Bruno Fernandes | Signed

[Dante]

So you’re saying Simon Stone of the BBC made up a story ok

You sound like a religious nutter whose holy book is being questioned.

Stone was found to be reasonably accurate before now because he had United based sources.

But he's admitted that his sources for the Bruno rumour are not coming from United. Therefore, on this particular story, his reputation doesn't precede him.

 

[Cassidy]

You sound like a religious nutter whose holy book is being questioned.

Stone was found to be reasonably accurate before now because he had United based sources.

But he's admitted that his sources for the Bruno rumour are not coming from United. Therefore, on this particular story, his reputation doesn't precede him.

Ok thanks
Theres is a difference between the rumour and the club brief, my last post on the subject.

 

[Dante]

Ok thanks
Theres is a difference between the rumour and the club brief, my last post on the subject.

A rumour has no quotes and no attributions.

A club brief does have rumours and does have attributions.

All of Stone's reports on this story fall into the former category.

 

[arthurka]

Nightmares are also dreams to be fair to him.

 

[FrankDrebin]

How old is that Woodward quote now ?

 

[Nr.7]

Bruno Gaitan.

 

[Adnan]

How old is that Woodward quote now ?

From 2013

 

[friendlytramp]

got to the point where I don’t want this guy, not sure if I’ve been brainwashed by the briefings and propaganda

 

[Withnail]

I can't see the Glazers ruining their carefully crafted budget by buying a player this window. They carved out twenty million in profits and then stuck it in their own pockets. You think they're going back in their own pockets for United? Why, they never have before.

Don't the club stand to lose a lot more than 60m euros by missing out on Champions League qualification, when the drop in sponsorship revenue etc is all factored in?

 

[roseguy64]

I get being cautious and making sure you get the best deal possible, but to potentially throw it away with a player that will genuinely improve us, and clearly wants to come? It's infuriating.

They've bleated on about "we can do things other clubs can dream of" but now we look like fecking paupers. It proper enrages me.

This implies that it was continuous when it was only said once. Anyway, we then proceeded to pay over the odds to back the various managers and that worked well.

 

[roseguy64]

Just sign the fecker, he fits needs for us. Who gives a shit about ten million? The Glazers can’t, they are doing well in their pocketbooks by the club. Does Woodward think he’s going to curry favor with a segment of the fan base by saving a rounding error’s worth of money? There’s poor value in the winter window, that’s understood, everyone suffers from it. But we shouldn’t suffer so bad, we can afford the price increase.
Biggest negative affecting the club right now is Woodward.

The club can't spend like it used to. Based on the recent financials. Everything is calculated risk.

 

[Wing Attack Plan R]

Thing is, are people even excited by this signing?

I am. Hope springs eternal.

 

[Adnan]

 

[Relevated]

The club can't spend like it used to. Based on the recent financials. Everything is calculated risk.

Are you joking? So what is Woodward good at?

 

[roseguy64]

Are you joking? So what is Woodward good at?

Spending money on players past managers wanted that didn't bring enough success to cover the risks we took.

 

[Member 117152]

Apparently we have ‘settled’ on a fee of around £47 million plus add-ons via the Daily Mail... so take that with whatever giant punch of salt u like.

That’s not exactly breaking the bank for a player who ‘could’ flourish if he steps up a level. That’s the big unknown with this transfer.

His goal stats in Portugal alone gives us the option to recoup a big amount of that money in a year or 2 if he doesn’t bomb completely.

 

[sglowrider]

The club can't spend like it used to. Based on the recent financials. Everything is calculated risk.

This.

Woodward needs to prepare for the lean years whilst we re-build properly. What people all seem to forget is that we are a publically listed company and have financial goals and objectives. With the expected lack of CL football and the massive drop in revenues, we need to be more prudent with our spendings going forward.

The days of commercial activities/revenues unrelated to football performance has come to an end.

 

[Withnail]

This.

Woodward needs to prepare for the lean years whilst we re-build properly. What people all seem to forget is that we are a publically listed company and have financial goals and objectives. With the expected lack of CL football and the massive drop in revenues, we need to be more prudent with our spendings going forward.

The days of commercial activities/revenues unrelated to football performance has come to an end.

Or we invest in order to make top 4 seeing as Liverpool are the only team not looking flaky this season

 

[USREDEVIL]

This.

Woodward needs to prepare for the lean years whilst we re-build properly. What people all seem to forget is that we are a publically listed company and have financial goals and objectives. With the expected lack of CL football and the massive drop in revenues, we need to be more prudent with our spendings going forward.

