were anything but organic growth; breaking the world record for a defender, Barton, and the world record for Shearer as examples. It was absolutely class at the time and I'd love to experience those times again. 

[Jackie Broon]

8 minutes ago, macphisto said:

Don't put that on the fans, it was the various owners, at different times, who raised expectations. 

 

With regards to Man City and people talking about natural growth. We've just released a 30 year old shirt celebrating when we were anything but organic growth; breaking the world record for a defender, Barton, and the world record for Shearer as examples. It was absolutely class at the time and I'd love to experience those times again. 

 

That was completely organic growth, it's a myth that we were bankrolled by Hall. The only money the Halls put in for transfers was for Brian Kilkline, and that was from Lady Hall.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 14:33 by Jackie Broon

[The College Dropout]

1 hour ago, madras said:

I do t know what's going on behind the scenes, I don't know what deals have been blocked or what conversations have been had to get round the rules but I am confused at not using some of the low hanging fruit, even season by season, training ground/kit sponsors for example.

Aye. 
 

1 hour ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

It is demonstrably not true, taking the figures recently reported for 23/24 since the takeover revenue has increased 100%, costs have increased by 75% and revenue growth has been more than growth in costs every year.

 

Yes we probably can't spend £90m without sales, but it's not true that our revenue growth isn't keeping pace with growth in costs.

 

 

 

if revenue kept up with costs we wouldn’t have needed to sell Minteh and Anderson.  If revenue was keeping up with costs we could continue to invest aggressively like Spurs. 

 

1 hour ago, Begbie said:

 

You have the APT rule for Premier League, but do UEFA have the same rule?

 

Let say theoretical speaking we pumped in hundreds of millions per year from Aramco, wouldnt it just hurt us in the Premier League? Wouldnt PL just devalue our incommings for the PL financial rapport, or is it illegal in the Premier League rule? If its illegal by PL law and not UK law then its a possible law suit which could lead to the APT rule being removed.

 

I would love if the 14 clubs came together(all other than skys top 6) and voted a new FFP/PSR/APT system that was equal for all. More and more clubs will soon understand that the current rules are unfair to them and not only us.

Other clubs don’t want to change the rules. Most other clubs actually want to make money/profit , not sustain higher and higher levels of profit. Most of the other 14 have already ‘made it’ by simply being in the PL. As a fanbase we need to wake up to that reality.  
 

Theres only us and Villa (maybe Chelsea) interested in making sustained losses over a long period of time to grow.  Another 3 or 4 clubs need higher footballing losses short term to maintain their position in the league. 

[The College Dropout]

There’s no world where Newcastle United break the top 6 cartel as a concept through ‘organic  growth’

 

An interest free new stadium or a world class academy isn’t organix growth. 

[Sean]

4 hours ago, nufc4eva said:

At some point this nonsense must drive down wages and fees if foreign clubs /others can't rely on Premier league cash if price too high.

 

I would love us to just find a different way with bringing talent through and getting them early and let the big clubs crack on with spunking 50 million up the wall for utter shite players. Maybe even spend a decent amount on top talents occasionally to really take us to next level but building a talent pipeline would be better.

We should be looking to build the infrastructure to support such a plan already if this is the route we want to go (which I agree it should be to some extent). We haven't done much in that regard to date however.

[macphisto]

1 minute ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

That was completely organic growth, it's a myth that we were bankrolled by Hall. The only money the Halls put in forvtransfers was for Brian Kilkline, and that was from Lady Hall.

That was nowhere near organic growth, there was no way we could afford that sort of money in such a short period. You're saying we naturally went from Hall having to put in his own money, what around £200k for Kilcline?, to the club having enough money to pay for Shearer? 

 

I don't know the full details but I'm sure Hall left the club with a lot of debt (maybe he got money back through the flotation) and I don't mean the stadium. Also worth adding they were also taking money out of the club for things like warehouses in Gibraltar. There was no way we were making enough to cover all of our costs. 

 

 

 

[KaKa]

18 minutes ago, macphisto said:

Don't put that on the fans, it was the various owners, at different times, who raised expectations. 

