Anthony Martial

What do think of the (supposedly) imminent signing of Anthony Martial?


  • Total voters
    1,260
Status
Not open for further replies.
That clause is only binding with respect to other Spanish clubs though.

That's not true. Case law (Martinez to Bayern, Herrera to United) has established that other EU clubs must be allowed to use the release clause mechanism.
 
It's in your interest to tell English media a lower version too.

Not to the same extent.

Woodward definitely likes showing off the club's financial power these days, so lieing about fees seems unlikely.
 
50m for Sterling isnt cheap fella. 36m for Martial is comparable. Like i said, if the 58m gets utilised, then he and we were a success, so who cares. If not, it still isnt the end of the world. City bought players thatw ere shite for ridiculous fees in the past too without getting scrutinised.

That's entirely untrue, the press love nothing more than mentioning how much City have spent and how much each individual player cost. Sterling was English and proven in the Premier League and had a good showing at the World Cup, Liverpool were always going to drive a hard bargain for him knowing City's need and want for him. Sterling's price ultimately did not surprise many people. This absurd fee for Martial has come out of nowhere.
 
With @GlastonSpur appearing in the thread, the fee will soon be around €120m, rising to €200m with add-ons. He's a one-man inflation army.

Naah. It will be about how desperate he was to join Spurs but they didn't deem him good enough to pay 20mil euros.
 
United have said that the fee is 36m and yet the people are using figures of 80m euros. Typical of some posters here.
Who knows what the truth is?

France reports say much higher, is it Monaco briefing their press that this has been agreed or is it United briefing the English media that they have scouted him for a year, they only could do the deal as Monaco were eliminated from CL and that it is for £36m

Truth is probably somewhere between, unless it's officially reported by either club, I doubt we'll truly know
 
How could it possibly be a deadline bust if he's 19 years old?

We're signing him at the deadline and he could turn out to be a bust if he never lives up to his fee.
 
Not to the same extent.

Why? Because you support one club and not the other?

As @Cina said, the truth is probably in the middle, but acting like what Man Utd leak the fee to be is more reliable than what Monaco leak is naive. Or biased.
 
Chelsea or Man City's have never topped the madness of this Martial deal if the €80m talk is true.

It'll be even more insane than spending £35m on Andy Carroll for Christ sake. @BobbyManc is spot on.
What? :lol:

£35m on Andy Carroll is the stupidest deal in English football history. Nothing will ever top that. Martial for one million more is a gamble. He might turn out to be fantastic, he might turn out to be useless, he might be something in between. It's a huge gamble.

Andy Carroll, however, wasn't a gamble. He was clearly useless. There was no chance of him ever succeeding at Liverpool because he was shite. And still is.
 
We're signing him at the deadline and he could turn out to be a bust if he never lives up to his fee.
by all accounts this doesn't look like a deadline panic buy, though. I fail to see the similarities to Di Maria (who was actually bought a few weeks before the deadline iirc)
 
It's the usual press changing something in Euros to pound sterling when it comes to United transfers.

Same thing has happened quite a few times this transfer window alone.
It's not. French journos saying a package worth up to 80m€. Whereas British journos saying £36m. What's not clear is how the deal is structured, certainly sure that this is not the case of journos getting confused though I'm sure some rival fans will.
 
No its not people talk a lot of rubbish about these clauses.

We can give him the money to buy out his contract and, no, we wouldn't pay an extortionate amount of tax on it.
When the money gets into the player's account, it's liable to a staggering 52% income tax in Spain so you'd pay almost twice as much if Atletico refuses to sell him. And even then, it isn't sure he would want to come to United.
 
Understand that people are a little taken aback by the price, it is a lot of money for a young player. The Club is loaded though, so who really cares. The biggest concern should be for the player himself and how he deals with the pressure of the fee.

However if the money could have been spent on a better/more established player then I would have preferred we do that.
 
that's what we briefed the press and that's why the BBC are running with it. French sources close to Monaco seem to put it between €60-€80m. I assume the truth lies somewhere in between.

I'd guess it's the 50m Euros basic, + 10m "easy to earn" add-ons, + 20m "really hard to get" add-ons.

The James deal last year was thought to include a "wins Ballon D'Or with Real Madrid," bonus clause for example. If the bonus clauses are tough enough and he earns them then it could still be a fair deal.
 
It's in your interest to tell English media a lower version too.

Yes its not like that lie could be exposed later on when United have their quarterly investor calls and are answerable to the investors...oh hang on!
 
A UK footy journalist? Must be true then, they never make shit up.

Same Uk journos that have been spewing nonsense all summer? same journos that had no clue about Martial until yesterday?
It was Ducker I think, I don't see what they'd have to gain by lying about what United have said to them. All the figures the moaners are quoting come from French journos.
 
What? :lol:

£35m on Andy Carroll is the stupidest deal in English football history. Nothing will ever top that. Martial for one million more is a gamble. He might turn out to be fantastic, he might turn out to be useless, he might be something in between. It's a huge gamble.

Andy Carroll, however, wasn't a gamble. He was clearly useless. There was no chance of him ever succeeding at Liverpool because he was shite. And still is.

Scored 11 goals in 19 apps for Newcastle in half a season, I'm in no way,shape or forming saying it was a sensible deal for that price, but he had already proven himself in the PL and was definitely not shite.

But i guess feck Liverpool.
 
I see liverpool, city fans and glastonmongs being annoyed over this unproven nobody that we're allegedly overpaying for. Can't help but smile.

The club's using its money, it didn't come from russians or oil sheiks, we're entitled to spend it as stupid as we want I think.
 
Yes its not like that lie could be exposed later on when United have their quarterly investor calls and are answerable to the investors...oh hang on!

Yeah, because Man Utd can't just wash their hands of what English media report and call it guesswork. Oh hang on.
 
If he costs £36m then it won't be much more than you paid for Soldado. Of course you will keep quoting him at £58m which is nonsense.

Actually even the base figure of £36m would be £23m more than the £13m base figure paid for Soldado. And the £58m with potential add-ons would be £32m more than Soldado's equivalent.

You say that £58m is nonsense, but there are plenty of reports to the contrary.
 
Sounds fecking expensive.
 
Why? Because you support one club and not the other?

As @Cina said, the truth is probably in the middle, but acting like what Man Utd leak the fee to be is more reliable than what Monaco leak is naive. Or biased.

Because Woodward wants to make the club look like a financial powerhouse for whom money is no object.

I don't think United have leaked the fee in any case, we haven't leaked a fee for any player thus far. Didn't even correct the assertion from every media outlet that Schweinsteiger cost £14m when it was actually only £6.3m. Probably some third party, and I'd believe that fee over something coming out of Monaco, given that they've just lost their brightest young player.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.