Rafa Benitez has not seen a single new face coming into Newcastle United this summer so far.

Almost as surprisingly, nobody has left either.

At the end of June both Massadio Haidara and Jesus Gamez see their contracts run out but apart from that, no definite news of shifting anybody.

Quite clearly, Newcastle United have plenty of players that the manager has no use for.

Last season saw numerous senior players out on loan, with the hope of it leading to a permanent move, either at the loan club or having impressed some other club.

With Rafa not having been able/allowed to bring in signings (apart from the prearranged Dubravka deal that had to be completed by the end of May for the £4m transfer fee to apply), I have noticed that a lot of the speculative NUFC transfer coverage claiming it is going to be ‘great news for Rafa Benitez’ has tended to be more and more focused on players being sold.

The stories tending to go along the lines of ‘Great news if…….is sold,, as it means £..m added to Rafa’s transfer pot.’

The following are amongst those clearly all up for sale and many feature in these stories:

Aleksandar Mitrovic,  Rolando Aarons, Chancel Mbemba, Henri Saivet, Matz Sels, Achraf Lazaar and Jack Colback.

I think we will see at least five or six of that list move on but what will it mean for the manager?

I also believe that if offers came in for many other fringe players, there is a possibility they could also move on – the likes of Jacob Murphy, Christian Atsu, Isaac Hayden, Rob Elliot, Javier Manquillo and Joselu.

Additionally, there looks to be substance in the claims of Mikel Merino potentially heading back to Spain, another possible/likely departure.

Once again though, what would this mean then for Rafa’s transfer plans?

Well, all the reports I read, have the journalists seeing it as very simple…

If say Mike Ashley is allowing Rafa Benitez something like only £30m as a basic summer transfer fund, if he sells players for £50m or so, he will then have £80m to spend on players in total.

To believe this, you have to totally ignore how Mike Ashley has conducted transfers year after year.

When other clubs buy players from Newcastle, Ashley wants them to pay by instalments, so when for example NUFC ‘got’ £30m for Moussa Sissoko in summer 2016, it was actually £6m that they ‘got’ up front, with the rest of the cash to follow in later seasons.

Ashley has got lucky once again in recent months, with Aleksandar Mitrovic going from a player that nobody was going to pay £10m for, to a goalscorer who will sell for at least £20m this summer, with who knows how much it would be if he pulled a few rabbits out of the hat over in Russia. Don’t forget, it was on the back of a couple of surprise Sissoko showings in Euro 2016, that Spurs suddenly were willing to agree that £30m valuation.

Using a £20m Mitro sale as a base, it could quite easily see £50m or more agreed for players heading out of Newcastle this summer. Merino would be at least £10m and then the likes of Saivet, Sels, Mbemba, Colback, Aarons and the odd fringe player or two such as Atsu or Hayden, would/could comfortably raise the sales figure to £50m+.

However, where is the incentive for Rafa Benitez to sell any player he might have a use for, if he was to only get around 20% of any sales figures to spend now?

I haven’t read one report claiming Mike Ashley is going to change this policy, never mind it actually happening.

This is part of the total disconnect between Ashley & his minions and Rafa Benitez & doing things in an ambitious and progressive way to take the club forward.

Mike Ashley wanting to take incoming fees in instalments isn’t a problem, if at the same time he was willing to support Rafa over and above that.

Instead he hides behind weasel statements of giving the manager ‘every penny’ including cash from outgoing transfers…but the reality of that is this amounts to very little, if Rafa Benitez only sees a small fraction to invest now, of what players are sold for.

Using Mitrovic as the example, Rafa could sell him to Premier League new boys Fulham for £20m and they have their potentially PL class centre forward, whereas Rafa then has only £4m (20% of the £20m) to go towards his own striker target.

So for Newcastle fans and Rafa Benitez, £30m + £50m doesn’t necessarily = £80m, in fact there is no chance of it doing so, with even the manager agreeing to trade in players this summer, still meaning he is likely to have little/no more than he had to spend last summer when he had to shop for bargains.

Once you accept the above, it is then easy to see why what looks an obvious bid for Kenedy hasn’t been made, or indeed decent offers for any decent player, if you believe the Chronicle.

