We're after Daryl Murphy according to Chronicle

[Mr Clarko]

80 mill to get relegated, 50 mill to get promoted, 70 million as reported this summer.
Some/most of the debt will be cleared with reduced wages/parachute payments/player sales/staff cuts etc so it isn't going to be particularly difficult to stay afloat in the championship if we spend within our means. If we to were rinse 50 million on worse players than we have now, then another 70 after promotion we will be worse off than we are now. £50 million isn't even needed to get promoted (the 7 sides below you probably didn't spend that much between them) so why would I want to risk the future of the club to copy what Newcastle have done when there are other sides who have done it on a shoestring and well within their means? I'd quite happily see us do what Burnley did in getting promoted, not spending much, being relegated again then using that money to consolidate and make a better fist of it the following year when we are in a better financial position
No idea what you are talking about in the last part

Just to clarify, I am not saying Sunderland should go out and replicate everything Newcastle did, that would be ridiculous, what I am saying is that Sunderland should follow Newcastle's blueprint. You have an issue with the previous statement because you're either ignorant or uninformed.

Newcastle did not lose £80m when they were relegated, they just did not receive all of the "TV money", they received the money in the form of parachute payments, that amount came to £40m for our first (and final) season in the Championship. To summarise, Newcastle didn't lose £80m.

Newcastle spent £55m on players in the summer, but recuperated £85m in player sales. To summarise, Newcastle did not spend £55m "to get promoted", they "made" £30m (on transfers).

Newcastle's transfer budget in the summer is yet to be revealed, what we do know is Ashley's statement, it reads "I’ve confirmed to Rafa Benitez he can have every last penny the club generates through promotion, player sales & other means", the important word being "generates", Newcastle will have already generated that money and will continue to generate that money through the player assets we have i.e. we will not be spending money we do not have.

Finally, reduced wages and staff cuts do not reduce the current amount of debt, the parachute payments and player sales will, only if you use that money to pay off that debt (if it needs to be payed back) which stands at approximately £170m. Sunderland will have no substantial income in the Championship, which is why they need to get out of it as quickly as they can, they can use Newcastle's title winning campaign as a guide.

 

[hawaymadlad]

Are you on heavy medication? Defoe for f***ing Murphy man?

They'd have gotten one of the best strikers around (still) and we'd have ended up with that big soft shite.

The club would have made some coin out of it.
He's been absolute shite since January anyone would have been an improvement.

 

[redalert69]

Knowing us we'd do a djillibodji (sp)
And pay 10 mill for the fucker...
Cannot believe we paid what we did for that knacka!
Plays a total of 30 seconds in a single league cup match, they pay 3mill and we paid 8mil...still cannot fathom for the life of me how our negotiating team found that to be acceptable? And even more so how Bellis short even with his limited knowledge of football never questioned how a players value can sky rocket after 30 seconds of game time..
That to me sums up sunderland afc.
f***ing calamity!

 

[Deleted member 20380]

Just to clarify, I am not saying Sunderland should go out and replicate everything Newcastle did, that would be ridiculous, what I am saying is that Sunderland should follow Newcastle's blueprint. You have an issue with the previous statement because you're either ignorant or uninformed.

Newcastle did not lose £80m when they were relegated, they just did not receive all of the "TV money", they received the money in the form of parachute payments, that amount came to £40m for our first (and hopefully final) season in the Championship. To summarise, Newcastle didn't lose £80m.

Newcastle spent £55m on players in the summer, but recuperated £85m in player sales. To summarise, Newcastle did not spend £55m "to get promoted", they "made" £30m (on transfers).

Newcastle's transfer budget in the summer is yet to be revealed, what we do know is Ashley's statement, it reads "I’ve confirmed to Rafa Benitez he can have every last penny the club generates through promotion, player sales & other means", the important word being "generates", Newcastle will have already generated that money and will continue to generate that money through the player assets we have i.e. we will not be spending money we do not have.

Finally, reduced wages and staff cuts do not reduce the current amount of debt, the parachute payments and player sales will, only if you use that money to pay off that debt (if it needs to be payed back) which stands at approximately £170m. Sunderland will have no substantial income in the Championship, which is why they need to get out of it as quickly as they can, they can use Newcastle's title winning campaign as a guide.

Tidied for you.

Although in my opinion I hope it's not the final. I hope there's many more to come.

 

[hank evans]

I'd rather stick pointy acid cocks in my eyes

Is it the weekend already?

