Andy Carroll

[Fan65]

You did an accounting analysis which was totally incorrect and I just corrected it. £20M is £20M pounds. It's a liability. Unfortunately company accounts don't record the number of games, goals and the entertainment an individual provides.

FYI - whilst Torres was at the club, we changed shirts twice but we have sold more Warrior shirts now than in any of the seasons when a new shirt was released with Torres at the club

Okay so if games, goals and the entertainment don't count in your accountancy eyes how about this balance sheet.

Torres cost £20 million and he was sold for £50 million

Therefore a profit of £30 million

Then we speculated the profit + £5 million from the kitty on Carroll

so now we are down £5 million on the deal

So say we now sell him for £10 million we are now up £5 million.

Yes or no ?

[cream]

Okay so if games, goals and the entertainment don't count in your accountancy eyes how about this balance sheet.

Torres cost £20 million and he was sold for £50 million

Therefore a profit of £30 million

Then we speculated the profit + £5 million from the kitty on Carroll

so now we are down £5 million on the deal

So say we now sell him for £10 million we are now up £5 million.

Yes or no ?

No, we paid £35m for Carroll, we are £35m down on the deal.

[kris90210]

How many consecutive transfer windows have we been seeking this now.......

Far, far too many mate

[Gibbo]

£35 million.

It shocks me every time I see it.

Especially where it seems we are in a situation now where we have to sell to buy.

[SB]

I wonder if that means he may be thinking about keeping him for a plan B. The only trouble with that is that he will want to be part of plan A.

It's a well known fact that Geordies don't know their ABC's.

[Shaggy]

Everyone knows we'll have to take a loss on Carroll, but still, **** off Pardew. You charged us £35m FFS, turning down £30m.

But Pardew told BBC Radio Newcastle: "[Reading chairman] John Madejski used to say to me about certain players, just wipe your nose and move on.

"And I think [Liverpool] are going to have to do that with Andy."

New Liverpool boss Brendan Rodgers is willing to accept offers of around £20m for the England striker.

And Pardew, who became Newcastle manager the month before Carroll's departure, believes that the striker was destined to Merseyside leave once Rodgers took over at Anfield.

"I think it was obvious that as soon as Brendan went into Liverpool that Andy's time was going to have to be somewhere else," said Pardew.

"I think it's quite right we're involved in that. Whether he comes here, is something that I will take or I will leave.

"It's a lot of money for Mike [Ashley, Newcastle owner], although we'll obviously be getting a big upside in terms of what we sold him for and we've got three great strikers here already.

"But of course as the manager I want the best players I can get."

[Fan65]

No, we paid £35m for Carroll, we are £35m down on the deal.

and we're £50m up from the Torres sale so what's your point.

[danperkins]

and we're £50m up from the Torres sale so what's your point.

The point is that 35 million could have been spent in other areas or on other player/s. It's is 35 million quid end of story no matter what way you try to swing it.

Remember people kept saying "sure we only spent 15 million on him". Absolute nonsense, we spent 35 million, which was pure insanity.

[Mostar]

Whether it means hes keeping him or not for whatever plan I'm quite encouraged by those quotes

My one fear about Rodgers has been this insistence that he will immediately impose a set style and will push that style irrespective of the players he has

For me any change to reach his ideal system / style of play will have to be gradual and we will have to evolve a gradual change in style

If he was to change and enforce his ideal style of play immediately he'd have to replace a lot of our players and its clear that we are not in a position to do that in one fell swoop

I unfortunately do not feel the same way.

Personally I see it as an attempt to show that we don't desperately need to sell, which in turn should show that our price evaluation is firm.

I cannot see him staying.

[RedSince1964]

The point is that 35 million could have been spent in other areas or on other player/s. It's is 35 million quid end of story no matter what way you try to swing it.

Remember people kept saying "sure we only spent 15 million on him". Absolute nonsense, we spent 35 million, which was pure insanity.

Absolutly

[spanky]

Newcastle are taking the piss now, just a complete mess with the Carroll situation.

[danperkins]

I unfortunately do not feel the same way.

Personally I see it as an attempt to show that we don't desperately need to sell, which in turn should show that our price evaluation is firm.

I cannot see him staying.

[Nick77]

12 million plus Ba is the absolute minimum imo...

[spanky]

straight swap for Ba and Ben Afra, let Pardew swallow that

[Fan65]

The point is that 35 million could have been spent in other areas or on other player/s. It's is 35 million quid end of story no matter what way you try to swing it.

Remember people kept saying "sure we only spent 15 million on him". Absolute nonsense, we spent 35 million, which was pure insanity.

I'm not trying to swing it, you cannot go back and put it right so I'm trying to get across that we need to cut our losses and move on.

The money wasn't borrowed it was from the profit on a sale.

Yes it could of been better spent but it wasn't, end of.

It is ridiculous to keep on moaning about the waste of 35million there is nothing that can be done that's going to change that now.

We have a new broom, let him sweep clean and then see where we end up.