£15 million for Kennedy

[Geordie1974]

Cant believe people still mention transfer fees in regard to us signing players.Doesnt matter what Kenedys price tag is.If Ashley is still here there will be no money.But as I am a plastic fan my opinion is worthless.

[ghostrider]

Cant believe people still mention transfer fees in regard to us signing players.Doesnt matter what Kenedys price tag is.If Ashley is still here there will be no money.But as I am a plastic fan my opinion is worthless.

Ashley's stated that the manager can have any money generated as profit for players.
What makes you think if he stays he won't spend?

Try not to use net spends as any excuse and try not to use a January transfer window that no right minded owner would spend good cash in, anyway, unless it was for loan deals, which we did.

[Geordie1974]

Ashley's stated that the manager can have any money generated as profit for players.
What makes you think if he stays he won't spend?

Try not to use net spends as any excuse and try not to use a January transfer window that no right minded owner would spend good cash in, anyway, unless it was for loan deals, which we did.

Absolute classic this.What makes you think if he stays he wont spend.The fact he hasnt already.Over his years in charge we have a net spend a season of just over 1m quid.
The money we have had from various means i.e tv money,season ticket sales,merchandise.Where is it?Dont you know because I do.Ashley is a greedy parasite who has ruined the club and I honestly cant believe people still believe his crap.How old are you 10.Because your naivety is off the scale.
By the way Rafa has a profit on transfers of over 8m since he came.Didnt have that to spend in January did he.

[tooslomofo]

Absolute classic this.What makes you think if he stays he wont spend.The fact he hasnt already.Over his years in charge we have a net spend a season of just over 1m quid.
The money we have had from various means i.e tv money,season ticket sales,merchandise.Where is it?Dont you know because I do.Ashley is a greedy parasite who has ruined the club and I honestly cant believe people still believe his crap.How old are you 10.Because your naivety is off the scale.
By the way Rafa has a profit on transfers of over 8m since he came.Didnt have that to spend in January did he.

Don’t sugar the pill tell it like it is 😆😆😆

[Geordie1974]

Should say What makes you think he will spend.

[ghostrider]

Let me just put something to all who read this.
First of all I asked you not to use net spends but seeing as you did, let's work it all out in how things work.

First of all we all know Ashley hasn't spent the money that people think he should spend and how much he should spend is never really answered by anyone when considering his stance on club coffers being used and not his own pocket money.

So let's get back to net spends.

If a club spends 500 million on players but reaps 600 million back in sales, it means a transfer profit of 100 million.
(Yeah I know....I know I'm going into way out values but it's to hit home about this net spend issue).

Now here's the key.
If that same club finished in the top 4, fans would be up in arms as to why it happened and would cite that the club is being cheapskate. (mad but certainly a truth in it).

However, if that same club spent 600 million on players but reaped 580 million back and finished in the top 4, the same thing would happen but this time it would be greed for only spending 20 million when more was needed to advance the club.
People would rather forget the worth of outgoing players as being anything to do with monetary value...they want readies in millions mentioned, not in player exchanges that cancel any monetary value out or close to it.

The nature of the beast that are the fans of today who are all brainwashed by the silliness of the spends.


What would be the argument?
" We are like this because we've spent nothing. It's minus 100 million."
" We are like this because we've had a net spend of 20 million."

A similar thing is happening with this club, only on the small scale compared to what I've just mentioned.

If we spent 80 million but reaped in 59 million (example only) or spent 50 million but reaped in 80 million (example only), then we would be 21 million net spend and plus 30 million transfer profit , respectively.

What does it mean?
Does it mean we have better players because of the 21 million net spend or better players for the 30 million transfer profit?
Because to gause it would be to gauge the quality going out to the quality replaced from it with a good or bad transfer scouting set up.


There's a fine line between greed and shrewd, just as there is with sanity and insanity...just as there is with rich or poor and it can hinge on one wrong move or one right move.

Let's put it in an even simpler way.
We are Newcastle United in the north east who are not on the elites party list, so to speak.... but just picture this.

Imagine we had a special player like a Gascoigne type and an elite club came in to offer 200 million for that player.
Naturally we couldn't refuse but now we have 200 million to spend.

Let's say we spent 160 million within that next few weeks on 6 players.
The fans would be miffed at first in losing the special player but now extremely pacified with the 6 players.

