David Gill Transfer warchest v2012

Pexbo said:
Change the record. As Gill said, we've got the third largest turn over in world football. Cash is and never has been a problem. We invested the best part of £100m last summer and we will no doubt do the same this year, maybe more.

What has ever happened to suggest we are skint?

£55m last year, £30m the year before, £20m before that, £35m before that, £60m before that.

"net spend?" so we let some players go which keeps a balance, is that a bad thing? Berbatov, Owen, Park and Macheda will probably be gone this year, it'll balance the books but it's not like we are being forced to sell, they are all surplus to requirements.

This club still has the clout and ability to attract when it needs to.
Click to expand...

Good post.

It is all about balance with the wages and squad and with players going out this summer there is obviously room for new arrivals and that is what we will see.

The people who keep harping on about there being no money and us not signing anyone must have been living in a cave the past few years.
 
MLfh2.jpg
 
If the rumours of the partial float are true, then we can probably expect us to spend more than usual anyway, as the glazers will be making a profit from Singapore/HK.
 
Cina said:
We completely overpaid for Young though.
Click to expand...

I've said before that I feel we overpaid massively for Young, but Fergie obviously felt he represented value in the last year of his contract. Given the wages of apparently £5-6m a year in addition to the £17m fee I really don't see how the £45~m expenditure could be justified over 5 years, particularly in an area we were already well stocked.
 
I quite like our approach to finances and transfers, Glazer-effect not withstanding. I think it's in keeping with the heritage of the club. We live within our means, earn our success on the pitch, value youth development and the Manchester United ethic of playing football and don't fall into the trap of splurging on quick fixes. But a quality midfielder would be extremely beneficial right at the moment, so even if that is the only transfer we make this summer I'll be happy
 
14th June 2005 Glazers took full ownership of United.

United have spent £52.6m net
Arsenal = - £42.2m (yes they have a negative net spend)
Liverpool = £108.95m
Tottenham = £84.45m
Chelsea = £247m
City = £407m
 
Commadus said:
14th June 2005 Glazers took full ownership of United.

United have spent £52.6m net
Arsenal = - £42.2m (yes they have a negative net spend)
Liverpool = £108.95m
Tottenham = £84.45m
Chelsea = £247m
City = £407m
Click to expand...
These are tiresome.
The 80m skews it a bit. Just because we had the world class talent who got us 80m doesnt mean we spend it to make a point.
And we have a very high wage bill as well.
Twice that of Spurs and nearly 30-40% more than Liverpool. That over 7 years amounts to much more than the difference in 'net spent'

Again. we arent overflowing with money, but we arent skint. We have to be sensible with our spendings, but it doesnt mean we cant spend...
Cant afford too many expensive duds.
 
Sarni said:
That's more down to Ferguson being stubborn, we could have signed a midfielder, we have had the money.
Click to expand...

I agree for me he hasn't tried hard enough. I think he has thought if an offer too good to miss comes along then we will take it. But i do not think he feels we need anything more in midfield.

I find this very worrying indeed, and i agree with Noodle if we start the summer with what we had last year, i envisage similar problems and a similar end result.
 
apotheosis said:
I agree for me he hasn't tried hard enough. I think he has thought if an offer too good to miss comes along then we will take it. But i do not think he feels we need anything more in midfield.

I find this very worrying indeed, and i agree with Noodle if we start the summer with what we had last year, i envisage similar problems and a similar end result.
Click to expand...

He relied on Fletcher, Anderson and till a couple of seasons back Hargreaves to cement their places. He obviously placed alot of faith in our youngsters. Sometimes it pays off, sometimes it doesn't.
 
Gill: "We're one of the top three clubs in terms of turnover in world football which generates a lot of cash to invest in players."

Fergie: "We are not like other clubs who can spend fortunes on proven goods".


Sing from the same hymn sheet please gentlemen.
 
prateik said:
These are tiresome.
The 80m skews it a bit. Just because we had the world class talent who got us 80m doesnt mean we spend it to make a point.
And we have a very high wage bill as well.
Twice that of Spurs and nearly 30-40% more than Liverpool. That over 7 years amounts to much more than the difference in 'net spent'

Again. we arent overflowing with money, but we arent skint. We have to be sensible with our spendings, but it doesnt mean we cant spend...
Cant afford too many expensive duds.
Click to expand...

The £80m does skew it but not by a whole lot. I don't think we would have brought Valencia and Young if we hadn't sold Ronaldo. The £80m is in the coffers and it is up to us whether or not to spend it.
 
It's the wages which we struggle with, not transfer fees. If fergie wanted to spend £40m on a player I'm sure he could, but we probably wouldn't be offering that player the same money as certain other clubs do.

This summer however we should see a few departures again and see the wage bill trimmed down a bit. Berbatov is on £90k or so, Owen is probably on about £40k basic, then there are others who may leave/retire/ take a pay cut like Anderson, Park Fletcher, Giggs, PIG and Rio.

We should be trimming at least £250k p/w off the wage bill which I would expect us to reinvest into our new signings.
We should
 
prateik said:
These are tiresome.
The 80m skews it a bit. Just because we had the world class talent who got us 80m doesnt mean we spend it to make a point.
And we have a very high wage bill as well.
Twice that of Spurs and nearly 30-40% more than Liverpool. That over 7 years amounts to much more than the difference in 'net spent'

Again. we arent overflowing with money, but we arent skint. We have to be sensible with our spendings, but it doesnt mean we cant spend...
Cant afford too many expensive duds.
Click to expand...

