Toonpack

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13827267 RIP Big Man

I think it's all just bollocks BUT... Scottwilsonecho Scott Wilson Strong suggestions of a final #NUFC push for Gervinho. Now if they could pull that off.....

They don't like, although depends if your talking gross (yes they do) or net (no they don't, by a distance). Their gross spend over the last 20 years (£360Mill) averages at £18Mill per year, the Net averages only £4Mill a year, over the same 20 years (£80Mill total). 20 years ago the world record transfer fee was £8m. Why not go back to 1950, you can get the average down to a few grand. Tell you what, why don't I just go back 4 years, is that "pertinent" enough of a period for you? that makes their average a £5 Mill transfer profit per year. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of the negative hysteria.

They don't like, although depends if your talking gross (yes they do) or net (no they don't, by a distance). Their gross spend over the last 20 years (£360Mill) averages at £18Mill per year, the Net averages only £4Mill a year, over the same 20 years (£80Mill total).

I suppose it can if the years sales income covers the fees and is provided/held against the value of the contract, which I'm guessing would show as "cash at bank" on a diminishing balance in relation to the player. Amortisation adds a strange dimension as well though, they're paying "cash up front" but that'll be charged year on year, as fee divided by length of contract so the player value depreciates (in the books) so, for example, if Collocini was sold for £10 Mill next year (one year left) his book value will be £2Mill at the time, so that's a profit of £8Mill next year. So they bought him for £10Mill sold him for the same amount but made an £8Mill profit in the year of sale !! Is that real money then ????? I suppose it must be. I think amortisation is a bit of red herring, the business is run on cashflow to pay wages and player sales. We need to look at the last 2 seasons finance. What are the current best estimates on our wage bill? £55m+? What was our income in the championship? £45m? What are the operating costs beyond wages for running the club? £15m+ On that basis we could have lost around £30m last year, the wage bill was lower last year so possibly only £20m. They are just rough estimates. Income from last season could have risen by £50m for extra TV. I'm sure i saw a table of TV revenue for this year's premiership at some point recently. This must mean the money has been paid to the clubs already. We should therefore have the same £45m from the championship + £50m of TV money maybe plus some more. The wage bill has risen and at current has risen again with Cabaye or Ba but only by a £2.5m roughly. There therefore should already be money available. Ignoring Carroll just for a moment, we've spent around £15m since January 2010. Roughly we should have £95m (Income) which has gone one - £55m (wages) - £15m (Operating expenses) - £15m (Players). Which would leave £10m to spend. Then you have the Carroll money. If this is a realistic assessment then, ignoring the debt just for a moment, he could spend £20m on 4 players who earn £10m a year. If he doesnt do that then maybe that assessment of the money situation is wrong, or people are very right to point out that he should be doing this and if he isnt then he must be prioritising debt (which should be stable and non-interest bearing) instead of showing ambition for the club. Which is in essence what I've been saying, as in 1st Sept will be interesting. We will know exactly which way he's going as he (the club) aren't running down the hill after the ball any more, they have (he has) the choice.

Or put another way ...................................... ........................................ .......................

Douglas: (on twatter) Just to clear it up: #NUFC gave him a thorough medical. No concerns whatsoever on groin! Failure to agree terms w/ #lfc, basically or as put quite well on RTG You only need to slightly amend the last sentence to reflect some opinions that'll be prevalent on here.

I suppose it can if the years sales income covers the fees and is provided/held against the value of the contract, which I'm guessing would show as "cash at bank" on a diminishing balance in relation to the player. Amortisation adds a strange dimension as well though, they're paying "cash up front" but that'll be charged year on year, as fee divided by length of contract so the player value depreciates (in the books) so, for example, if Collocini was sold for £10 Mill next year (one year left) his book value will be £2Mill at the time, so that's a profit of £8Mill next year. So they bought him for £10Mill sold him for the same amount but made an £8Mill profit in the year of sale !! Is that real money then ????? I suppose it must be.

Because if you're less than 56 then you're automatically wrong on all counts. Can't be 56, I'm only 53 !! on the bright side I don't piss my pants yet.

