Newcastle buyout

[WalkerboyUK]

Chelsea and City should have a * put against their trophy winning titles, like Mark McGuire, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds when they set Home-Run records while doping on steroids. The records stand, and to them and their fans they allude to success, but it was done by circumventing the rules.

 

[ikky]

Being linked with lampard for the manager’s job. Really hope they get him as I don’t rate him as a manger at all.

 

[McFlash]

Just to add Joe lewis hosts Israeli soldiers every year at his resorts. Reward for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children in Palestine

I was waiting for you to pop up and to try to turn a debate about Saudi Arabia and Newcastle, into digs at Joe Lewis and the Jewish people. ?

 

[spursfan77]

Telegraph reporting that even the guy they’ve got linked up as a caretaker doesn’t want the job, as he’s not getting assurances that he’d have a place under the new managerial set up.

It’s probably why Bruce hasn’t been given the sack yet. Sounds like a mess.

Next Newcastle manager: Lucien Favre and Frank Lampard under consideration

Plus: The leading candidates for who could become the club's next director of football

www.telegraph.co.uk

Although there is hunger at Newcastle for a quick decision to be made and for Bruce’s sacking to be confirmed by the club as early as possible, there is understandably a lot of work to be done with a number of voices competing to be heard in and around the consortium.
Its leading figures, Amanda Staveley and her husband Mehrdad Ghodoussi, held a surprisingly long meeting with Bruce at the club’s training ground yesterday afternoon which was described as both informative and cordial.
Advertisement
Despite talking for around an hour, a definitive decision was not taken on whether Bruce will continue. It is thought he was asked to give a full appraisal of the squad and, in turn, was told about the new regime’s ambitions for the future.
It is still expected that Bruce will be relieved of his duties before the Tottenham game on Sunday and that announcement should come in the next 48 hours.
Sources have told The Daily Telegraph that one of the potentially complicating factors is that Graeme Jones, the first-team coach, is not sure he wants to take over as caretaker if Bruce steps aside.
However, it would seem unlikely would refuse to take charge of the team if the new owners wanted him to given his future at the club will also come into question when a new manager is appointed.
The Daily Telegraph has also been told that the new regime has got off to a slightly chaotic start because of the speed with which the takeover went through last week after being in deadlock since April 2020 .
The new board did not expect to be in charge until next year at the earliest so the list of candidates to replace Bruce has not been firmed up.
Even when Staveley and Ghodoussi have reached an agreement on who to approach about the manager’s job, it will also have to be approved by the club’s new owners, who insist on making all the final decisions even while they operate away from the public glare.

 

[hellava_tough]

Heard they can only spend £200m before maxed out on FFP apparently. Imo it’s gonna take 5 years before in top 4 debate and maybe 10 before serious challengers. And is Stavely actually CEO, massive undertaking for someone that’s never run a football club before. It’s a colossal task, like having a high street cafe and turning into Starbucks.

This is probably why they're looking at Ralf Rangnick for sporting director. Rangnick will take care of the football side of things while Stavely and the Saudis take care of the money side. If they have any sense they won't do a Levy and interfere with the running of the first team.

So Simon Jordan on TalkSport was saying they can spend a hell of a lot more than one might first believe.

They're currently running a profit over the last 3 years, so have 3 years until any losses have to be accounted for.

I think a club is allowed up to £105m in losses over a 3-year period.

Jordan was talking about how a player depreciates over their contract; I think what he was implying was that depreciation can mitigate expenditure, from an accounting point of view.

I'm sure some accountants on here can explain it, but basically it's not simply a case of revenue in/revenue out, when it comes to calculating losses over 3 years.

 

[Spurslove]

Just to add Joe lewis hosts Israeli soldiers every year at his resorts. Reward for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children in Palestine

Seriously mate, but what the actual fuck...!!

.

 

[Spurslove]

Just to add Joe lewis hosts Israeli soldiers every year at his resorts. Reward for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children in Palestine

Just as a matter of interest, are you getting this absolute bollocks from sort of demented anti-semitic website...?

.

 

[McFlash]

Just as a matter of interest, are you getting this absolute bollocks from sort of demented anti-semitic website...?

.

I don't know why this bloke supports the club, he seems to hate the owners, along with the Jewish links we have.

 

[Ribble]

David Squires going in with a full two-footed meaty tackle on the takeover:

David Squires on … Newcastle United’s Saudi takeover

Our cartoonist on the controversial Tyneside takeover and the questions of morality and mental gymnastics that have followed it

www.theguardian.com

 

[spursfan2021]

Guys, I know it's an off-topic question but can you please help me with a question....

Can One Hotspur+ Members use Ticket Share ? or only Season Ticket Holders can use Ticket Share ? I can't find that information anywhere on the website....if there are One Hotspur members like me here please help....

I cannot attend a game and plan on giving the ticket to my friend...I dunno how to do that without using Ticket Share....Cheers

 

[Spurslove]

I don't know why this bloke supports the club, he seems to hate the owners, along with the Jewish links we have.

Takes all sorts I guess.

.

 

[Delboy75]

Can’t remember the guy on sky name who reports on Newcastle he’s been all over this for weeks ( looks like he hasn’t slept for a week ?) Anyway he seems convinced Bruce won’t be in charge by Sunday. If that’s true seems a bit odd not sacked yet. Honestly Stavely has zero experience running a football club, let alone trying to avoid relegation to become the biggest club in the world. Can see them making a right pigs of this, should be fun to watch this circus.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

So Simon Jordan on TalkSport was saying they can spend a hell of a lot more than one might first believe.

