Zhan_Zhuang Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 Hold on, they've spent £400 million and they are midtable in the PL. I'm not sure if that us good business at all...they are the new Chelsea but with an inferior manager. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 49 minutes ago, Zhan_Zhuang said: Hold on, they've spent £400 million and they are midtable in the PL. I'm not sure if that us good business at all...they are the new Chelsea but with an inferior manager. They’ve had significant injuries and other selection issues for most of the season so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 A lot of wishful thinking on display in this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 6 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said: They’ve had significant injuries and other selection issues for most of the season so far Yep. Running into every tackle at a thousand miles an hour works in the short term but injuries will pile up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HalfTimePost Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 14 hours ago, JPJCB said: What have they even spent that money on? As this season has shown, their squad isn’t even that good. Fair enough Guimaraes, Isak, Tonali. But Who else has been warranting such big sums? Harvey barnes?! Genuinely forgot that they had signed Harvey Barnes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HalfTimePost Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 A lot of people in here correctly saying Newcastle will have to sell somebody to help balance the books with their spending. Be interested to see the same responses in our own thread when it comes to Emi, Dougie, Watkins, McGinn and Ramsey etc. We too are going to have to sell atleast one in the summer, the Grealish £100m will be up and off the FFP books, we'll need to generate more money. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 38 minutes ago, HalfTimePost said: A lot of people in here correctly saying Newcastle will have to sell somebody to help balance the books with their spending. Be interested to see the same responses in our own thread when it comes to Emi, Dougie, Watkins, McGinn and Ramsey etc. We too are going to have to sell atleast one in the summer, the Grealish £100m will be up and off the FFP books, we'll need to generate more money. Why’s that? We aren’t reporting such losses and we’ve sold some academy names for 100% profit too. Newcastle are in this mess partly because they’ve spent very heavily and sold little in return since the takeover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 you look at their bench for the last 2 PL games, the new regime have only bought 2 players, hall and livramento the difference between us and them is we bought a squad and then we've slowly replaced the pieces with better ones, we've had slower progress but we've had the likes of nakamba, trez, now traore and chambers they're still backed up by dummett, krath, ritchie, murphy - that's their relegation contender players 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HalfTimePost Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 55 minutes ago, The_Steve said: Why’s that? We aren’t reporting such losses and we’ve sold some academy names for 100% profit too. Newcastle are in this mess partly because they’ve spent very heavily and sold little in return since the takeover. Yeah we haven't made losses like that because we sold players. The most recent accounts in March '23 (for 21/22), had us make a £0.4m profit on the basis of Grealish's sale masking operating losses of £96m in that one season. The accounts that will be released this March will be a nice indicator, we sold Ings, Carney and Targett for around £50m , half that of the Grealish sale, but the spend was somewhat-similar. It'll be interesting to see where we're at on the P&L and whether our commercials have made up for the shortfall. If not, as we did this summer (Archer, AJ), we'll need to sell some players, but the academy isn't quite a factory just yet, there will be discussions that we may need to cash in on a bigger player in order to fund ourselves. Similar to what is being said here for Newcastle having to sell Isak, Bruno or Botman. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 10 hours ago, villa4europe said: Their sleeve sponsor didn't jump from £1.5m a year to £7.5m a year because of CL Of course not - but £6m a year is "sod all" in the grand scheme. (And they've probably just topped up that sponsorship on a "fair means" - or whatever the sponsorship test is - basis for this season). