 | Forum
Reply | State over reach....terrorist supporters everywhere.
at 10:10 17 Jul 2025
Can remember getting stopped for a traffic offence in the early 2000s and the copper absent-mindedly telling me my car's number plater was "flagged" on their system after attending an anti-war demo.
Think small town/rural police can be prone to small 'c' conservatism where they see this stuff as a big city thing that has no place in their towns.
It's also deliberate mission creep. Most national politicians and media actually do think pro-Palestine activism is basically all bad and borderline should be illegal. Anyone remember the freakouts they had about the big Saturday demos in London last year? Think the lawmakers are perfectly happy to provide an excuse for this sort of low-level political harassment (note also that the Kent Constabulary doubled down when the press called). [Post edited 17 Jul 11:02]
|
| Forum
Reply | Are new signings dependent on fee from selling Omari?
at 09:49 17 Jul 2025
Good point, seen £22m going around as the figure, but if we'd actually paid £18m, the calculation would be.
£17m actual profit
£3.4m to Chelsea.
=
£20.4m booked original fee.
£4.08m year 1 amortised
£16.32m un-amortised fee
Book profit £18.68m
2025-26 amortisation avoided £3.6m**
Extra 2025-26 FFP head room £22.28m
That head room would also be bigger than it seemed, assuming we give 5-year contracts to any big money moves, that would technically enable to you to spend £111.4m in fees without making your FFP position worse this year.*
*You wouldn't do that obviously because the wages would kill you and you'd be on the hook for £22.28m amortisation each of the next 4 years, which could come back and bite you.
**This bit would enable you to spend £14.4m on a player on a 4-year contract and it would be financially neutral because you'd just be matching the payment you made for Omari that was already due to be on the books. [Post edited 17 Jul 9:52]
|
| Forum
Reply | Are new signings dependent on fee from selling Omari?
at 22:14 16 Jul 2025
The book value is what remains of his fee to be amortised.
We signed OH for £22.5m on a 5 year contract. We'll apparently pay Chelsea £2.5m of the actual profit. So that's now OH's full fee booked as £25m. We take off £5m for the first year amortisation to make his current book value (£20m) and book our profit based on that.
£35m - £20m = £15m book profit for FFP purposes.
Oh, and if we keep him, we'd have had to amortise another £4.5m this season. So you can chuck that in as extra head room for spending this season too. |
| Forum
Reply | Huge position of strength on Omari ...
at 16:35 16 Jul 2025
I imagine, Brentford will come back in with something that spreads the risk slightly better for them but leaves us getting more money in the long-run.
Clubs like structuring fees with appearance, goal, outcome bonuses and sell-on percentages because you only pay them if the move at least partially works out. £35m up front leaves you exposed if things go wrong. |
| Forum
Reply | Is Chaplin's time up?
at 15:26 16 Jul 2025
We like a left footer in that Right 10 role and as it stands, him and Hutchinson are the only two we have. Think it's far likelier that we're investigating getting another one in that position than letting one go. |
| Forum
Reply | Unite questioning its relationship with Labour!
at 15:52 12 Jul 2025
Graham's whole thing is that Unite should just be hyper-focused on winning disputes and use any/all leverage they've got to do that.
That's what this is really. Their members are in dispute with a Labour-run council and suspending Rayner is a cheap way of exerting a bit of leverage on someone with some ability to influence proceedings.
(Probably also makes them unlikely to just pull all political funds from Labour) [Post edited 12 Jul 15:56]
|
| Forum
Reply | What are we expecting from Cameron Humphreys this year?
at 10:11 10 Jul 2025
Jack Taylor has one year left on his contract. Sam Morsy has been linked with a move away. It's 10th July and we still haven't pinned down even one new centre midfielder.
We surely aren't going to be in a position to let Cameron Humphreys go anywhere? |
| Forum
Reply | ITFC old shirt prices
at 09:55 10 Jul 2025
I bought an old 1995-97 home shirt on eBay that was not in great nick (planning on getting it "restored") and they had it at £80 or best offer. Was surprised when they took my offer of £50 and then wondered if I'd overpaid.
So, might not be worth quite as much as they're advertised at. That said, have a friend who does good business on eBay and her advice was you should never auction things, set a Buy it Now that you think is a good price and be patient, it'll usually go eventually. |
| Forum
Reply | “Such good English, it’s beautiful."
at 09:50 10 Jul 2025
Actually one of only a handful of places where the USA tried establishing settler colonies.*
*Well, obviously the USA itself is a settler colony, but aside from that. [Post edited 10 Jul 10:35]
|
| Forum
Reply | Listening to the NTT20 & KOA Podcast this morning
at 15:33 9 Jul 2025
"Nowhere near" is relative to other clubs rather than relative to our ideal Ipswich first eleven though, isn't it?