 

[Vauxie]

Just to clarify, I am not saying Sunderland should go out and replicate everything Newcastle did, that would be ridiculous, what I am saying is that Sunderland should follow Newcastle's blueprint. You have an issue with the previous statement because you're either ignorant or uninformed.

Newcastle did not lose £80m when they were relegated, they just did not receive all of the "TV money", they received the money in the form of parachute payments, that amount came to £40m for our first (and final) season in the Championship. To summarise, Newcastle didn't lose £80m.

Newcastle spent £55m on players in the summer, but recuperated £85m in player sales. To summarise, Newcastle did not spend £55m "to get promoted", they "made" £30m (on transfers).

Newcastle's transfer budget in the summer is yet to be revealed, what we do know is Ashley's statement, it reads "I’ve confirmed to Rafa Benitez he can have every last penny the club generates through promotion, player sales & other means", the important word being "generates", Newcastle will have already generated that money and will continue to generate that money through the player assets we have i.e. we will not be spending money we do not have.

Finally, reduced wages and staff cuts do not reduce the current amount of debt, the parachute payments and player sales will, only if you use that money to pay off that debt (if it needs to be payed back) which stands at approximately £170m. Sunderland will have no substantial income in the Championship, which is why they need to get out of it as quickly as they can, they can use Newcastle's title winning campaign as a guide.

Are you obsessed ?
Do you feel the need to spend your life posting on another teams website?
Is it a cry for help perhaps?

 

[Mr Clarko]

Are you obsessed ?
Do you feel the need to spend your life posting on another teams website?
Is it a cry for help perhaps?

Why do you feel the need to respond to me?
Why ignore the content of the discussion? Is it because my post was about Newcastle? Or that it was factual? Did that upset you?
Are you crying for help?

 

[reginald_molehusband]

I have to take into account our past few meetings , which has resulted in you lot being humiliated
We,ll take Richie in a part ex for Rodwell

You last beat us in October 2015, both clubs had different managers that day, and both squads are completely different too.

It's fair to say that both clubs are in a completely different place since that game, and you are utterly deluded if you think Ritchie is the only Newcastle player good enough for your current squad.

 

[BucketBiff]

Proved to be a very clever signing for the filth. Done a job when required and they'll get their money back, probably.

Would rather it wasn't us giving them it back though. Although 1-1.5 million I would be happy enough

 

[ir35]

Knowing us we'd do a djillibodji (sp)
And pay 10 mill for the fucker...
Cannot believe we paid what we did for that knacka!
Plays a total of 30 seconds in a single league cup match, they pay 3mill and we paid 8mil...still cannot fathom for the life of me how our negotiating team found that to be acceptable? And even more so how Bellis short even with his limited knowledge of football never questioned how a players value can sky rocket after 30 seconds of game time..
That to me sums up sunderland afc.
f***ing calamity!

Let's be fair, regardless of how poor he's been for us he did make 171 appearances for Nantes and 14 on loan to Werder Bremen. I'm not saying we were right to pay what we did mind.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

Just to clarify, I am not saying Sunderland should go out and replicate everything Newcastle did, that would be ridiculous, what I am saying is that Sunderland should follow Newcastle's blueprint. You have an issue with the previous statement because you're either ignorant or uninformed.

Newcastle did not lose £80m when they were relegated, they just did not receive all of the "TV money", they received the money in the form of parachute payments, that amount came to £40m for our first (and final) season in the Championship. To summarise, Newcastle didn't lose £80m.

Newcastle spent £55m on players in the summer, but recuperated £85m in player sales. To summarise, Newcastle did not spend £55m "to get promoted", they "made" £30m (on transfers).

Newcastle's transfer budget in the summer is yet to be revealed, what we do know is Ashley's statement, it reads "I’ve confirmed to Rafa Benitez he can have every last penny the club generates through promotion, player sales & other means", the important word being "generates", Newcastle will have already generated that money and will continue to generate that money through the player assets we have i.e. we will not be spending money we do not have.

Finally, reduced wages and staff cuts do not reduce the current amount of debt, the parachute payments and player sales will, only if you use that money to pay off that debt (if it needs to be payed back) which stands at approximately £170m. Sunderland will have no substantial income in the Championship, which is why they need to get out of it as quickly as they can, they can use Newcastle's title winning campaign as a guide.

Firstly, I didn't say Newcastle lost £80 million when they were relegated. I said they spent 80 million to get relegated. £80 million on player transfers alone.