These are depressing times and this is with Rafa Benitez still currently sticking it out, just imagine how you would be feeling now if the manager had walked and we had another Ashley stooge?

Where there is Rafa there is still hope…but it is fading fast with the club’s owner continuing to block/undermine any chance of things going well this summer and beyond.

To feature like Matthew Robson submit your article to [email protected] and/or for more info go here



  • Clarko

    ‘If Rafa Benitez can sell unwanted Newcastle players he will have £40m not £80m to spend

    Rafa Benitez set to have £80m not £40m to spend this summer, if Mitrovic, Mbemba, Merino and others leave.’

    Great start Matthew, great start…

    • JonMag

      I`m sure you`ll get there in the end, don`t bother calling me a moron as i like it

      • Clarko

        Yeah, you still can’t read…

        • JonMag

          i don`t read the schitt you post, i just like calling you a [email protected]

          • Clarko

            You don’t read my comments, because you can’t. Didn’t block me yesterday?

            #dummy

          • JonMag

            [email protected]@k off budgie brain

          • Clarko

            caughtout(.)com

          • TheNutJob

            you couldn`t catch cold Clarko

          • Clarko

            Why would I want to catch a cold?

            #dummy

          • Jonathan Gibson

            What a bell you are jonmug

          • TheNutJob

            you`re a bigger one along with you`re facetious mates

          • TheNutJob

            he`s not even that bright, he`s Mr Google

    • TheFatController

      It’s the old 80:40 rule ….

    • Geordieguy

      Yeah OK they’re rubbish journalists on here but you’re Mr creosote’s hoop licker Which is worse ?

      • Clarko

        I don’t know what ‘Mr creosote’s hoop licker’ means?

        • Geordieguy

          Mr creosote is a very obese man from a monty python film

          • Clarko

            So that “insult” is fictional then? You couldn’t pick a flaw in any of my arguments or make fun of any of my comments so you thought it would be a good idea to go with the standard ‘I’ve got nothing to say so I’ll just say he licks Ashley’s a**e’ comment. Yeah, you’re really smart, you’re almost as smart as the ‘rubbish journalists’ who write for this site. Dummy.

          • Geordieguy

            Yes

          • Geordieguy

            I was being sarcastic . This is a fan website not the new York times . You’re the one who pointed out the mistake to make yourself look clever . Most of us ignored it and got on with our lives

          • Clarko

            No no, you can’t pull the ‘I was being sarcastic’ card after you’ve lost the argument, certainly not a whole day after you lost the argument and you definitely can’t play that card after you had the last word. You have embarrassed yourself and you have made yourself look stupid, the damage is done, get over it.

            Imagine coming back a day later and responding to a comment the you’ve already replied to because you thought you had come up with a better response than ‘yes’ and then you go and type that drivel… What a dummy.

          • Geordieguy

            I haven’t lost any argument . You’re the one trying to look clever by pointing out tiny grammatical errors while defending all the calamities that Mr creosote has made. I couldn’t be bothered to argue with you last night because I was tired

          • Clarko

            No you did lose the argument, you’ve just admitted it:

            ‘I couldn’t be bothered to argue with you last night because I was tired’

            Can you quote where I defended ‘all the calamities that Mr creosote has made’? I’ll wait.

          • Geordieguy

            No I can’t quote you word for word but that’s because your profile is private unlike mine which is public . I stand by my words while you hide them away

          • Clarko

            I don’t hide my thoughts, I comment on this site daily, I comment on Ashley daily, the question is why did you choose to respond to a message about a grammatical error and try to make it about Ashley instead of responding to one of my many comments about Ashley?

            #StrawMan #TooStupidToDebateMe

          • Geordieguy

            Yeah you comment on this daily but choose not to let people retroflect on your comments. But anyway congratulations on not signing off on dummy . At least it’s a change

          • Clarko

            I choose not to let people mass report my profile because their ego can’t take it when they lose an argument.

            So again, why did you choose to respond to a message about a grammatical error? Why haven’t you ever responded to one of my posts about Ashley?

          • Geordieguy

            You sound as paranoid as ashley . I can’t bring my son to the game for fear of being attacked etc

          • Clarko

            And there we go, nothing of substance to say. Two nights in a row.

