Alexis Sanchez | Done deal

Status
Not open for further replies.
£180 million for Sanchez is not a bad outlay, considering under normal circumstances we would have to pay £100 million plus for the initial transfer for him and then his wages on top of that which would probably be similar.
 
Dumbstar said:
180m :eek: Even taking away 100m for salaries 80m for a 29 year old? :eek:
Click to expand...
It's bollocks of course. People get confused over the whole before/after tax. He's currently on 160k a week, we're giving him 270k a week (14m a year). Agent gets 10m, signing on fee they're saying 20m (I doubt it's quite that high) and then a straight swap for Mkhitaryan who is valued at 30m. Also literally none of the other fees are ever included when talking about player cost so I don't know why it is now.
 
What happened to the good old term 'transfer fee'? Here all the talk is about "transfer worth around ..." and some other fluffy terms. Being a bit old fashioned here, I know, but what is the transfer-fee for Alexis?
 
United_We_Stand said:


"The 29 year-old will be paid £14m a year after tax - just under £27m a year before tax - to join United, on top of his £30m valuation, £20m signing-on fee, and an agents’ fee worth more than £10m. That all adds up to around £180m"
Click to expand...


£27 x 4 = 108
30 + 20 + 10 = 60
Total is £168m, so how do they arrive at £180? Are we also paying part of Mhiki’s salary according to these journalists?
 
Class of 63 said:
I know, they all seem to drag on these days, but guess it's too much to ask that they're all Chicharito, Bailly type transfers, done and dusted before the press even have an inkling anything is happening.
Click to expand...
I guess that’s becuasue their lower key transfers and so easier to keep under the radar till it’s all about sewn up
 
I've genuinely never seen another club's transfer reported as a total cost over the length of the contract.
 
Well City got Kyle Walker for 50 million: On 14 July 2017, Walker signed a five-year contract with Manchester City, in a transfer reported to be worth an initial £45 million fee, rising to £50 million with add-ons

So who do you prefer buying ?
 
ive never known transfer figures get reported as much and then inflated as when united sign a player. One minute we are buying someone for 30m, then another reporter has to then add the wages on to the deal.. then agent fees. Every time we buy a player the media have to give a negative spin, i remember the martial deal getting over done by the press, then pogba was the same. Im sure if the sanchez deal to man city went through, all the media would be calling it a bargain and no mention of his wages.
 
gavdim2002 said:
What happened to the good old term 'transfer fee'? Here all the talk is about "transfer worth around ..." and some other fluffy terms. Being a bit old fashioned here, I know, but what is the transfer-fee for Alexis?
Click to expand...
They still do that for other clubs but whenever it looks like United have got a good deal on a player the media always change the narrative and run with some bullshit wages story.

These journalists are sick to their stomach to see United beat their darlings City to a player so they'll do anything to make us look bad or whatever.
 
Dumbstar said:
180m :eek: Even taking away 100m for salaries 80m for a 29 year old? :eek:
Click to expand...

Journalist just cant add - 27 x 4 = 108 (+ 30 + 20 + 10) = 168

I'm guessing all them figures are bullshit. Every other report is saying 10m signing on fee and 5m agent fees,
randomly doubling numbers makes me kind of skeptical of the journalist personally.
 
Anyway, it’s not my fecking money.

United can pay him 400K a week for the rest of his life if they can afford it.

All that matters is that soon he’ll be our player who’ll take us to the next level.

feck what the ABU crowd say. They’re jealous we can do these type of deals.
 
gavdim2002 said:
What happened to the good old term 'transfer fee'? Here all the talk is about "transfer worth around ..." and some other fluffy terms. Being a bit old fashioned here, I know, but what is the transfer-fee for Alexis?
Click to expand...
Because us paying 0 for Sanchez (straight swap for Mhiki) doesn't sell papers or play into the media narrative of Money vs. Pep.
 
The way figures are being thrown around makes me wonder if maybe we should have invested those billions, instead of sanchez, on cloning Gorge Best.
 
United_We_Stand said:


"The 29 year-old will be paid £14m a year after tax - just under £27m a year before tax - to join United, on top of his £30m valuation, £20m signing-on fee, and an agents’ fee worth more than £10m. That all adds up to around £180m"
Click to expand...


Never knew Txiki Begeristain wrote as a ghost columnist for the Telegraph :lol:
 
manunited1919 said:
£27 x 4 = 108
30 + 20 + 10 = 60
Total is £168m, so how do they arrive at £180? Are we also paying part of Mhiki’s salary according to these journalists?
Click to expand...
I think they're combining the agent fee to the 168m total to bring it to 180m. That's the only thing I can think off.

Either way the initial reports stated his salary would be in the 300k per week range.
 
Mourinho back at Lowry Hotel, we aren't going to hear anything tonight either :mad:

DTwzyc0U8AEYUs9.jpg:large
 
I can never understand why the buying club has to pay a fee to the player's agent. Surely the agent is working for the player so they should take their fee out of what he is getting??
 
Utd7 said:
I think they're combining the agent fee to the 168m total to bring it to 180m. That's the only thing I can think off.

Either way the initial reports stated his salary would be in the 300-350k per week range.
Click to expand...
Isnt the agent fee the "10" in his calculation?
 
JustFootballFan said:
This might also become more/is this messy, because of the Aubameyang/Mkhitaryan connection. Maybe neither wants to go to Arsenal, unless the other one has an agreement. And Dortmund probably could not care less about United/Sanchez/Mkhitaryan. Might only encourage them to take a harder stance on the fee.
Click to expand...
Yeah fair shout, but Nornally in transfers the selling club is trying to buy a replacement the buying club might be looking to shift a player out to make room.

It’s probaly just that big name transfers are complicated thier is a lot of money and egos kicking around and it just takes a while to get that all in a row.
 
Rado_N said:
Worth pointing out we've just had our annual wage bill for 2016 confirmed as circa £260m, and the dumb feck journos are claiming we're giving 10% of that to Sanchez now?

Obvious bullshit is obvious, the £14m figure is probably close to accurate but before tax, and the brainless twerps have decided to gross it up to sensationalise it.

We've seen the same thing with Rooney, and with transfer fees where they've just changed a € sign to a £ sign and then later converted that back up to a higher € figure. They straight up make this shit up.
Click to expand...
Journalists don't have the skill to read financial statements and if they do, it doesn't feed their narrative of evil money United. Clickbait wums, the lot.
 
And keep in mind that City are now after Fred, who "tested positive for the banned diuretic hydrochlorothiazide in June 2015".

How much ?
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
I can never understand why the buying club has to pay a fee to the player's agent. Surely the agent is working for the player so they should take their fee out of what he is getting??
Click to expand...

Agents fees are generally deemed to be 50/50 on behalf of the player and the club, so say for example the agent gets £10m in total, £5m will be a club cost and £5m the club is paying on behalf of the player and the player will have to pay tax on that as a benefit in kind.

In reality it's all for the player, but HMRC accept the 50/50 split as reasonable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.