We start the season great and end up well in the top half but then we fall away and end up sinking towards the bottom and struggling.
The pacified nature turns to irritable and then the knives come out.
What gets said?

It comes down to something like," this wouldn't have happened if Ashley hadn't let (special player) him go" or " this is because Ashley scrimped on players by not even having a net spend and pocketing 40 million of the transfer money."

Something along those lines would be trotted out.
By all means people can deny it but It's my opinion that this would be close just by judging on a lot of earlier stuff from the season start, to now.

It wouldn't matter about the wage bill probably doubling with the newbies, it would all be about risk and greed and lies and leaving the manager (depending on how loved) short or the manager gets it in the neck as well (depending on how unloved).

It's wind of change with many fans and it's all about what fits an agenda as and when one presents itself.

I'll put this to everyone who views it.
Tell me what you think.

[tinostongue]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[TheOtherTerryMac]

Wilf you would rock a glass eye to sleep.

[Geordie1974]

Dont need to write a book to come to the conclusion Ashley has took the club backwards.Raped the club of money,been proven in a court of law to be a liar by a club legend in Keegan.
Didnt even read your post.

[Sclox]

Let me just put something to all who read this.
First of all I asked you not to use net spends but seeing as you did, let's work it all out in how things work.

First of all we all know Ashley hasn't spent the money that people think he should spend and how much he should spend is never really answered by anyone when considering his stance on club coffers being used and not his own pocket money.

So let's get back to net spends.

If a club spends 500 million on players but reaps 600 million back in sales, it means a transfer profit of 100 million.
(Yeah I know....I know I'm going into way out values but it's to hit home about this net spend issue).

Now here's the key.
If that same club finished in the top 4, fans would be up in arms as to why it happened and would cite that the club is being cheapskate. (mad but certainly a truth in it).

However, if that same club spent 600 million on players but reaped 580 million back and finished in the top 4, the same thing would happen but this time it would be greed for only spending 20 million when more was needed to advance the club.
People would rather forget the worth of outgoing players as being anything to do with monetary value...they want readies in millions mentioned, not in player exchanges that cancel any monetary value out or close to it.

The nature of the beast that are the fans of today who are all brainwashed by the silliness of the spends.


What would be the argument?
" We are like this because we've spent nothing. It's minus 100 million."
" We are like this because we've had a net spend of 20 million."

A similar thing is happening with this club, only on the small scale compared to what I've just mentioned.

If we spent 80 million but reaped in 59 million (example only) or spent 50 million but reaped in 80 million (example only), then we would be 21 million net spend and plus 30 million transfer profit , respectively.

What does it mean?
Does it mean we have better players because of the 21 million net spend or better players for the 30 million transfer profit?
Because to gause it would be to gauge the quality going out to the quality replaced from it with a good or bad transfer scouting set up.


There's a fine line between greed and shrewd, just as there is with sanity and insanity...just as there is with rich or poor and it can hinge on one wrong move or one right move.

Let's put it in an even simpler way.
We are Newcastle United in the north east who are not on the elites party list, so to speak.... but just picture this.

Imagine we had a special player like a Gascoigne type and an elite club came in to offer 200 million for that player.
Naturally we couldn't refuse but now we have 200 million to spend.

Let's say we spent 160 million within that next few weeks on 6 players.
The fans would be miffed at first in losing the special player but now extremely pacified with the 6 players.

We start the season great and end up well in the top half but then we fall away and end up sinking towards the bottom and struggling.
The pacified nature turns to irritable and then the knives come out.
What gets said?

It comes down to something like," this wouldn't have happened if Ashley hadn't let (special player) him go" or " this is because Ashley scrimped on players by not even having a net spend and pocketing 40 million of the transfer money."

Something along those lines would be trotted out.
By all means people can deny it but It's my opinion that this would be close just by judging on a lot of earlier stuff from the season start, to now.

It wouldn't matter about the wage bill probably doubling with the newbies, it would all be about risk and greed and lies and leaving the manager (depending on how loved) short or the manager gets it in the neck as well (depending on how unloved).

It's wind of change with many fans and it's all about what fits an agenda as and when one presents itself.

I'll put this to everyone who views it.
Tell me what you think.

...put the cork back on the fork Ruprect.

What a load of old shiit that was.

He hasn't, doesn't and wont ever spend even reasonably to a level befitting NUFC.