The days of commercial activities/revenues unrelated to football performance has come to an end.

This actually presents a bigger term issue. In the U.S. at least, a corporation's board has a duty to maximize the shareholder's value. That is priority #1 and failing to look out for the best interests of the shareholders can subject to them to legal liability. For most companies, this is not an issue aside since the company's main goal is to create money. But when a corporation is also a sports team, then i think there's at least a bit of a "conflict." One the one hand you need to maximize the profits for the shareholders so that the value of the company, and their shares is maximized. On the other hand you want to make the team successful on the pitch and that usually means spending some of that revenue, thereby decreasing the available profit. So i always thought it strange situation having a listed company be a football team. I googled what other football teams are publicly traded and found this list:

Football Clubs on the Stock Market

• Arsenal.
• AS Roma.
• Borussia Dortmund.
• Celtic.
• Juventus.
• Lazio.
• Manchester United.
• Rangers.

Apart from Juve, not a great group of killer teams. Even Dortmund are not known as big movers in the transfer market, at least not long term. So my main point is that Manchester United being a publicly traded company may hinder our ability to compete with the current top teams that aren't publicly traded.

 

[sglowrider]

Or we invest in order to make top 4 seeing as Liverpool are the only team not looking flaky this season

There are many priorities. Getting a striker is another and usually, they don't come cheap.

Running a business like any other, there are plenty of places that you need to spend your hard-earned cash. In our case, our revenues are easier to predict. However, the spending here are fraught with uncertainties with injuries to your assets. Its easy to say that Woodward needs to budget for uncertainties but that requires compromises.

We all have to work within financial constraints and try and make the best choices given the information that we have available.

Even if we spend the extra few million, are we certain that Bruno will get us into the Top 4? What if we get more injuries or he takes a Fredeques like settling period? Then we are spending a few extra million quid at the cost of say not getting a Jude Bellingham. Or a new roof/repairs for OT as examples.

So Woodward did the best he can do in this situation or within his control -- reduce cost ie chopping off the deadwoods first. A short term measure.

Mid-term plans are to bring down the average age profile of the 1st team, which is also a cost-cutting measure.

The long term strategy is to bulk up the academy so that we have talent conveyer belt coming in for the next ten to 15 years like we did decades ago. And not quite short term bursts of spendings.

Ole is willing to play kids so this has to be part of his remit.

The mistake Woodward made was not to get Jose in right after Fergie's retirement. Jose is best with a veteran squad and squeezing every ounce out of those older legs. Plus he would guarantee silverware which would reassure fans who were unease after Fergie left. Jose just came at the wrong time.

Now we literally need to re-build structurally as well as for the short term after years of poor board management.

And it also means we have to spend everywhere -- so a few million quid matters --- we are in the worst quadrant of the matrix to be in -- declining revenues and requiring major investments for a re-build.

We can't afford to get some big-name manager who will require major short term investments -- say like a Poch or anyone else. Ole, being one of our own -- a vision is about a United built on academy players which also
handily fits within Woodward's financial constraints and reality.

The manager after Ole will be one that dovetails into the Ole/lean years -- and not blow it away after all the sacrifices that we are doing now -- and back to square one.

This will be Woodward's lessons learnt a few years down the road.

 

[sglowrider]

This actually presents a bigger term issue. In the U.S. at least, a corporation's board has a duty to maximize the shareholder's value. That is priority #1 and failing to look out for the best interests of the shareholders can subject to them to legal liability. For most companies, this is not an issue aside since the company's main goal is to create money. But when a corporation is also a sports team, then i think there's at least a bit of a "conflict." One the one hand you need to maximize the profits for the shareholders so that the value of the company, and their shares is maximized. On the other hand you want to make the team successful on the pitch and that usually means spending some of that revenue, thereby decreasing the available profit. So i always thought it strange situation having a listed company be a football team. I googled what other football teams are publicly traded and found this list:

Football Clubs on the Stock Market

• Arsenal.
• AS Roma.
• Borussia Dortmund.
• Celtic.
• Juventus.
• Lazio.
• Manchester United.
• Rangers.

Apart from Juve, not a great group of killer teams. Even Dortmund are not known as big movers in the transfer market, at least not long term. So my main point is that Manchester United being a publicly traded company may hinder our ability to compete with the current top teams that aren't publicly traded.

