Ed Woodward 2019 - Until all Arctic ice melts edition

OneUnited24 said:
And I guess if you don’t know how business works that’s your problem. Just some friendly advise if you see a car you like you can negotiate on the listed price. You don’t have to pay it outright, could save you some money :)
Click to expand...

You really don't get it it's hilarious seeing you repeat the same point again and again. No one has said we should offer a 100m from the get go. The story is us and City asked to sign him several weeks ago and they asked for such price, City decided they're not paying it and backed out of the deal while we didn't want to pay it and kept stalling to get it at lower price till the last week when we ended up paying every.single.penny they wanted and got nothing bar just preventing him from joining the preseason. What's the point of delaying the deal till the last week when you're not getting it at lower price at all ?
 
el3mel said:
You really don't get it it's hilarious seeing you repeat the same point again and again. No one has said we should offer a 100m from the get go. The story is us and City asked to sign him several weeks ago and they asked for such price, City decided they're not paying it and backed out of the deal while we didn't want to pay it and kept stalling to get it at lower price till the last week when we ended up paying every.single.penny they wanted and got nothing bar just preventing him from joining the preseason. What's the point of delaying the deal till the last week when you're not getting it at lower price at all ?
Click to expand...
You dont know this.
Also: if its one player when a later transfer is OK its one like Maguire. Used to the PL and knows many players from the national team as well. He will slot right in.
But, sure, lets stay negative no matter what.
 
Woodward did not pursue alternatives to Maguire. Apparently he cannot work a deal on more than one player at a time. So there was no reason for Leicester to do anything but sit on their hands and wait for the inevitable capitulation. Incompetent negotiating by Woodward.
 
el3mel said:
You really don't get it it's hilarious seeing you repeat the same point again and again. No one has said we should offer a 100m from the get go. The story is us and City asked to sign him several weeks ago and they asked for such price, City decided they're not paying it and backed out of the deal while we didn't want to pay it and kept stalling to get it at lower price till the last week when we ended up paying every.single.penny they wanted and got nothing bar just preventing him from joining the preseason. What's the point of delaying the deal till the last week when you're not getting it at lower price at all ?
Click to expand...
So you know the whole period between the first bid and now wasn’t negotiation of the terms and it was Ed sitting at a table with his opposite number saying £70m non-stop in hopes the other guy would be like “fine”. You know this period wasn’t spent working out the details of a large transfer of money and other details over a big bid. You also know that LcFc position wasn’t £100m and Ed worked it down. You know all this?
 
OneUnited24 said:
So you know the whole period between the first bid and now wasn’t negotiation of the terms and it was Ed sitting at a table with his opposite number saying £70m non-stop in hopes the other guy would be like “fine”. You know this period wasn’t spent working out the details of a large transfer of money and other details over a big bid.
Click to expand...

All I have said was reported by almost every journalist these last several weeks. Again, if you're not following the press or don't want to believe them because it doesn't suit your ideas, it's not my problem, as far as I'm concerned.
 
el3mel said:
You really don't get it it's hilarious seeing you repeat the same point again and again. No one has said we should offer a 100m from the get go. The story is us and City asked to sign him several weeks ago and they asked for such price, City decided they're not paying it and backed out of the deal while we didn't want to pay it and kept stalling to get it at lower price till the last week when we ended up paying every.single.penny they wanted and got nothing bar just preventing him from joining the preseason. What's the point of delaying the deal till the last week when you're not getting it at lower price at all ?
Click to expand...
Again, isn't that the point of negotiations. The seller sets a value, which is always what suits them the most. Now, the buyer has a value in mind, that suits them. Now, from the pov of the buyer, you want to get the value as close to what suits you, in terms of price, or the structure of the deal and so on. This time Leicester decided to just not budge, so at the end we paid what they wanted as we needed the player. So I don't see the point of blaming the buyer for negotiating.
If you just keep backing out of deals where your value doesn't match the seller's value at the get go, then no deals will happen.
 
el3mel said:
All I have said was reported by almost every journalist these last several weeks. Again, if you're not following the press or don't want to believe them because it doesn't suit your ideas, it's not my problem, as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...
It becomes your "problem" if you choose to state it like fact. But we all know that if it had been reported as 70m you would have written exactly the same.
 