            👋

          • Geordieguy

            Well this has been fascinating but I’m due back on planet earth now. Night night

          • Geordieguy

            OK ashley is a fat tory crook who pays his staff less than national minimum wage. Is that substantial enough for you ?

          • Geordieguy

            Mr creosote is a fat crook who paid his staff less than national minimum wage. Is that substantial enough for you?

  • JonMag

    he leaves the signings as such until the very last minute because he`s that [email protected]@king greedy he doesn`t want to pay players in the close season.
    scumbag

  • Mayor Vaughn

    Who’s proof reading these articles?

  • Leazes.

    It really is of no consequence how much Rafa may or may not have to spend.

    The club will still be positioned by the owner between 10th and 15th

    The revelation that the club has geared its pricing towards mid table and no further was apparent from Chris Holts graph-less data tables of the charges Ashley makes to fill the ground with Chaver seats.

    The club ceased to compete after the first walk away and downscaled its entire operation, and as many have said only exists to serve as a giant billboard for Ashleys marketing.

    If I were Rafa, and I’m not….I’d not sign up for this deceitful ongoing process of conning and tricking the fans of the club but walk away when the contract is up.

    Eleven years of nonsense followed the crooked regime of Hall and Shepherd….. it doesn’t have to be this way…..what other club subsidises its owners for millions each year and has done now for over 20 years?

    The purpose of a football team is to compete, to try and win things, the purpose of its board is to maximise its revenue streams and secure its long term future!

    This club has been betrayed by lots of people….the owners who didn’t care about anything but lining their own pockets, a local press who accepted a hair shirt on behalf of the fans, not to mention the fans themselves….those who treat it as an afternoon out for the beer and crac….yes you… Brian, Simon, Mark and the rest…. betrayers all!

    • TheFatController

      It is true that Rafa gives the club a superficial sheen the owner doesn’t deserve.

      Imagine that squad, with that owner, and, say, Mark Hughes in charge. Can’t see anyone arriving early to hold the ‘Sparky’ flag up in the Gallowgate.

      We got Rafa by a collision of fortunate circumstances – we’re hanging onto him by a thread now.

      I fully expect a mid to lower table everything soon, whenever the top 6 manager eventually leaves.

      Spain don’t have a manager yet. I wonder who their FA have been discussing …?

      • Mark Potter

        Do they have the money to buy him out of his contract? I’m sure there will be plenty of Spanish managers not in work they could turn to.

        • TheFatController

          He’d probably buy himself out to take the Spain job …

        • Danimal

          Perhaps they’re not penny pinchers, unlike the lying sweatshop owner you admire so much.

  • Paul Patterson

    So I can, in theory sleep with Gillian Anderson, if she says yes?

  • Tino11

    There are only two ways to get rid of Ashley;

    1) A full SJP, BUT with masses of negative banners and flags, not about
    Ashley, but about Sports Direct, mentioning everything that is toxic
    about his favourite business, from zero hours contracts to a female worker giving birth in the toilets. Do that every home game, continuously and both he and
    SD’s shareholders would soon be sick of the negative press attention,
    which could go worldwide and would dwarf any positive brand image his stupid
    SD stadium signs generate.

    2) This could work on its own or in connection with option 1. Load up your TOR browser and navigate to the Dark Web. Enlist the services of a well known hacker or hacking group and pay them (wouldn’t be much) to disable the Sports Direct website with the various options such as a DDos Attack and replace the home page with a message simply stating the website attack will be stopped when Ashley sells up.

    • Ram Kishore

      😂😂

    • Mark Potter

      Two is illegal. Anyone in the UK planning, assisting or paying money for such a thing would be guilty of conspiracy.

      Any reasonably protected website, especially an online business worth £millions, can withstand DDoS attacks, including by very sophisticated hacking groups, far more extensive than you could ever hope to purchase. Few of their attacks interrupt service at all, those that do only for a few minutes.

      The idea that you can hold a website to ransom is many years out of date. The IP addresses of the attackers can be identified and blocked almost immediately, by automated processes which monitor for any unusual traffic. You are extremely naive if you think Sports Direct’s website is not protected that way. Ashley may know nothing about IT, but his IT department do. It’s like thinking that they don’t employ security to protect their shops, and you can invade the shops and hold them to ransom for weeks or even months while Ashley arranged a sale. Within an hour the police would arrive and evict you by force. Then lock you up. The system administrators for their website could evict you in minutes. And SOCA would then be tracking you down.