Secondly, although you made money in players sales, you still needed to bring in 50 million worth of players to marginally win the league on the last day of the season after capitulations by Huddersfield and Brighton (although I still think you's would have finished second even if Huddersfield hadn't give up)

It has been reported nearly everywhere that Newcastle will have around 70 million to spend this summer with strong links to Atsu £6.5, Cairney who Fulham wanted 20 million for, and Mooy for 10 million. Half the budget on 3 players who wouldn't really be an improvement (at least on paper) on the squad you had before the window started in 2015.

No reduced wages don't pay off the debt but parachute payments and players sales should pay off approx 100 million reducing the overall debt. Lower debt with reduced payments and a smaller wage bill would make our expenses more manageable in contrast to still paying prem wages in the championship and the higher debt payments, especially with everything else that has been cut. If we then rinsed 50 million + of that instead of paying the debt off then we would be in a very worrying position financially, then if we got promoted we would need to spend that again just to compete, which we either do, creating more debt, or we don't then fall back down a league and start the very same process all over again.

I'm not entirely sure what the Newcastle blueprint is regarding this season to be fair other than make sure you get promoted first attempt whatever the cost, which is fine if you are financially sound but throwing money around hoping it will come good at some point is exactly what has gotten us into the mess we are now.

The 'blueprint' we should be looking at is more like the one of Burnley that I've mentioned a number of times already, once we have got rid of high earners and dead wood and at least be in a better position to manage the debt, whether that means mid table next year or not. The best scenario would be to spend very little on player transfers and to get promoted first time, again spend very little and hope for the best in the prem. If we go down again then the tv money/parachute payments again goes towards paying the remainder of the debt then the following season, when we are in a much better position, start to put more money into transfers.

It will be frustrating as fuck as a fan during that time, but I'd much rather go through that in the short term, and still have a club in 40 years time, than to risk it all with a win at all costs 'blueprint' for the sake of one season

 

[Daffy]

You last beat us in October 2015, both clubs had different managers that day, and both squads are completely different too.

It's fair to say that both clubs are in a completely different place since that game, and you are utterly deluded if you think Ritchie is the only Newcastle player good enough for your current squad.

Rattled

 

[Mr Clarko]

Firstly, I didn't say Newcastle lost £80 million when they were relegated. I said they spent 80 million to get relegated. £80 million on player transfers alone.

Secondly, although you made money in players sales, you still needed to bring in 50 million worth of players to marginally win the league on the last day of the season after capitulations by Huddersfield and Brighton (although I still think you's would have finished second even if Huddersfield hadn't give up)

It has been reported nearly everywhere that Newcastle will have around 70 million to spend this summer with strong links to Atsu £6.5, Cairney who Fulham wanted 20 million for, and Mooy for 10 million. Half the budget on 3 players who wouldn't really be an improvement (at least on paper) on the squad you had before the window started in 2015.

No reduced wages don't pay off the debt but parachute payments and players sales should pay off approx 100 million reducing the overall debt. Lower debt with reduced payments and a smaller wage bill would make our expenses more manageable in contrast to still paying prem wages in the championship and the higher debt payments, especially with everything else that has been cut. If we then rinsed 50 million + of that instead of paying the debt off then we would be in a very worrying position financially, then if we got promoted we would need to spend that again just to compete, which we either do, creating more debt, or we don't then fall back down a league and start the very same process all over again.

I'm not entirely sure what the Newcastle blueprint is regarding this season to be fair other than make sure you get promoted first attempt whatever the cost, which is fine if you are financially sound but throwing money around hoping it will come good at some point is exactly what has gotten us into the mess we are now.

The 'blueprint' we should be looking at is more like the one of Burnley that I've mentioned a number of times already, once we have got rid of high earners and dead wood and at least be in a better position to manage the debt, whether that means mid table next year or not. The best scenario would be to spend very little on player transfers and to get promoted first time, again spend very little and hope for the best in the prem. If we go down again then the tv money/parachute payments again goes towards paying the remainder of the debt then the following season, when we are in a much better position, start to put more money into transfers.

It will be frustrating as fuck as a fan during that time, but I'd much rather go through that in the short term, and still have a club in 40 years time, than to risk it all with a win at all costs 'blueprint' for the sake of one season

You didn't say Newcastle "spent", you said "80 mill to get relegated", the money spent in the 15/16 season is irrelevant to the 16/17 season.

Again you mention the "£50m" (it was £55m) spent on incomings, you are just repeating yourself and I have already countered that argument, Newcastle made £30m profit in the transfer market. Your comments on Brighton and Huddersfield are, that's right you guessed it, irrelevant. You are beginning to use a straw man.

Talk of any rumours are what they are, rumours, just like the budget quoted. I will refer you to Mike Ashley's statement again, that club are using money that has been generated by "promotion, player sales and other means".