Ed shows his skills again.

Should have Fernandes sorted by October and Dybala in time for Christmas
 
Amarsdd said:
Again, isn't that the point of negotiations. The seller sets a value, which is always what suits them the most. Now, the buyer has a value in mind, that suits them. Now, from the pov of the buyer, you want to get the value as close to what suits you, in terms of price, or the structure of the deal and so on. This time Leicester decided to just not budge, so at the end we paid what they wanted as we needed the player. So I don't see the point of blaming the buyer for negotiating.
Click to expand...

What did we gain exactly from this is the question. We couldn't get the price lower and we made him miss the entire preseason. When did the last time we stall on player and ended up getting him at a far lower price by the way ?
 
Amarsdd said:
Again, isn't that the point of negotiations. The seller sets a value, which is always what suits them the most. Now, the buyer has a value in mind, that suits them. Now, from the pov of the buyer, you want to get the value as close to what suits you, in terms of price, or the structure of the deal and so on. This time Leicester decided to just not budge, so at the end we paid what they wanted as we needed the player. So I don't see the point of blaming the buyer for negotiating.
Click to expand...
Exactly. couldnt have said it any better but I guess it’s more fun to blame Ed for everything.
 
el3mel said:
What did we gain exactly from this is the question. We couldn't get the price lower and we made him miss the entire preseason. When did the last time we stall on player and ended up getting him at a far lower price by the way ?
Click to expand...
AWB. From the reports, Crystal Palace started with valuing him at 60+ million and we got him for 45+ mil.
 
Amarsdd said:
AWB. From the reports, Crystal Palace started with valuing him at 60+ million and we got him for 45+ mil.
Click to expand...

They wanted 50m iirc and we got him for 45+5, though we did manage to get rid of Zaha sell clause which was a good business though, but in terms of price, don't really think we get it that lower.
 
el3mel said:
What did we gain exactly from this is the question. We couldn't get the price lower and we made him miss the entire preseason. When did the last time we stall on player and ended up getting him at a far lower price by the way ?
Click to expand...
Well we don’t know what the starting position of any of the selling clubs has been. In fact no one does. Figures get touted by the press as that’s usually what the buying club briefs the press with. For all we know palace may have wanted £70m for AWB
 
el3mel said:
You really don't get it it's hilarious seeing you repeat the same point again and again. No one has said we should offer a 100m from the get go. The story is us and City asked to sign him several weeks ago and they asked for such price, City decided they're not paying it and backed out of the deal while we didn't want to pay it and kept stalling to get it at lower price till the last week when we ended up paying every.single.penny they wanted and got nothing bar just preventing him from joining the preseason. What's the point of delaying the deal till the last week when you're not getting it at lower price at all ?
Click to expand...
Exploring other avenues, trying to work out a deal for someone better or someone cheaper or both. There could be a million other reasons, even if the negotiation for this one was simple.
 
Moonwalker said:
Exploring other avenues, trying to work out a deal for someone better or someone cheaper or both. There could be a million other reasons, even if the negotiation for this one was simple.
Click to expand...

And the end result ?
 
The hate ed gets on here is unreal

Everyone is a master negotiator and Ed is completely incompetent, you don’t simply give them what they want you see what works hence why we seemed to have offered 70 + 10 - Its a cat and mouse game - don’t give them what they want first go otherwise any team would put extraordinary prices on their players, not budge and not sell anyone

Who’s to say that theyre not working on 3 deals simultaneously? Would expect Dybala & Bruno to follow suit soon.
 
el3mel said:
They wanted 50m iirc and we got him for 45+5, though we did manage to get rid of Zaha sell clause which was a good business though, but in terms of price, don't really think we get it that lower.
Click to expand...
Again, everyone is going by reports from journos. Based on that I'm pretty sure initially asking price was around 60+ mil or 50+ mill with the Zaha clause removed (which again has a value of at least 10+ mil)
 
'Ed won't spend, he's an ass'

***Ed breaks world record fee for a defender***

'Ed spends too much, he's an ass'

.