They're currently running a profit over the last 3 years, so have 3 years until any losses have to be accounted for.

I think a club is allowed up to £105m in losses over a 3-year period.

Jordan was talking about how a player depreciates over their contract; I think what he was implying was that depreciation can mitigate expenditure, from an accounting point of view.

I'm sure some accountants on here can explain it, but basically it's not simply a case of revenue in/revenue out, when it comes to calculating losses over 3 years.

There's two big aspects that are not understood by the normal man on the street football fan (and the main reason that talk about net spend is a real red herring).

1. Ammortisation. Clubs ammortise the transfer cost of a player over the duration of their contract. So, if Newcastle buy Kane for £100m on a 5 year contract, they would ammortise £20m (£100m/5years) per year against their accounts.
2. Profit on player sales. This is the profit (or loss) against the ammortised value of the player (the original transfer fee minus the amount that has been ammortised to date). So, if they sold Kane in the 4th year for £30m they would make a £10m profit on player sales - as his ammortised value would be £20m (£100m minus 4x£20m).

When you consider the above, and then take into account player transfer inflation, it is quite easy to see that in the majority of cases you'd make a profit against ammortised value to offset your current year spending, and easily remain within the FFP limits......however.....in terms of accounting there are a few very easy ways to circumvent FFP if it becomes an issue, and I'll cover a couple below:

1. Have a conveyor belt of young players. They have no ammortised value, and consequently any sale is pure profit against player purchases (The Chavski).
2. Sell players late in their contract for higher than their ammortised value. WHilst players in the final year of their contract appear cheap, they are quite useful to petrodollar clubs as the ammortisation has already given them virtually nil value on the accounts, and therefore any sale proceeds will count as profit against player sales.
3. Never sell a player for less than his ammortised value - often it's better to let his contract expire (particularly if late into the contract).......which is frankly quite ridiculous, but if you have unlimited resources and don't care about the cash then this is a viable option!
4. Shithouse sponsership deals. As ammortisdation only sets a fraction of the transfer fee against each years accounts, you actually don't need these sponsership deals to be amazingly outrageous.........just a buffer really.

 

[hellava_tough]

There's two big aspects that are not understood by the normal man on the street football fan (and the main reason that talk about net spend is a real red herring).

1. Ammortisation. Clubs ammortise the transfer cost of a player over the duration of their contract. So, if Newcastle buy Kane for £100m on a 5 year contract, they would ammortise £20m (£100m/5years) per year against their accounts.
2. Profit on player sales. This is the profit (or loss) against the ammortised value of the player (the original transfer fee minus the amount that has been ammortised to date). So, if they sold Kane in the 4th year for £30m they would make a £10m profit on player sales - as his ammortised value would be £20m (£100m minus 4x£20m).

When you consider the above, and then take into account player transfer inflation, it is quite easy to see that in the majority of cases you'd make a profit against ammortised value to offset your current year spending, and easily remain within the FFP limits......however.....in terms of accounting there are a few very easy ways to circumvent FFP if it becomes an issue, and I'll cover a couple below:

1. Have a conveyor belt of young players. They have no ammortised value, and consequently any sale is pure profit against player purchases (The Chavski).
2. Sell players late in their contract for higher than their ammortised value. WHilst players in the final year of their contract appear cheap, they are quite useful to petrodollar clubs as the ammortisation has already given them virtually nil value on the accounts, and therefore any sale proceeds will count as profit against player sales.
3. Never sell a player for less than his ammortised value - often it's better to let his contract expire (particularly if late into the contract).......which is frankly quite ridiculous, but if you have unlimited resources and don't care about the cash then this is a viable option!
4. Shithouse sponsership deals. As ammortisdation only sets a fraction of the transfer fee against each years accounts, you actually don't need these sponsership deals to be amazingly outrageous.........just a buffer really.

Thanks that sums things up quite nicely

 

[NayimFTHL]

Just as a matter of interest, are you getting this absolute bollocks from sort of demented anti-semitic website...?

.

Sorry how is this anti-semitic? Or are u just throwing that term out like a lot of people who support apartheid?

 

[NayimFTHL]

I was waiting for you to pop up and to try to turn a debate about Saudi Arabia and Newcastle, into digs at Joe Lewis and the Jewish people. ?

Well if you don't like facts don't go crying like a baby.

 

[NayimFTHL]

I don't know why this bloke supports the club, he seems to hate the owners, along with the Jewish links we have.

You can hate the owners and what they stand for and still support the club. Or you could just suck the owners off. As u please

 

[ajspurs]

I know Steve Bruce is hardly encouraging and I'm not saying it's ultimately the wrong decision, but I don't think it looks right at all for new owners to come in and immediately sack him. Have an intention to get rid of him, sure, but even in maintaining some sort of harmony at the club, wait until his next dip to sack him. The players must already fear for their futures, surely the manager getting the chop straight away doesn't help their mentality.

 

[CantSmileWithoutYou]

Just to add Joe lewis hosts Israeli soldiers every year at his resorts. Reward for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children in Palestine

In the words of A&C... Link please?

 

[Albertbarich]

Go get your blood money dickhead.

Football would present a Hitler xi against a pol pot team with all its stars rushing to play if they paid enough.