macphisto

I realise these things take time but I would have thought a lot of planning would have taken place prior to buying the club. What was it from attending the Liverpool game to taking over the club, 2-3 years? That's at least 4 years to plan for the training ground. I'd be surprised if they hadn't preliminary explored a new training ground prior to buying the club. I realise I sound impatient but it just feels like we're not doing all that we could to get to where the Chairman wants the club to be. As I said previously, I'm over the moon to finally have a club that's finally well run so no complaints if our objectives have changed.

No doubt but how is the return being measured? Not strictly in monetary terms directly related to Newcastle as there's much easier ways to make money and avoid the hassle they've had in purchasing and now running the club. Also if you take it at face value related to the club then FMV is a non-issue as they want to run it organically. Irrespective the above points "long term investment" is a vacuous term, it means nothing as they can't say anything else. I'm sure City and PSG would say it's a long term investment too. Same for golf and the Saudi league.

I hope you're right but if it is with Saudi companies then they might as well have done it from the start as they'll still get flack. I say I hope you're right, but at the same time I am more than happy with the new owners and what they've done without contradicting myself. I'm just challenging the idea that PIF have been prevented by FMV from putting in more money, they could easily have exploited other ways to put in another £20-£50 million in commercial income.

We're missing the point a bit with regards to ASM, when looking at our income as a whole FMV is not the issue at the moment. Look at our list of sponsors, it's tiny when compared to other clubs (Man City & Man U as examples). If PIF want to pump money into the club then why have we not got similar deals at FMV rates? This, together with lack of progress on a training ground, makes me suspect that maybe PIF will not throw money at the club similar to Man City and PSG. Is the priority now more about getting a Saudi Club into the Champions League to eventually win it rather than Newcastle?

What ever the amount is I can't imagine we'd get more from a company that is not related to PIF (I presume FMV would not apply) than a related 3rd party sponsorship subject to FMV. Obviously just my opinion and hope I'm wrong. All conjecture, but I find the idea that without FMV, PIF would be throwing money at the club through their many companies misleading as their actions so far don't support that.

Not arguing against getting the most from a related party but we don't have any of those deals at all. If we had any of those deals in place then we could discuss how FMV is hurting us but at the moment FMV is a bit of red herring.

To name a few: Stadium sponsor Training ground sponsor Training ground kit sponsor

I'm not missing any point, my original post was replying to the idea that FMV is killing us when there is nothing to support that argument. There are plenty of other avenues available for money to be channelled into the club that haven't been exploited by related 3rd parties.

Yes, could have but there is no indication anyone was willing to pay that for him. There is plenty of other ways PIF could have put money into the club under FMV through sponsorship deals or player transfers but haven't done that.

But we don't have a FMV stadium sponsor, tractor partner or training ground sponsor. It doesn't make sense to suggest that because we can't hyperinflate our deals under FMV that we decide to go the other extreme and not have any at all. You mention Dummett for £50 million. I'm sure we could sell Fraser, Hayden, Ritchie, etc for £5 million per player under FMV but we haven't. Why are we afraid scrutiny @Abacus? What do you think they are afraid of? Try to get double the money for ASM and if it's not allowed then kick-up a bit of a fuss and eventually end up at a figure that's accepted at FMV.

How is it killing us, have any deals been contested? What would be different if it wasn't there?

Was that not customers returning fake clothes and Flannels not checking before putting them back on sale?

Is it not more Adidas? irrespective of the specifics of Newcastle, both Nike and Adidas have a clear strategy of selling more and more of their products through their own channels. In many ways mirroring Sports Direct who also produced and sold their own products (Donna, Everlast, Dunlop, etc.).

Not picking up on your words personally but when we talk about the crowd in the past, which times are we talking about?

I can soon see a situation, certainly next season, where they both force their way into the team. Good problem to have.