Number 6

This is potentially encouraging if we're looking to get our house in order. In theory we've got a -£90m dropping off for PSR. Any result better than that this year improves our PSR position which would suggest you could spend quite heavily this January. The continued tightening of purse strings however suggests we aren't looking to have another huge loss this year. Potentially good for a few reasons: - acceptance that we may well go down and need to get our house in order - smoothing out of results to allow better PSR management: prevents the peak and trough years we currently have - allowing for the lower Champ budget to hit us next year We had a disastrous summer window imo, but there's at least some signs here of accepting that the way out of this mess isn't by further huge gambles. Suspect if the right target was available then we'd do business, but we're being more restrained by the looks of things.

Despite what you read on here I think it's very unlikely.

Need him back before Arsenal if we're to survive imo. Our defence isn't strong enough to handle the drop in keeper quality, even if Stol is a perfectly reasonable keeper. This next month of games is too important.

You can deservedly criticise the years which were -£90m each, but that's old news. There's nothing new to criticise until we see the numbers for 23/24.

I think people are angry at the hierarchy for so much at the moment that anything negative against them gets latched on to. Whatever the source and whatever the truthfulness. Agreed that mud on this shouldn't be slung unless it's deserved.

Agreed. But we were extremely unprepared for that kind of situation arising. We were definitely all in on that one strategy and once the contracts were signed it was always going to be difficult to pivot to another strategy. Probably more of an issue that average players were offered big wages than good players were offered a good wage. It's like somebody saw that there was a correlation between performance and team wages and thought that offering everyone a pay rise would make us better. I think that selling model is our only way back to some success though, which is why I was particularly frustrated with our summer activity. Difficulty comes when you end up where Forest are and then have to decide which players get a salary bump and which you allow to move on. Which is ultimately what will prevent the non-traditional big 6 from competing.

I don't think having the wages to turnover ratio above 100% is showing ambition though. It's massively gambling with the financials of the club. PSR gets a lot of stuff wrong but it should absolutely be stopping that kind of structure being implemented. Admittedly you could argue that turning that around once contracts were signed was difficult to do though, and the rule changes on wage structure made it very difficult for us to pivot.

It is quite ridiculous for them to keep peddling this given the wage structure we had.

Thought I'd drop a post here as 2024 was the year I got into vinyl. Never really thought I would be the kind of person who did go down this route, but dipped my feet in the water mid year and have definitely caught the bug. It has completely changed the way I listened to music to be honest, and it has been really nice to go back to listening to an album start to finish rather than the same playlist I would always use on Spotify. I have mostly been buying new stuff and haven't got into scouring second hand shops for some bargains yet, but looking forward to seeing where this journey takes me. Anyway, some of my favourites from last year: Adrianne Lenker - Bright Future Amyl & The Sniffers - Cartoon Darkness English Teacher - This Could Be Texas Jack White - No Name King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard - Flight b741

I think this is exactly how it works. And I don't think it's a loophole. When people mentioned Borson saying it I assumed the PL had ****ed up. But I think it's the way they mean it to work. Means no PL team has to adhere to a £39m loss cap.

Reading the rules there is no mention of a reduction in losses for T, so we are aiming for a £105m loss at most. I know Swiss says that doesn't make sense but the rules are pretty clear on that. So say someone like Sunderland got promoted and stayed up their allowable losses over 3 year periods would go £61m, £61m, £83m, £105m. Looks like it has been set up to prevent someone having a £39m limit. Means if we stayed up the limit would be £81m next season though. Edit: don't know why I used Sunderland as an example when it applies to Ipswich this season. They should be allowed £61m so are well clear rather than being borderline.

Definitely if there was to be a really hefty deduction. Though if we were going with the long term strategy then I think you'd wait until the summer.

It's going to be close whatever the result but these are different periods; we've got a -£90m dropping off for the latest period, even the SR projection which has us breaching suggests we could be approx. -£80m this year and comply. We'd potentially be in the dangerous position of getting a points deduction but having headroom to gamble on buying players to stay up. Lack of January transfers points to issues in our recruitment process rather than a PSR breach.

Could see Brighton going back in for him if there is a deal to be struck.

There is a corresponding -£10m in Chelsea's exceptional items so looks like this is the case.

Yeh don't think he's got this. Got +£10m of exceptional items but not sure if that's manager comp?

Oddly he has our player sales as Madison + Barnes, but could be a mistype.

It's quite funny because if this ends up not being us and instead is someone like Everton then it could actually be great for our chances of survival 😂. Boom or bust.

If true then we'd be in for some months of legal arguments on this. The whole motivation for the transfer from ours and seemingly the player's side, was to assist the financials.

Why would we have been rushing the KDH sale through if it wasn't in that accounting period? Doesn't make sense. It will be in this period.

PSR ensures turnover will also (eventually) determine league position though. I think we'd only have been able to fly that close to the sun for so long. We could have had a good long term strategy which saw us as a Premier League constant, but there would have been cycles of European challenges followed by lower half finishes.

There's a difference between writing us off in 2016 and writing Forest off this season, and that is a big 6 team in form. They all fell off a bit in 2016; at this stage Arsenal lead on 42. Liverpool's game in hand is likely to put them on 49. So they need Liverpool to lose at least 3 more games, when they've lost 1 so far. Plus keep up the rate they're at. Just don't see it. They're having a great season though and looks like they'll take advantage of others dropping off to get Europa/CL.

Doubt they'd ever introduce something like this because then if you know you're gonna breach, you'd be as well to push it as far in that threshold as you could. Each case will be judged subjectively, there's too much nuance for boundaries.

Anyone could come out saying "One club has a high chance of breaching" and know that 1. It would generate chat and clicks 2. It would probably be true You don't need insider info for that statement.

The more I think about the more I think we'll be ok. Went into the KDH negotiation knowing what sum we would need, Golding coming the other way suggests he was used to fudge the numbers for PSR. E.g. We need £30m for KDH, Chelsea willing to spend £25m, Golding used as a £5m balance (illustrative numbers).