      Making unwarranted demands by menaces to extract an advantage is blackmail. It is punishable in England and Wales by up to 10 years in prison.

      • TheFatController

        Can anyone already started on number 2 please stop therefore…

      • Steven05

        It sounds you know more than me about this sort of thing (honestly, no sarcasm), but did a similar thing not happen to the NHS not long ago?

      • We-Are-Anonymous

        Hahaha the only person with outdated info is you. I believe the previous poster was only using DDoS as an example, but if not, you are correct it wouldn’t work, that however is the only thing you are correct on.

        There are various methods hackers and cyber criminals can use to take down a website, including those of massive companies and even Governments, whole servers can be taken over with relative ease.

        As for logging IP addresses, please come on! Genuine hackers hide their IP addresses through multiple layers, bouncing off several servers worldwide. The idea a company like Sport’s Direct could track them is laughable. Even Law Enforcement couldn’t track them, we are talking about people with the skills on a par with state sponsored hackers from North Korea and Russia, in some cases much more talented.

        Considering most, if not all the people involved would be from outside of your little country, why would they be scared of SOCA? The only people who could eventually find out their identity would be GCHQ, after a live and lengthy investigation, but why would they spend time helping Sports Direct! You will find the only people arrested for hacking or cyber crimes are those that make mistakes or they are tech interested kids who have aspergers and weren’t really trying to hide their identity in the first place. 90% of hacking and cyber crime goes unpunished, even if it is stopped because you can never find the people behind it.

        As for cost, you’d be surprised how little people would do this for, especially if you can convince them the target(s) are lacking in morals, or are greedy or take advantage of people. What you obviously also don’t know is that many companies do and have paid hackers and criminals to get their service back, you just won’t ever hear about it from the media or those involved, I should know, I’ve seen the bitcoins.

        I’m afraid you have far too much trust in the abilities of Law Enforcement and too little knowledge of modern cyber crime.

        • Geordiegiants

          Do it, do it, do it, do it, do it 👍

    • Geordiegiants

      Either are really good ideas, the problem with one is, the sheep are used to it now so just sit on their hands and do f all and wait for him to leave.

  • Ram Kishore

    No one knows what really is happening behind the scenes.. There is already enough transfer speculation. This article seems a bit stretched and unsubstantiated

    • TheNutJob

      there`s nowt happening behind the scenes

      • Jate Legend

        Exactamundo

    • Mark Potter

      Unsubstantiated? It’s just a bare faced lie. Liverpool and Spurs wanted to buy Wijnaldum and Sissoko on instalments. The arrangement was revealed in the accounts released a year ago. Some of the idiots on this forum spent all last summer denying this, and stating that the club had received over £50m for those two players, should have been spending that on a record signing. Despite the fact that it was in black and white and undeniable.

      Now they twist what happened in those two sales to be a “policy” dictated by Ashley to sell all players that way. IF we sell Mitro in instalments it will be because Fulham cry poverty, and insist on spreading the payments until such time as they have received Sky TV money, and no-one else is willong to pay anything similar upfront. That’s undoubtedly what Huddersfield and Brighton did last summer, otherwise they simply couldn’t have afforded to buy any expensive players.

      But the other lie by the article writer is that these instalment arrangements are made over 5 years, with 20% paid each year. Neither Wijnaldum nor Sissoko were sold that way. One was over three years the other four. The accounts don’t say which, but it wouldn’t be a surprise if it was Sissoko bought by Spurs over 4 years. But there is zero evidence that these deals involved the first instalment being paid after a year, nor that the instalments were evenly spread. It’s quite possible Sissoko was sold with something like £10m upfront and £5m each year for four years.

      The only reason we know those deals were instalments was that they were for so much money AND they were after the end of the financial year. The Director mentioned them in the notes to the accounts because they didn’t appear in the numbers, and wouldn’t do so for a year. We don’t have any idea whether Janmaat and Townsend were sold on instalment deals, nor whether we bought Gayle, Ritchie, Clarke etc the same way. But we do know that the deal to buy Lejeune last summer was delayed for some weeks. Eibar said that this was because Rafa Benitez wanted to pay in instalments, they wanted the full amount upfront.