 

With regards to Man City and people talking about natural growth. We've just released a 30 year old shirt celebrating when we were anything but organic growth; breaking the world record for a defender, Barton, and the world record for Shearer as examples. It was absolutely class at the time and I'd love to experience those times again. 

 

You're free to adjust your expectations.

 

Also, I never mentioned organic growth.

 

However, completely free spending doesn't interest me either.

 

Not excited by the prospect of watching the club with the most money just eventually pummel everyone else all the time.

 

For people that enjoy that sort of thing, I guess also supporting PSG or Bayern is an option.

[Jilted Generator]

No transfer rumours then I take it?

[Unbelievable]

23 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

There’s no world where Newcastle United break the top 6 cartel as a concept through ‘organic  growth’

 

An interest free new stadium or a world class academy isn’t organix growth. 

How do you define “breaking the top 6 cartel”, because as far as I can tell we’re on course for doing exactly that for the second time in three years since the takeover in the most important way I can think of, on the pitch in league and cup competitions..?

[Jackie Broon]

21 minutes ago, macphisto said:

That was nowhere near organic growth, there was no way we could afford that sort of money in such a short period. You're saying we naturally went from Hall having to put in his own money, what around £200k for Kilcline?, to the club having enough money to pay for Shearer? 

 

I don't know the full details but I'm sure Hall left the club with a lot of debt (maybe he got money back through the flotation) and I don't mean the stadium. Also worth adding they were also taking money out of the club for things like warehouses in Gibraltar. There was no way we were making enough to cover all of our costs. 

 

 

 

 

Yes, we were 2nd only to Man U in the PL in terms of revenue by 97, and 5th in the world. That was organic growth.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 15:09 by Jackie Broon

[Deuce]

so any rumors

[The College Dropout]

19 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

How do you define “breaking the top 6 cartel”, because as far as I can tell we’re on course for doing exactly that for the second time in three years since the takeover in the most important way I can think of, on the pitch in league and cup competitions..?

Having similar revenues sustained. And probably need top 3-4 revenues to sustain title challenges season on season.    
 

Without the revenues you can’t pay the wages. Without the wages you can’t keep the top players. 
 

Like I said - I suspect we’ll have to sell a top player to invest significant money in the squad to comply with current and future financial regulations.  The well managed top 6 clubs don’t have to do that.  
 

What goal.  Miley.  

 

 

Edited Sunday at 15:21 by The College Dropout

[Unbelievable]

1 hour ago, The College Dropout said:

Having similar revenues sustained. And probably need top 3-4 revenues to sustain title challenges season on season.    
 

Without the revenues you can’t pay the wages. Without the wages you can’t keep the top players. 
 

Like I said - I suspect we’ll have to sell a top player to invest significant money in the squad to comply with current and future financial regulations.  The well managed top 6 clubs don’t have to do that.  
 

What goal.  Miley.  

 

 

 

Revenue follows sporting success though. We continue to qualify for CL and do well in the league and cups, we’ll eventually catch up in terms of revenue as well. These things are never static.

[Begbie]

6 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Other clubs don’t want to change the rules. Most other clubs actually want to make money/profit , not sustain higher and higher levels of profit. Most of the other 14 have already ‘made it’ by simply being in the PL. As a fanbase we need to wake up to that reality.  

 

Theres only us and Villa (maybe Chelsea) interested in making sustained losses over a long period of time to grow.  Another 3 or 4 clubs need higher footballing losses short term to maintain their position in the league. 

I think they will start feeling the PSR in the comming years. Leicester are talking about it, Everton and Forrest had point deducted, and more will need to sell their best assets or also face point deduction. Just hope the «rest» will wake up soon.

[janpawel]

Miss the dopamine hit of a high quality transfer. Imagine we singed Mbuemo out of no where, would be on cloud 9 for weeks

[toon25]

Singed? Poor Mbuemo doesn't deserve that, man

[elbee909]

3 minutes ago, toon25 said:

Singed? Poor Mbuemo doesn't deserve that, man

 

Then he should keep away from Burn!