Precisely. People seem to think we can be free-spending and lots of cash to burn. Its all about making priorities. From fixing the leaking roof to a new stadium/stand to having to suddenly needing a temporary striker. Its so easy to bitch and criticise what the management isnt or is doing.

Easily picking out individual line-items and making an issue out of it. 20/20 hindsight.

Its chess versus checkers.

Reality is that its tough to manage a juggernaut like United.

 

[Isotope]

Need to identify cheaper players then. Just like any other teams (Liverpool, Leicester, etc). Being financially responsible doesn't mean the Club can only buy the like of Maguire once a while.

Why only chasing Bruno when you aren't ready to meet the seller demand (which is known since last Summer)?

 

[sglowrider]

Need to identify cheaper players then. Just like any other teams (Liverpool, Leicester, etc). Being financially responsible doesn't mean the Club can only buy the like of Maguire once a while.

Why only chasing Bruno when you aren't ready to meet the seller demand (which is known since last Summer)?

Maybe we have but the other players may not be available till the Summer? January is just a tough time to buy regardless.

 

[Isotope]

Maybe we have but the other players may not be available till the Summer? January is just a tough time to buy regardless.

History tells most likely not. Also you can buy player and join in later on. It's not useful for now, but it gives assurance about the Club intent and progress.

 

[sglowrider]

History tells most likely not. Also you can buy player and join in later on. It's not useful for now, but it gives assurance about the Club intent and progress.

I suspect we are either under financial constraints or we are trying to ensure that we look like we are run better financially to position ourselves for a sale once we get out of this mess.
You just dont sell when you arent looking pretty financially unless we dont have a choise -- and we arent close to that ... yet.

 

[Isotope]

I suspect we are either under financial constraints or we are trying to ensure that we look like we are run better financially to position ourselves for a sale once we get out of this mess.
You just dont sell when you arent looking pretty financially unless we dont have a choise -- and we arent close to that ... yet.

Agreed. Although with the current condition, it will be hard sell if the Club don't want to invest. The CLub is in much worser status than when they bought at 500m.

 

[croadyman]

This stubbornness over apparently €10m is doing my head in,we haven't any creativity at all so just pay up and get it done. We aren't getting top 4 or winning europa without him and a loan striker.

Personally I feel if he wanted the move that much he would push for it,similar to what Van Dijk did when wanting to leave Southampton. Doesn't look like he is that bothered and just happy to carry on at Sporting.

I really don't like the sound of what this portuguese journo Rui Braz has said about people won't believe the negotiations regarding this transfer. He also adds that Bruno isn't to blame at all which is probably spot on.

 

[sglowrider]

Agreed. Although with the current condition, it will be hard sell if the Club don't want to invest. The CLub is in much worser status than when they bought at 500m.

They did a few things:

1) They realised that the innate potential revenues for United was much bigger than the previous owners (Coolmore Gang and the Edwards) had even realised under the EPL umbrella.

2) The LBOs the purchase of the club and thus exposing it to higher financial baggage and risk than before.

3) I dont think we can criticise them for being penny pinchers in general. However, I think the mistake the Glazers made was not recognising the dangers or the linkage of team performance and long term revenue streams.

I think they thought it was a given that United would always be competing, given their history and ability to bale ourselves out by spending more and buying the best players. This is their lack of knowledge of football and not knowing the history of United ie. we have been relegated before.

 

[sglowrider]

This stubbornness over apparently €10m is doing my head in,we haven't any creativity at all so just pay up and get it done. We aren't getting top 4 without him and a loan striker.

Personally I feel if he wanted the move that much he would push for it,similar to what Van Dijk did when wanting to leave Southampton. Doesn't look like he is that bothered and just happy to carry on at Sporting.

I think that has to be his next step but maybe the last resort.

 

[Bondi77]

The thing that makes me laugh is that when Ole came in he said it was not going to be a quick fix and he would need a few transfer windows but yet we do not buy anyone in January so I take that as being a few years then.
It does not seem to take Wolves or Leicester that long to get a cohesive team that play better football than us and get good players into their club.
It just seems to be so hard for us to do.

 

[Andrew Richmond]

Need to identify cheaper players then. Just like any other teams (Liverpool, Leicester, etc). Being financially responsible doesn't mean the Club can only buy the like of Maguire once a while.

Why only chasing Bruno when you aren't ready to meet the seller demand (which is known since last Summer)?