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 28 minutes ago, HalfTimePost said: Yeah we haven't made losses like that because we sold players. The most recent accounts in March '23 (for 21/22), had us make a £0.4m profit on the basis of Grealish's sale masking operating losses of £96m in that one season. The accounts that will be released this March will be a nice indicator, we sold Ings, Carney and Targett for around £50m , half that of the Grealish sale, but the spend was somewhat-similar. It'll be interesting to see where we're at on the P&L and whether our commercials have made up for the shortfall. If not, as we did this summer (Archer, AJ), we'll need to sell some players, but the academy isn't quite a factory just yet, there will be discussions that we may need to cash in on a bigger player in order to fund ourselves. Similar to what is being said here for Newcastle having to sell Isak, Bruno or Botman. Yup. People seem to have completely forgotten that we got £100m for an academy player which allowed us to spend pretty heavily. I think we'll be fine with regards to FFP for what it's worth; clubs are generally so aware of it now and it would be utterly ridiculous to be caught out by it whilst on an upward trajectory (you could maybe see it happening if we were going into the other direction). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 6 minutes ago, bobzy said: Of course not - but £6m a year is "sod all" in the grand scheme. (And they've probably just topped up that sponsorship on a "fair means" - or whatever the sponsorship test is - basis for this season). the sleeve sponsor is a more interesting one as it shows you what they've done and what the disparity in the PL is before Newcastle sponsored themselves we had the top 6 teams getting sleeve sponsors for £10m-12m per year, the other 14 teams were getting sponsors between £500k-2m Newcastle then artificially inflate their deal to £7.5m and it is artificial, CL alone doesn't constitute that kind of jump, ours certainly wont jump like that any time soon spurs are now rumoured to be negotiating theirs for £16m because Newcastle have reset the market Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Just now, villa4europe said: the sleeve sponsor is a more interesting one as it shows you what they've done and what the disparity in the PL is before Newcastle sponsored themselves we had the top 6 teams getting sleeve sponsors for £10m-12m per year, the other 14 teams were getting sponsors between £500k-2m Newcastle then artificially inflate their deal to £7.5m and it is artificial, CL alone doesn't constitute that kind of jump, ours certainly wont jump like that any time soon spurs are now rumoured to be negotiating theirs for £16m because Newcastle have reset the market That last line makes no sense whatsoever, though. Newcastle got a sponsor deal below that of Spurs' previous one, so Spurs can jump up by at least £4m? God, the game is shit isn't it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 3 minutes ago, bobzy said: That last line makes no sense whatsoever, though. Newcastle got a sponsor deal below that of Spurs' previous one, so Spurs can jump up by at least £4m? God, the game is shit isn't it Yes That's how market values work... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Just now, villa4europe said: Yes That's how market values work... Newcastle are improving, Spurs are not. Newcastle get a sponsorship deal that's higher than their last one, but below that of Spurs'. Newcastle finish 3rd, Spurs finish 8th. I'm not quite seeing how this translates into Spurs having an at least £4m/season jump in a sleeve sponsor, if I'm honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 9 minutes ago, bobzy said: Newcastle are improving, Spurs are not. Newcastle get a sponsorship deal that's higher than their last one, but below that of Spurs'. Newcastle finish 3rd, Spurs finish 8th. I'm not quite seeing how this translates into Spurs having an at least £4m/season jump in a sleeve sponsor, if I'm honest. thats not how market values work Newcastle improving doesn't mean they are eating in to spurs or say man utds market share, those clubs are still worth more than newcastle if Newcastle artificially raise the market then in theory everyone benefits, we will surely be using their deal as a benchmark when negotiating our next deal, we've already seen this with man city and the impact they had on the numbers of man utd and chelsea - it just happens that the top teams benefit more than everyone else rising tide raises all boats... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Joelinton being out for at least 6 weeks is a huge blow for them. That Saudi-link gonna be tested this window... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 minute ago, bobzy said: Joelinton being out for at least 6 weeks is a huge blow for them. That Saudi-link gonna be tested this window... They've told the press no Saudi loans so let's see how long that actually lasts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oishiiniku_uk Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Nice Guy Eddie, my heart bleeds for you and the unfairness of this situation. Spent beyond their means for three seasons and run their players into the ground. Why can't they just spend all that oil money as they please? Quote In an ideal world given the freedom to act, we'd have brought players in already but we're not in that situation because financial fair play is a problem for us. So, we're having to navigate around that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 It’s so funny how suddenly media voices are bashing FFP - it was always unjust. Newcastle however are mad because they can’t spend Saudi GDP unlimited. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts