If the club relationship is the issue I think it's a silly reason. Who knows if we'll want to buy another AM player again, it's been years since we signed De Gea. By that time their board could have changed entirely. Anyway, I'm pretty sure a little extra money would sweeten them up again.Part of me wonders how much 'losing interest' is based on not wanting to screw with AM so much. Besides AG not wanting to screw his current team, maybe Utd don't want to poison the waters with AM, as we'd like to buy from them again in the future. Yeah, we can force the issue and sign AG, leaving AM in the lurch since they can't sign anyone til January, but at what cost in our relationship? Of course, we can all say 'screw it' and do the deal anyway, but maybe Utd is just giving AM some space to re-evaluate.
BTW, what's the difference in financial accounting if we paid in full up front vs in multiple installments? I figure the transfer fee is still written out over the course of the contract, whether it's lump sum or installments, but maybe the cash flow is the major difference.
I doubt this has anything to do with that. It's either that Griezmann told United in advance the deal is on only if the ban is lifted, or it's a negotiating tactic. Strange timing though if it's the latter.