Transfer Rumours The Summer 2024 Transfer Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Rex Kramer said:
1.They have repeatedly advised us since day one.

2. So you're ignoring media evidence that's fine.

3. Then you agree completely anyway.

4.Guimareas did Yesterday.

5. See 3.
Click to expand...
1. So the Club have repeatedly advised us since day one that we need to sell a player in June 2024 to keep on the right side of FFP? Really? Awaiting evidence.

2. Yes. Based on years of experience, they know nothing.

3. on your previous point, no. On the fact the rules exist, yes. Hopefully, that’s clear enough.

4. No he didn’t. Awaiting evidence.

5. Point 5 is journalists. Not sure how accepting the rules exists has anything to do with them.

Starts holding breathe whilst awaiting evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: magpie290761
Roland Deschain said:
Exactly this. We need a first choice LB, RW, GK, RCB and a backup striker this Summer. We need shot of as much Ashley deadwood as possible. Longstaff, Burn will stay but we have to take whatever we can for Murphy, Almiron, Wilson, Krafth and Dubravka.
Click to expand...
The ideal would be two for RW then, if we're selling Murphy and Almiron. Gordon should stay on the left
 
Delusional Full Stop said:
1. So the Club have repeatedly advised us since day one that we need to sell a player in June 2024 to keep on the right side of FFP? Really? Awaiting evidence.

2. Yes. Based on years of experience, they know nothing.

3. on your previous point, no. On the fact the rules exist, yes. Hopefully, that’s clear enough.

4. No he didn’t. Awaiting evidence.

5. Point 5 is journalists. Not sure how accepting the rules exists has anything to do with them.

Starts holding breathe whilst awaiting evidence.
Click to expand...

1. I never said that anyway so here is why you've failed.. I said it 'looks like' which isn't the same as saying something 'is'

2. Like I said ignore all the evidence it's fine.

3. The rules exist that's the crux upon which all the other evidence is built , so hopefully you're slowly beginning to realise.

4. Yes you did you just thought you were arguing against something I never said .. see 1 for details.

5. You asked for evidence and that is used as evidence... proof is that ffp exists.see 3.
 
Last edited:
Rex Kramer said:
1. I never said that anyway so here is why you've failed.. I said it 'looks like' which isn't the same as saying something 'is'

2. Like I said ignore all the evidence it's fine.

3. The rules exist that's the crux upon which all the other evidence is built , so hopefully you're slowly beginning to realise.

4. Yes you did you just thought you were arguing against something I never said .. see 1 for details.

5. You asked for evidence and that is used as evidence... proof is that ffp exists.see 3.
Click to expand...
You must log in or register to see media
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fox Mulder
Judge GG said:
You must log in or register to see media
Click to expand...

It's just blatantly obvious mate and i have no problem with it. I don't understand why some want to just ignore all the evidence. It doesn't matter It's all part of the journey.

This idea that every single journalist is making it all up is another strange one.. is it not more likely Newcastle do need to sell player or two ? The answer is yes.
 
Rex Kramer said:
It's just blatantly obvious mate and i have no problem with it. I don't understand why some want to just ignore all the evidence. It doesn't matter It's all part of the journey.

This idea that every single journalist is making it all up is another strange one.. is it not more likely Newcastle do need to sell player or two ? The answer is yes.
Click to expand...
If it was a problem at 14 Jan 24 it’s still a problem now.

I would hazard a guess that we are right on the line at 30 June 24 with regards to FFP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fox Mulder
It's just another Howe based signing... these Burnley and Bournemouth connections are where it all starts and ends where he's concerned.

Nickson will hopefully be looking at quality somewhere and get a few across the line.
 
magpie290761 said:
New finances kick in for the summer so January and the summer windows are very different.
Click to expand...

It won't mean they didn't breach prior to the end of this month mate. The rules are ****housery and there's no escape... building revenue is the only way.
 
Tasty Magpie said:
Just a little.
Click to expand...

All the indications are that they will pack out the squad with really dull signings and that Howes now got almost full control.

The exciting signings are just not happening .. Gordon the last and that was ashworths work.

Nicksons surely got to start shouting louder... it's all well and good Howe playing it safe , but if it goes wrong we'll be in big trouble... these signings are getting more and more dull... I accept it doesn't mean it won't work.
 
Rex Kramer said:
It won't mean they didn't breach prior to the end of this month mate. The rules are ****housery and there's no escape... building revenue is the only way.
Click to expand...
It won’t no but no one knows if we have breached or not although the owners are confident not.
Clearly we are building revenue and will have new funds in summer. How much no one knows that either for good reasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eddie's British Plodders and Rum & Black for 2
Judge GG said:
You must log in or register to see media
Click to expand...
So what has this to do with June 2024 and needing to sell a player so as not to breach FFP rules?


Rex Kramer said:
1. I never said that anyway so here is why you've failed.. I said it 'looks like' which isn't the same as saying something 'is'

2. Like I said ignore all the evidence it's fine.

3. The rules exist that's the crux upon which all the other evidence is built , so hopefully you're slowly beginning to realise.

4. Yes you did you just thought you were arguing against something I never said .. see 1 for details.

5. You asked for evidence and that is used as evidence... proof is that ffp exists.see 3.
Click to expand...
You must log in or register to see images
 
  • Like
Reactions: magpie290761
magpie290761 said:
It won’t no but no one knows if we have breached or not although the owners are confident not.
Clearly we are building revenue and will have new funds in summer. How much no one knows that either for good reasons.
Click to expand...

Nobody said they did know they said it looks like the club have to sell players. All the evidence suggests that's the case and there is not one shread of evidence otherwise.

People can use evidence to base our assessment... perhaps people can show me some evidence that ffp isn't an issue ? There just isn't any I can see.. it's been very open and honest from the club.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back