      Which is interesting, because we had heard many times over the years that Ashley preferred to buy players with cash upfront, and this had often tempted selling clubs to lower their asking prices. It seemed there was a change of policy last season, not by Ashley, but by Rafa. It seemed to confirm what Rafa told us – that he was in charge of transfers.

      We can only speculate, but it does seem that those sort of instalment deals used by Liverpool and Spurs are probably not uncommon. Certainly the accounts suggest that most clubs owe other clubs money and are in return owed money by other clubs. It is probably one of the reasons for the complexities of deals, as clubs don’t just negotiate a price, but how they will pay that price. And why not? Few people buy their cars or houses with cash upfront, and businesses do the same with their assets. Football is no different.

      • JonMag

        What a load of sheer krap

        • Ram Kishore

          No it’s not.. just read with a open mind

      • Ram Kishore

        Good and sensible comment Mark👍

      • Vodkamagpie

        Well said. Regarding mitrovic , we know fulham want him, and 20mil is a reasonable price for me. I think we should demand the 20mil up front, to dent their transfer budget in hopes they can’t strengthen to much, every season is a relagation fight for the 14 teams

    • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

      Exactly, very few clubs are doing business. Clubs try to respect those at the world cup to not have transfer speculation going on.

      This article is full of made up ninsesno.

      • Ram Kishore

        The only way to rile up few people here is to come up with these sort of articles.. I’m ok with click baits and other copy paste articles but this makes me feel Tue staff writer is acting more than just biased

        • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

          It’s in line with a lot of articles. Repeat the claim enough times and it seems to be true and appeal to the audience. The Audience here, don’t think, they believe what they are told. They don’t want to read a balanced article, they want to read an article punctuated to establish that Ashley has “minions”, says “weasel” words, staff are “Ashley stooge(s)” etc etc.

          It’s stupidity that gives Nufc fans a bad name

  • HarryHype59

    The way the Fat man conducts transfers, massively restricts the managers ability to recruit quality players. Rafa will be given only 20% of funds generated from selling players. No wonder the transfer record remains unbroken since Owen.

    • TheNutJob

      the sooner Rafa walks and we have a riot the better, get it done once and for all

      • Jate Legend

        Deck some horses

      • Mark Potter

        A riot? Smash up the town, punch horses, terrorize old ladies doing their shopping, vandalise people’s cars, loot shops, throw bricks at our police force. How far are you prepared to go – kill people?

        • JonMag

          Does he mean that type of riot, i don`t think so.
          only a [email protected]@king idiot like you would take it literally,
          now go kiss Ashley a $$ you pr1ck

          • Mark Potter

            Given your angry young man type posts that are full of hate, then why wouldn’t anyone take it literally?

          • Geordiegiants

            He never wrote that comment

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            He’s getting angry on behalf of nut Job

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            What sort of riot did you have in mind?

            This facade of stupidity must be some sort of joke.

          • Geordiegiants

            Howare Bobbi your the one that goes on about snowflakes. It’s obviously said tongue in cheek.

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            Fair enough

        • Ram Kishore

          This is a bit far stretched lol..

    • Mark Potter

      Where is the evidence for this 20%? It’s made up.

      You also have zero idea whether Owen was bought by the club on installments. Instalment deals are undoubtedly not a new thing. We have known for a long time that clubs owe each other large amounts of money. And that could only happen if transfers paid in instalments were not unusual.

      • JonMag

        Owen`s fee was paid upfront, all you have to do is look at the records.

        • Mark Potter

          Which records? The club announced in the 2006 accounts that he had been the club’s record signing at £16.8m. They said nothing about how or when that was paid. The club owed £150m at the time. It’s impossible to tell if they owed any of that to Real Madrid. But the accounts do mention in the notes that there can be payable and receivables “on deferred terms, in particular the purchase [and sales] of player registrations.” It seems odd for the accounts to mention this if the club never bought or sold players on deferred terms, ie. in installments.

          I’m not saying Owen was bought that way. But no-one outside the club and Real Madrid can know this. And this applies to every transfer. Rarely do we get the insight into the details behind a transfer than we got in the accounts referring to Wijnaldum and Sissoko, and this was only because of the highly unusual circumstances. No-one knows whether or not Mitro will be sold in installments, how much they will be and how this affects Rafa’s transfer budget. You have no more knowledge of the finances of the club than anyone else.