I agree. Surely we could acquire four players averaging around 20 million each rather than gamble on Bruno for the money Sporting are asking. Personally, I don’t think he is worth the gamble at the asking price and if we sign him paying overs and the gamble doesn’t pay off then we are in a whole world of unnecessary hurt. We lack depth and quality in so many areas Bruno even if he came here and is a decent signing or better is not going to solve our problems.

 

[Adam_S]

This actually presents a bigger term issue. In the U.S. at least, a corporation's board has a duty to maximize the shareholder's value. That is priority #1 and failing to look out for the best interests of the shareholders can subject to them to legal liability. For most companies, this is not an issue aside since the company's main goal is to create money. But when a corporation is also a sports team, then i think there's at least a bit of a "conflict." One the one hand you need to maximize the profits for the shareholders so that the value of the company, and their shares is maximized. On the other hand you want to make the team successful on the pitch and that usually means spending some of that revenue, thereby decreasing the available profit. So i always thought it strange situation having a listed company be a football team. I googled what other football teams are publicly traded and found this list:

Football Clubs on the Stock Market

• Arsenal.
• AS Roma.
• Borussia Dortmund.
• Celtic.
• Juventus.
• Lazio.
• Manchester United.
• Rangers.

Apart from Juve, not a great group of killer teams. Even Dortmund are not known as big movers in the transfer market, at least not long term. So my main point is that Manchester United being a publicly traded company may hinder our ability to compete with the current top teams that aren't publicly traded.

United have been a PLC for a long time and it didn't used to stop the club from making record breaking signings on a fairly regular basis.

 

[AneRu]

Need to identify cheaper players then. Just like any other teams (Liverpool, Leicester, etc). Being financially responsible doesn't mean the Club can only buy the like of Maguire once a while.

Why only chasing Bruno when you aren't ready to meet the seller demand (which is known since last Summer)?

This. We spent 130m pounds on two defenders who aren't exactly world class when we could have shopped in the French/German leagues for cheaper alternatives who are just as effective on the pitch, such a decision doesn't sound like a club that has learned its lessons.

Maybe we have but the other players may not be available till the Summer? January is just a tough time to buy regardless.

Anyone with a modicum of football appreciation, even a 12 year old on FIFA, would have seen that our squad was ridiculously thin when the transfer window closed and scouts should have been at work in preparation for this window.

We can put up all manner of excuses but the reality of football is that financial success is built on success on the pitch, this is why United winning 13 titles under Fergie made us the richest club in the world whilst Porto who have earned hundreds of millions selling players remained a small club in relative terms.

 

[kouroux]

I think most caftards should do what I do, expect nothing good coming from any transfer windows. Expect zero players and if a player is signed, don't expect too much from him. Best way to not get disappointed and frustrated which is all our club makes us these days.

 

[ISMAIL-007]

The thing that makes me laugh is that when Ole came in he said it was not going to be a quick fix and he would need a few transfer windows but yet we do not buy anyone in January so I take that as being a few years then.
It does not seem to take Wolves or Leicester that long to get a cohesive team that play better football than us and get good players into their club.
It just seems to be so hard for us to do.

This. If there was any doubt on on the incompetence at this cub.

 

[Devil may care]

Maybe their admin is doing it for shits and giggles.

Fat sweaty Portugese nerd in his gruds pissing his sides.

That's an image I could have done without.

I think most caftards should do what I do, expect nothing good coming from any transfer windows. Expect zero players and if a player is signed, don't expect too much from him. Best way to not get disappointed and frustrated which is all our club makes us these days.

Yeah, I mean I don't care about this particular signing but overall it's the only way to deal with our transfer dealings as this stuff is a joke at this point.

 

[kirk buttercup]

I'm waiting for the line " once we get Pogba back it will be like a new signing ".
You cant get rid of What we did even though they were underperforming and not replace at all . Its madness

 

[Sunny Jim]

I think most caftards should do what I do, expect nothing good coming from any transfer windows. Expect zero players and if a player is signed, don't expect too much from him. Best way to not get disappointed and frustrated which is all our club makes us these days.

Ive been on this path since the Bastain and Schneiderline summer. I thought we were getting the best CM in the EPL.

 

[Inigo Montoya]

It’s like he’s got shit on his fingers after the paper tore

 

[JPRouve]

United have been a PLC for a long time and it didn't used to stop the club from making record breaking signings on a fairly regular basis.

United doesn't have an history of making record breaking signings on a regular basis and it used to have a strict wage structure which prevented the club from getting the likes of Batistuta.