70k is bullshit mate. If he's chosen NUFC over EFC on wages alone it's because you're lowballing. We just don't pay wages like this anymore, it's why we're pushing out the biggest wage earners. It's well documented that we're being tight on wages and transfer fees. Much like yourselves in fact. Could be right mind, they could be aggregating fee and wages so £70/week is only (only !!!) £13Mill over 3 years, just like paying £5Mill for someone and paying them £35K a week (ish) over 3 years (for example).

Really ??? Their average wage is £50,289 per week. Liverpools is £48K btw (that was before Carroll/Henderson but with Torres).

He is survived by his wife and 2 daughters.

He's been reading to much Sartre and eating baguettes, poor lad. Weren't you alluding to Camus in gen chat btw? It's spelt Cambois man !!!!

We wanted him as well, but not for 5 years. Would you have given him 5 years on £50K a week ?? just askin Same lot gave Ameobi a 3 year contract when he was 27. I rate Nolan a lot more than I do Shola. See the pattern ?

We wanted him as well, but not for 5 years. Would you have given him 5 years on £50K a week ?? just askin i would have aye. he earned a deal to take him to the end of his days with us by arguably being one of our best players of the past two seasons, leading the team and playing a massive part in fostering the team spirit that has got us out of a massive hole. he's in his prime now. 29/30/31 are generally the best years for good pros. more evidence sadly that ashley isn't prepared to splash the going rate on wages, even when it comes to his senior and most important players. Frist bold bit, sentiment has no place to play in professional sport sadly. It's not like in three years he'll be a pauper and have to buy and run a pub to survive. Second bold bit, I always thought it was 25-30 myself, but OK each to their own. Slow already, comming off ankle surgery and £50K a week for 5 years, I wouldn't. For 3 yes, not 5.

We wanted him as well, but not for 5 years. Would you have given him 5 years on £50K a week ?? just askin

Stolen from RTG Tune for Ba "BA! HUH! YEAH! What did he sign for? Absolutely NOTHING "

T'was simply a "point of order", Alex and I snipe quite a lot, all in good fun, it was far from being a defence of CT per se and pedantry is fun. Since I have ignored LM I haven't quite completely recalibrated down the sensitivity of my "making things up" radar/defences. you ignore me because you quite simply don't have a leg to stand on. The more he ignores you, the closer you get. I'm not even going to pretend I comprehend what that means. As for the quoted ignored ignoramus

T'was simply a "point of order", Alex and I snipe quite a lot, all in good fun, it was far from being a defence of CT per se and pedantry is fun. Since I have ignored LM I haven't quite completely recalibrated down the sensitivity of my "making things up" radar/defences.

We did well to cover over the fact that his legs were gone this season. The perfect crime. Will be surprised if anyone even notices that Nolan's not here next season. Business as usual, chalk up another win for Ashley. He mustn't need legs then cos he was CT'a player of the season. There's no higher authority. Are you sure? You wouldnt be making things up again would you? And that's a player you want to sell? Is there any player at the club whose sale could not be justified? It appears you were making things up tbh Player of the season and second on a shortlist aren't the same thing, I would have the temerity to suggest.

Talksport reckon he's getting £70K a week, well that's what they (Alvin Martin and the ginger twat) said on me way home

Other than it being fairly common knowledge a week earlier that a deal had been agreed in principal with Spurs for £22m, this was then backed up by 'Arry talking about our transfer dealings the day after. Other than that good solid information that they were going to accept £22m I agree, there is nothing to say theyd have caved in to an additional 8m Really, is this documented somewhere? I would have thought if it were true the £30 Mill would have been a sort of "snap their hands off" sort of thing yet the £30Mill was rejected. Strange that, even Carroll is quoted as knowing nothing about any move until that final day.

Alledgedly 3yr deal with option for a 4th at £50K a week It's not about the money though.

"Newcastle would have gone bust if Ashley hadnt come in." Thats not speculation like? you say that enough Yes it's speculation on my part, based upon my interpretation/opinion of evidence, never said it wasn't. BTW Ashley or someone with deep pockets, is what I usually say, just happens to have been Ashley. There is no foundation to suggest they would have taken £30Mill. We're talking about a chain of bazillionaire's negotiating, NO WAY would Liverpool have, in turn, tried to squeeze Chelsea if they thought they didn't have to. (that's speculation too, but I think it's logical).