A responsible club does not buy players to make a point. However I doubt that a big club would rely on 36-38 yr olds or defenders/wingers to sort problems in CM. There had been some shrewd transfers going on which could have helped us sort this issue once and for all. However we decided to opt for the 'no one can replace Paul Scholes' theory.

I think the writing on the wall is pretty clear. We're not big spenders.
 
apotheosis said:
I agree for me he hasn't tried hard enough. I think he has thought if an offer too good to miss comes along then we will take it. But i do not think he feels we need anything more in midfield.
Click to expand...

I think that he feels that only top class will improve us in midfield - he mentioned before how hard it is to find a Keane, a Robson, a Scholes, and that if we identify one we'll try to get him. I tend to believe otherwise.
 
R_Kelly said:
Jones was wanted by Chelsea (amongst others) who have deep pockets.

Valencia was wanted by Madrid.
Click to expand...

If the media was to be believed, we also stole Bebe right from down Real's nose. Would you believe that?

If Real wants a player we want (and they want him as first teamer) then 99 per cent of the time they'll get him.
 
prateik said:
These are tiresome.
The 80m skews it a bit. Just because we had the world class talent who got us 80m doesnt mean we spend it to make a point.
And we have a very high wage bill as well.
Twice that of Spurs and nearly 30-40% more than Liverpool. That over 7 years amounts to much more than the difference in 'net spent'

Again. we arent overflowing with money, but we arent skint. We have to be sensible with our spendings, but it doesnt mean we cant spend...
Cant afford too many expensive duds.
Click to expand...



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13679632

UTD - 132m
Liverpool - £121m


http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/may/19/football-club-accounts-debt

There is an error on the Arsenal figure.
 
devilish said:
If the media was to be believed, we also stole Bebe right from down Real's nose. Would you believe that?

If Real wants a player we want (and they want him as first teamer) then 99 per cent of the time they'll get him.
Click to expand...

Steve Bruce confirmed that Valencia turned down an offer from Madrid, you calling him a liar?
 
RedRichio said:
I'd love to know when we were top of the transfer tree globally. It's not been in my thirty years of supporting united.
Click to expand...

Remember Veron? Ferdinand? Rooney? RVN? Nani? Anderson? etc.. and some where we just fell short like Ronaldinho? Robben? Those guys were cream of the crop in the market at the time and were very sought after by the top clubs in Europe. Their prices and wages today would be much higher and beyond our definition of value. I'm pretty sure that the likes of Diouf, Owen, Bebe, Hernandez, Young, etc are a step down.

Again, I think its important to consider that maybe SAF and Gill have just been unwilling to fish at the top end because they didn't see a pressing need and were cautious about the prices and what not, and were waiting for an appropriate time. But I think it is pretty clear that our transfer activity has changed - a lot of United fans didn't become disgruntled because they were imagining things. Our place in the market just ain't the same anymore.
 
devilish said:
A responsible club does not buy players to make a point. However I doubt that a big club would rely on 36-38 yr olds or defenders/wingers to sort problems in CM. There had been some shrewd transfers going on which could have helped us sort this issue once and for all. However we decided to opt for the 'no one can replace Paul Scholes' theory.

I think the writing on the wall is pretty clear. We're not big spenders.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where he's getting Chelsea from, but Jones was chased by both Arsenal and Pool too. I'm pretty sure SAF said himself that he wanted to wait another year to get him but was forced into the transfer last Summer because they were bidding too.
 
I reckon our warchest this year will be around the 75 million mark.
 
Interval Level said:
He relied on Fletcher, Anderson and till a couple of seasons back Hargreaves to cement their places. He obviously placed alot of faith in our youngsters. Sometimes it pays off, sometimes it doesn't.
Click to expand...

When has it paid off again? It seems to have not paid off much more often from my perspective.

Relying on someone who is injury prone and another with a incurable illness is a huge risk and never really likely to pay off. We would all have loved for TC and Ando to have continued as they started, but can you honestly tell me you have been shocked by the fact Fletcher and Anderson have been missing for most of the season?

Prepare for the worst while hoping for the best. We hoped for the best with no plan for the worst, and have since paid a heavy price for that lack of foresight.
 
I used to believe in the Sacred Warchest, back in the halcyon days of 2008.

Now the cruel Gods guide me to a new icon: the Bargain Bin
 
devilish said:
A responsible club does not buy players to make a point. However I doubt that a big club would rely on 36-38 yr olds or defenders/wingers to sort problems in CM. There had been some shrewd transfers going on which could have helped us sort this issue once and for all. However we decided to opt for the 'no one can replace Paul Scholes' theory.

I think the writing on the wall is pretty clear. We're not big spenders.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is all about being big spenders, i think Fergie like Wenger simply doesn't like being told what to do. He is a stubborn old sod at times, and without a strong number 2 to tell him he may be wrong occasionally, i think he makes a lot of questionable decisions.

Not only in terms of transfers, but tactics and formations too. Had some real shockers this season, some of the worst i can remember. Blackburn at OT sticks out like a beacon.
 
Raoul said:
If it is, it would mean at least two expensive players in addition to Kagawa being bought. I doubt he will go for more than 12m.
Click to expand...

Even that sounds steep. I would have thought under 10 consideting he has a year left on his contract. I doubt 75 mill warchest is realitic, more like 30 i would have thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.