You say that "wages don't pay off debt", I believe I mentioned that when you stated the contrary. Talk of parachute payments and players sales paying of the outstanding £170m debt has also already been discussed, if Sunderland use that money to pay off a fraction of the debt they will have no money to invest in the squad, I also question where the value of £100m has stemmed from, you do realise Sunderland still have to run the club (including a £68m wage bill). Have you heard of the phrase "you have to spend money to make money", that is the exact situation Sunderland are in, if Sunderland do not get out of the Championship they will lose money from the second they enter it, Sunderland will not pay any debt off in the Championship.

The blueprint was to assemble a completely new squad, at a lower cost (£30m), whom have the required experience at the level they are playing with the potential to improve in the future, while winning football matches and winning promotion (and title).

You are overestimating the parachute payment money, Sunderland will receive £54m next year, £44m the year after and £20m in the third year. To put how little that is in comparison to operating costs, Newcastle had operating cost of £97m last season, Sunderland will have a similar number. Sunderland may not spend a penny, sell their top assets and still win promotion, but it is unlikely and given the dire circumstances the club is in it would be foolish to not spend money to increase their chances.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

You didn't say Newcastle "spent", you said "80 mill to get relegated", the money spent in the 15/16 season is irrelevant to the 16/17 season.

Again you mention the "£50m" (it was £55m) spent on incomings, you are just repeating yourself and I have already countered that argument, Newcastle made £30m profit in the transfer market. Your comments on Brighton and Huddersfield are, that's right you guessed it, irrelevant. You are beginning to use a straw man.

Talk of any rumours are what they are, rumours, just like the budget quoted. I will refer you to Mike Ashley's statement again, that club are using money that has been generated by "promotion, player sales and other means".

You say that "wages don't pay off debt", I believe I mentioned that when you stated the contrary. Talk of parachute payments and players sales paying of the outstanding £170m debt has also already been discussed, if Sunderland use that money to pay off a fraction of the debt they will have no money to invest in the squad, I also question where the value of £100m has stemmed from, you do realise Sunderland still have to run the club (including a £68m wage bill). Have you heard of the phrase "you have to spend money to make money", that is the exact situation Sunderland are in, if Sunderland do not get out of the Championship they will lose money from the second they enter it, Sunderland will not pay any debt off in the Championship.

The blueprint was to assemble a completely new squad, at a lower cost (£30m), whom have the required experience at the level they are playing with the potential to improve in the future, while winning football matches and winning promotion (and title).

You are overestimating the parachute payment money, Sunderland will receive £54m next year, £44m the year after and £20m in the third year. To put how little that is in comparison to operating costs, Newcastle had operating cost of £97m last season, Sunderland will have a similar number. Sunderland may not spend a penny, sell their top assets and still win promotion, but it is unlikely and given the dire circumstances the club is in it would be foolish to not spend money to increase their chances.

Like Villa?

 

[Mr Clarko]

Like Villa?

Elaborate?

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

We would be foolish not to spend 50 million plus on players. Like Villa? They don't look foolish, with their 1 mill transfer kitty this year?

 

[HeedBoy87]

Sold for £10Million !!!

We would be foolish not to spend 50 million plus on players. Like Villa? They don't look foolish, with their 1 mill transfer kitty this year?

Exactly, how much did Alli, Mahrez and Kante cost spuds and Leicester between them ?

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

Sold for £10Million !!!




Exactly, how much did Alli, Mahrez and Kante cost spuds and Leicester between them ?

It's bizarre like. It's as if the only way to get promoted is by buying 50 million worth of players. Despite only one club from 3 this year doing that

 

[Mr Clarko]

We would be foolish not to spend 50 million plus on players. Like Villa? They don't look foolish, with their 1 mill transfer kitty this year?

Aston Villa have a debt of around £30m and a committed owner, they spent (a lot of) money poorly and are now restricted to how much they can spend because of FFP and are now losing money. Sunderland have a debt of around £170m, a non committed owner and are losing money (even in the Premier League), as I have said multiple times, Sunderland need to get out of the Championship and should spend to increase their chances of doing that.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

Aston Villa have a debt of around £30m and a committed owner, they spent (a lot of) money poorly and are now restricted to how much they can spend because of FFP and are now losing money. Sunderland have a debt of around £170m, a non committed owner and are losing money (even in the Premier League), as I have said multiple times, Sunderland need to get out of the Championship and should spend to increase their chances of doing that.

So Villa can afford 50 mill on players because they aren't riddled with debt and Sunderland can't for the same reason

Glad we've cleared that up