I think we're all in agreement that midfield is too thin right now. But how many Championship clubs have better in goal, at right back, right wing, centre forward? |
| Forum
Reply | Listening to the NTT20 & KOA Podcast this morning
at 14:37 9 Jul 2025
Having a settled team in 2023 was our super power and it's not ideal that we're still waiting on possibly our entire centre midfield.
However, it's not like we're trying to recruit an entire first eleven here. As it stands you imagine our matchday squad looks like this:
Palmer; Johnson, O'Shea, Greaves, Davis; Morsy, Taylor; Ogbene, Hutchinson, Szmodics; Hirst. Subs: Walton, Townsend, Woolfenden, Clarke, Humphreys, Philogene, Clarke, Chaplin, Al-Hamadi.
There are weaknesses you'd worry about there (you need a new starting 8, there's a couple of bench options you'd ideally upgrade) but it's not like you'd need to recruit and integrate half a dozen players straightaway. Dropping one recruit into your first team and two onto your bench isn't the same as needing to integrate a 11 new probable starters. [Post edited 9 Jul 14:56]
|
| Forum
Reply | Downsizing / opting out
at 16:34 7 Jul 2025
I don't object to people retiring, no. I think people have a right to live parts of their lives without labouring and it's fine for people entering the last bit of their life, the bit where it's likely hardest (or impossible) for them to work, to be looked after by the rest of the community.
I suppose there's two things that inform my thinking here. I believe in a broad sense that we live in a social mode of production, billions of people labour to keep human societies going and that the distribution of wages, wealth, work and non-work time is fundamentally untethered from how hard you work, the importance or difficulty of the work you do and the contribution it makes to society.
So in a sense, almost every interaction in that society seems at least somewhat unfair to me (including my own job relative to others!). But it's not like I can just click my fingers and change all that, so you have to live with a lot of the inequity of a lot of it. Pensions/retirement isn't fair. I do a physically-non-demanding job and will retire at the same age as someone who did body-wrecking manual labour their whole life. Still, broadly I'd regard pensions as deferred wages, retirement as time off you've earned through a lifetime of contributing labour to society. Think it would stop sitting right with me if I spent a long period of my working life with the majority of my income coming from me passively benefiting from wealth-derived income. [Post edited 7 Jul 16:36]
|
| Forum
Reply | Downsizing / opting out
at 15:35 7 Jul 2025
Think I have mixed feelings about this.
I'm a history lecturer, which involves two things I love doing (historical research, teaching), that I'd happily continue doing until I was no longer mentally able and a bunch of stuff I hate doing (marking, a bottomless pit of bureaucracy, chasing a bunch of pointless metrics so they can produce league tables that pit my department against our peers elsewhere), which makes me want to retire as soon as is possible. Like a lot of academics, I have also been on precarious fixed-term contracts since I got my PhD, which is stressful and makes it appealing to get out asap.
Beyond that though, I think one of things our society systematically obscures is that it's labour that keeps society going not money. If you're living off investments so you can just sit there, you're basically just leveraging your wealth to make other people do all the necessary labour on your behalf. Someone slaves away at a rubbish job to pay the rent for the house you are renting, someone else slaves away in an Amazon warehouse to make Bezos a profit that he passes on to you as a shareholder. You haven't opted out of work, you've outsourced it to someone else. Doesn't sit entirely right with me. |
| Forum
Reply | Corbyn's new party launched
at 14:57 7 Jul 2025
Starmer massively benefited from the Left being widely regarded as illegitimate political actors who should be crushed by any means necessary. It was only once the Labour Left had been fully buried that the media started fully going after him. |
| Forum
Reply | Corbyn's new party launched
at 13:54 7 Jul 2025
Think there's just a significant extent to which Labour infighting, particularly post-2015, feels worse than the Tory equivalent because it is exhaustively reported on.
During the Corbyn era you'd get a whole week of front page headlines over a "coup" on Haringey Borough Council and then another week on some backbench MP's terror about being deselected. You got less coverage even when the Tories mass expelled basically all their centrist MPs.
Think it's easy to decide anti-capitalist politicians are inept, always in-fighting (and they often are), but it is always the case that the media is mainly owned by people who instinctively and automatically hate that kind of politics, so if that's your ideas you're playing on hard mode right from the start. [Post edited 7 Jul 14:50]
|
| Forum
Reply | Thank God for immigrants
at 14:41 4 Jul 2025
I do wonder if a politician honestly explaining what the current level of immigration was for and what the reality of the global refugee situation is would be any more unpopular than the current parade of governments that tells everyone they're going to "sort out immigration" and "control our borders" but then finds themselves powerless to affect it. |
| | jayessess
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 5329 | | Comment Votes: | 203 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 5532 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.