          • Ram Kishore

            Are u saying we had 150 million debt 2006?

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            Liabilities IN this season in this way where I said that so it would take me off as tax issue with them to be able and a brown sugar in jjiniiiiijjjujujjhhjijujuhhihuhhuiújîuuuuúhujujîjîjiijiijjjjjijjiiii8i8i8j8jjjjjjjijjîiijjjjjijjiijijihjiijjjijj, 2007 had reached £160m, £50m We did have £5m owed to us

          • Ram Kishore

            Wow that’s huge compared to what we have right now.. right now we are a bit more financially stable..
            Still need to clear the debt owed to Ashley’s company.
            It’s important to be self reliant

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            We were in a mess. We are stable now but the relegation in 2016 was the worst time to be relegated.

            We do need to push on now.

          • HarryHype59

            We are “financially stable” whilst the EPL TV revenues continue. Without them, NUFC would be in the fiscal clarts.

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            Exactly

        • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

          It looks like it was installments, our trade creditors whent up in the year Owen was signed.

          Which records are you looking at?

      • HarryHype59

        Do keep up!

        It’s common knowledge the Sissoko fee was a based on staggered payments over five years. This means NUFC get £6m or 20% of the £30m per year.

        Fatman accepts staggered payments for players that are sold but insists players are bought outright. This obviously limits the managers abilty to compete effectively in the market.

        If this practice is continued it is obvious Rafa will get 20% of the fee for that year. Think about it.

    • JonMag

      he does it with intent, he`s undermined every coach/manager from day one.

  • Donald Dong

    No-one knows the real story why funds ain’t release to Rafa, the only thing I can say is that during historical times, when he bought in United, he made quite a few unwise decisions, while his pockets are full. Then he probably realise that this business requires people with extensive knowledge to run it, but he’s reluctant to let go of major decisions, that has been costing him all these years. The reason Benitez was brought in, is because he has no clue how to reverse the sinking ship, not because he wants Benitez to run it, but he wants someone who can repair it.

    • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

      There is a bit of truth in that. He ran things his way early on having become deeply suspicious of doing things the ‘football way’ which is at odds to his business sense. I think he’s still suspicious but accepts football experience is needed in team matters.

  • Michael Robert Steel

    If you are correct, and sales of players are paid in instalments, then we should be in for a windfall from previous seasons payments then? The sales of players like Wijnaldum, Cabella, Janmaat, Sissoko, Townsend, etc in 2016 totalled around £86m. So on your reckoning we should be seeing some of that coming in and more from previous windows. How much this is and will it be made available is another matter…

    • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

      We have, in the accounts, 38m landing in 2018 with 14m going the other way.

      The author is a little misled, budgets aren’t set in the way he sets out, the cash position is important but the transfer budget is not set using the cash position in isolation.

  • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

    This is, one of the worst articles ive read recently in thetMag.

    We have, in the past paid for players up front because we’ve been a rarity in football, cash-rich and the idea is to use that to our advantage, driving the price down or accelerating a deal.

    Whilst monies owed to us went up in the accounts, mainly as a result of the Sissoko, townsend and Wjnaldum deal, so did our trade creditors suggesting the claim in the article “Mike Ashley wanting to take incoming fees in instalments” is a bit of a lie.

    It’s utter nonsense to say “When other clubs buy players from Newcastle, Ashley wants them to pay by instalments” there is no desire to take payment in installments unless it eases a sale, i.e. if the deal only goes ahead this way or the amount received in installments exceeds the amount upfront. I’m buying a kitchen right now and the shop offered me finance to encourage me to go beyond my statrd budget, it’s about them maximising a sale whilst I’m using my cash in hand position to drive down the price in negotiation.

    Budgets aren’t set in simple cash terms. They are set at overall long term budgets. If we sell Mitro for £20m in installments, the budget still goes up in simple terms by £20m. In reality, and this is where I hoped your article was going, we don’t get the full £20m. The transfer budget goes up £20m minus, mitro’s signing fee -10% our agent’s fee, say 5%, legal fees etc etc. The wages budget releases the full wage + 13.9% NI.