Manchester United fans :wenger:
 
Last edited:
Amarsdd said:
Again, everyone is going by reports from journos. Based on that I'm pretty sure initially asking price was around 60+ mil or 50+ mill with the Zaha clause removed (which again has a value of at least 10+ mil)
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...d-head-turned-aidy-boothroyd-england-under-21

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ce-aaron-wan-bissaka-deal-improved-offer-zaha

Both reports said they wanted at least 50m + the Zaha clause. We did well on the Zaha clause though, as I said.
 
Wumminator said:
:lol:

We will easily finish above Arsenal.
Click to expand...

I hope so too, but to claim that we'll 'easily finish above Arsenal' is pushing it. You do realize that we've only finished above them once (2nd place finish during Mourinho's tenure) in the 6 seasons since Fergie retired right? Probably not...
 
Josep Dowling said:
I like AWB but to suggest paying essentially £50m for a 21 year old RB is good business seems a bit extreme. I would expect to get an international and played Champions League football for that price.

Kyle Walker cost £50m just 2 seasons ago who was the best RB in the league, prime age and at a club fighting for the top 4
Click to expand...

Sorry, but AWB was easily in the top 4 or 5 performing Fullbacks in the league, arguably the 3rd best behind Liverpools duo.

£50M in today's market for an extremely talented kid who could in reality offer us 10 years of service is a bargain!

FFS, Liverpool just spent £75m on VVD and they'll be lucky to get another 3 tops seasons from him.

oz insomniac said:
The surprise is the defence mounted by the Keefys and Johan, mainly using the tactic of there could be worse owners or the so called lynch mob doesn't understand financials.
Click to expand...

What's surprising?

I'm far from a financial genius but you've idiots posting propaganda rubbish and they've no idea what it means. They just completely run with the story and take it as gospel rather than bothering their arse doing some research and learning something new for themselves.

Would you like an example?

The story going around about the Glazer sibling taking out a second loan. It's a complete nothing story and it gathered traction on twitter under the glazer out trend. There was such pearls of wisdom from idiots tagging in BBC and demanding a panorama episode on their ownership and why they can take out personal loans like this. :rolleyes:

If they knew what they were talking about they'd realize it doesn't affect the club. If her loan defaulted she'd lose shares... basically it's in their interest that the loan defaults cause she could possibly lose some control in the club, unlikely but even still its not the draining of resources from the club the glazer out sor thinks it is.
 
I'm actually a bit excited to know what our next sponsor is now.

Who's going to pay for Mcguire's wages?!
 
Red_Jamie said:
feck around all summer. Miss preseason. Pay the asking price anyway. Repeat. #edlogic
Click to expand...

How did he feck around all summer? Any evidence of that?

Late transfers have been systemic at our club long before Woodward was anywhere near it.

Gill loved a late transfer!
 
While I'm happy with Maguire and am not arsed about the price really, let's not forget Woodward was asked to sign the same player 12months ago for £20-25m less and declined, saying he was not an upgrade on what we had.

His incompetence doesnt change just because he made a signing.
 
Alabaster Codify7 said:
While I'm happy with Maguire and am not arsed about the price really, let's not forget Woodward was asked to sign the same player 12months ago for £20-25m less and declined, saying he was not an upgrade on what we had.

His incompetence doesnt change just because he made a signing.
Click to expand...

wasn't maguire's quoted price 75 million pounds after the world cup? Maybe it was less. Still I wouldn't put that all on Ed because Mourinho could have asked for him going into his 2nd season and would have been far cheaper. He got to see him up close twice against Hull and he played well in those games. Surely would have joined Mou at United over Leicester then.
 
Alabaster Codify7 said:
While I'm happy with Maguire and am not arsed about the price really, let's not forget Woodward was asked to sign the same player 12months ago for £20-25m less and declined, saying he was not an upgrade on what we had.

His incompetence doesnt change just because he made a signing.
Click to expand...

Where in the feck ya getting those figures from?

It was off the back of the World Cup!

They were still looking for a minimum of £70m for him last summer.

https://talksport.com/football/404392/manchester-united-transfer-news-leicester-city-harry-maguire/
https://www.joe.co.uk/football/manchester-united-leicester-city-harry-maguire-192020
 
I feel like working under LVG and Mourinho really hurt Woodward's reputation.

