Given the flurry of transfer activity that has been seen at Aston Villa in recent days, Newcastle United fans are understandably asking the question around why similar isn’t happening at St James’ Park.

Newcastle missed the opportunity to move into a top four spot at the weekend after a 2-1 home reverse against Fulham, on the same weekend when fourth-placed Manchester City were humbled 5-1 at Arsenal.

But the race for Champions League football for the Magpies remains very much on, with the potential revenues available to the club should they achieve that hugely significant, far more so than they were when the club featured in the competition in 2023/24.

READ MORE: Aston Villa 'wowed' as Newcastle United not alone after £135m vote blocked

READ MORE: What happened to Newcastle's Marc Guehi transfer funds after Tottenham twist

Newcastle have been hamstrung in their bid to build on that success by the Premier League’s profit and sustainability rules (PSR), the financial controls that allow clubs to lose a maximum of £105m over a three-year rolling period, with allowable deductions from those losses for such things as investment in infrastructure, the women’s team, the academy and community initiatives.

But they haven’t been alone in that, with last season’s top-four surprise package, Aston Villa, also having to be mindful about how they go about their transfer business but still build towards building long-lasting success.

The January transfer window has seen Villa be active. They signed winger Donyell Malen for an initial £19m from Borussia Dortmund, while they also have added Manchester United outcast Marcus Rashford on loan, picking up a reported 70 per cent of his £325,000 per week wages with an option to buy for £40m in the summer. They are also in talks to sign Paris Saint-Germain’s Spanish midfielder Marco Asensio until the end of the campaign.

The Villans, who sit eighth in the Premier League, four points back from Newcastle, have also sold Colombian striker Jhon Duran to Saudi Arabian side Al-Nassr for a guaranteed £63m plus add-ons, while Diego Carlos has departed for Fenerbahce for around £8.5m.

Newcastle haven’t been active in adding, in fact they have seen two players depart this past week, with Miguel Almiron heading back to the MLS with Atlanta United for an £8m fee, while Lloyd Kelly, signed on a free transfer from Bournemouth last summer, is to join Serie A giants Juventus on an initial loan, with an obligation for the Italian side to buy the 26-year-old defender in the summer for a £20m fee.

The different approaches to the market has led to some degree of consternation among some Magpies fans, with the club in a strong position to push on and achieve Champions League football next season but failing to add players into the mix to improve their chances of doing so.

PSR, which is in its final year for the 2024/25 accounting period before being replaced by a squad cost ratio rule similar to UEFA’s, is the reason and while Villa have had to sail close to the wind like Newcastle, they have become more emboldened to act in recent weeks.

According to figures presented by football finance expert Swiss Ramble, Villa could lose around £17m for the 2024/25 period and remain PSR compliant, but that figure estimated Champions League revenue at £40m, while qualification for the knockout stages and performance in the league phase has actually delivered nearly £20m more than that.

Add into that the £53m profit made on Duran’s sale that can be booked immediately, as well as the modest £2m profit made on Diego Carlos’ sale, that is £75m of additional income for Villa that wasn’t banked on. That means losses could rise to £92m and still be PSR compliant, but that kind of financial performance likely won’t occur.

Adding Malen will add around £3.8m per year onto Villa’s books, while 70 per cent of £325,000 of Rashford’s wages is around £227,500. The outlay between now and the end of the season will be just under £3m. All very affordable given the business that has been conducted.

It puts Villa in a comfortable position heading down the stretch of the current financial year, and allows them to have one foot in the market for next year and the next financial year with Rashford’s option to buy, not to mention strengthening their chances of pushing for a top four slot.

Newcastle’s situation is different. The picture, however, starts to look a little healthier in the here and now and the current 2024/25 financial year which clubs find themselves in.

The £70m loss from 2021/22 will drop off, meaning that it will be the £73m from 2022/23 and a potential £7m profit from 2023/24, suggested by Swiss Ramble, that would lead into the 2024/25 period. That would mean that the club could lose as much as £84m in the current financial year yet remain PSR compliant, although the reality will be that the financial results will be healthier than that.

But the club booked no player trading income for this season until the sale of Almiron, which represented pure profit as he no longer held book value. The Kelly deal looks opportunistic and a way to strengthen the balance sheet into the next financial year.

The lack of additional Champions League income, or a player trading success like Villa has seen, may point to a less healthy forecast than the £7m, or a potential heavier loss for 2024/25 given the lack of sales.

There likely was the room to make some kind of addition, but in the January market it often requires a loan fee, significant contribution to wages, and often either an option or obligation to buy, and the players who are on offer are either actively wanted out by their club's due to lack of form, or prohibitively expensive because clubs don’t want to sell them mid-season when they are being impactful for said club’s aspirations.

It isn’t really a buyer’s market. Newcastle’s plan is very much around being one of the big hitters, that remains the goal of the PIF ownership. But to achieve that they have been seen to make big moves in the market, such as Alexander Isak, Sandro Tonali and Bruno Guimaraes. The signs seem to point toward the wallet being fattened ahead of some large summer business.

It is a risky strategy, however, as the club are actively in pursuit of Champions League football that has already delivered £60m for Aston Villa and more than £85m for the likes of Liverpool this season thanks to the revamped format. The club won’t want to miss out on that potential action.

Keeping Isak was always the main goal, and they have done that, but in being unable to rely on the kind of windfalls that Villa have, they just haven’t had the same ability to manoeuvre.