IMO Solksjaer is a much better fit for him than those two.
 
Keefy18 said:
Where in the feck ya getting those figures from?

It was off the back of the World Cup!

They were still looking for a minimum of £70m for him last summer.

https://talksport.com/football/404392/manchester-united-transfer-news-leicester-city-harry-maguire/
https://www.joe.co.uk/football/manchester-united-leicester-city-harry-maguire-192020
Click to expand...



I'll tell you exactly where I got those figures from, lad.

https://www.shoveitupyourbollocks.com/upyourbollocks/keefy18

Up your bollocks. That's where I got there from.

Now kindly shove those figures back up there for me, please.
 
If Woodward decided last summer that Maguire was not an upgrade on the current defenders we had, and a year later we have the exact same defenders still at the club, then why are we buying him now, at a more expensive price?

And if Maguire has really been our number 1 target this summer then why has it taken until 1 week before the season starts to sign him, meaning he's had no chance to bed in with the team and our system before the season has started?

This is not a criticism of Maguire at all, but another example (that we've seen every summer since Woodward took over) of a shambolic, ill thought out, and poor business approach to transfers. WOODWARD OUT.
 
JK-27 said:
If Woodward decided last summer that Maguire was not an upgrade on the current defenders we had, and a year later we have the exact same defenders still at the club, then why are we buying him now, at a more expensive price?

And if Maguire has really been our number 1 target this summer then why has it taken until 1 week before the season starts to sign him, meaning he's had no chance to bed in with the team and our system before the season has started?

This is not a criticism of Maguire at all, but another example (that we've seen every summer since Woodward took over) of a shambolic, ill thought out, and poor business approach to transfers. WOODWARD OUT.
Click to expand...


I mean I'm with you on the Woodward out train but I reckon he just didn't trust Mourinho last window. Also it was said even on this forum that his price would be inflated last summer and that it might make sense to wait a year for him so that might have been a thought. It does look fairly incompetent but had Mourinho got Maguire last window he might still be here so I'm not too mad at Ed.
 
JK-27 said:
If Woodward decided last summer that Maguire was not an upgrade on the current defenders we had, and a year later we have the exact same defenders still at the club, then why are we buying him now, at a more expensive price?
Click to expand...
A year ago maybe they saw it as a high risk whereas now they have seen him over the course of a year and decided he’s worth it. Also with us missing out on the champions league it affected our pulling power with other targets.

in summary we don’t know what had happened over the year but to put it all on him, with the benefit of hindsight, isn’t fair. Hell what if Maguire had a terrible season last year we probably wouldn’t have gone back i for him but he has a good season where a bigger outlay wasn’t seen to be a bad thing
 
Ed was right to not go for Harry last season under Mourinho imo.

He’d backed him with Bailly and Lindelof the previous season and then started stamping his feet for another defender.

The price quoted was roughly the same last year which felt really out of sync after 1 good season and an ok World Cup.

Price still seems high but isn’t outrageous given he’s had another good season showing he’s not a flash in the pan and is proven quality.

Ed’s played it right.
 
JK-27 said:
If Woodward decided last summer that Maguire was not an upgrade on the current defenders we had, and a year later we have the exact same defenders still at the club, then why are we buying him now, at a more expensive price?

And if Maguire has really been our number 1 target this summer then why has it taken until 1 week before the season starts to sign him, meaning he's had no chance to bed in with the team and our system before the season has started?

This is not a criticism of Maguire at all, but another example (that we've seen every summer since Woodward took over) of a shambolic, ill thought out, and poor business approach to transfers. WOODWARD OUT.
Click to expand...
I think Woody has a very high opinion of his own football knowledge and I think the reason we didn't buy him last season is that he thought that last season our defense was good enough that we didn't need him. I totally agree with your first point in bold as that is what I've been saying all window. I think that all our transfer business should be done at the beginning of the window to give the player time to get used to Oole's methods and gel with the team.

I also agree with your second point in bold and I think this highlights further that Woody needs a DoF in to help him out.
 
15 year contract extension for Sir Ed if he manages to get Dybala and Fernandes in.

What a crazy summer that would be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.