Erling Haaland

Status
Not open for further replies.
red thru&thru said:
You put this sooo much more eloquently than I was.

Also touching on your point about only winning about £6m more in prize money...winning the league usually means bonuses for all involved, which soon eats away into the money made by winning.

I'm convinced this is why Arsenal were always happy to just finish in top 4 than to ever really try to win the league.

Winning the league obviously gives you more than just money in the short term. For a marketing juggernaut like us, it helps to pull in and charge extra to be associated with the best team in the best league in the world.
Click to expand...
Yeah, very true about squad bonuses. There was a great article in July explaining how we actually made a net loss by qualifying for the CL regardless of the Adidas money because of the 10-20% wages increases in players' contracts for CL participation.

As for Arsenal, very possible, especially during the years of paying out their stadium.
 
Matriac said:
Most in here are way too worried about an agent. He's more talk than action.

Now would I prefer that he didn't represent any of our current players and future targets? Sure. But am I worried enough that I wouldn't want some of the best players in the world at the club just cause he runs his mouth now and again?

Ole has zero trouble dealing with him, most of the time he just ignores him. And in those situations where Ole snaps back a bit, Mino usually has to backtrack shortly after.

People put way too much weight on whatevers said in the media.
Click to expand...
People put too much weight on what's being said in the media (including twitter) on every football related topic. Unfortunately.
 
georgipep said:
You don't have to convince me, I'm a huge Haaland fan but I'm also incredibly cheap and practical when it comes to investment cases. I don't have a proven model to estimate commercial benefits from signing a worldwide football star (as I'm sure he will sell a lot of merch and drive social media engagement through the roof) thus cannot take that into account when evaluating potential transfers. £120m is more than our mandatory annual EBITDA. Considering the uncertainty around this season (record number of new PL player COVID infections last week) and the not-so-remote possibility to have a new hiatus, which would destroy revenue projections, I would never sanction such a transfer fee if I were in charge.
Click to expand...

But if we can sell for example Martial (60M), Pogba (40M) and Pereira (doing well at Lazio so maybe we 20M) for a combined 120M, aren't we better off doing that and buying Haaland than not?

You can't just look at EBITDA, you also have to look at our academy and such. Having an academy costs a certain amount, but Greenwood for example we could presumably sell for 60M tomorrow.
 
NoPace said:
But if we can sell for example Martial (60M), Pogba (40M) and Pereira (doing well at Lazio so maybe we 20M) for a combined 120M, aren't we better off doing that and buying Haaland than not?

You can't just look at EBITDA, you also have to look at our academy and such. Having an academy costs a certain amount, but Greenwood for example we could presumably sell for 60M tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Selling Martial and Pogba? No, we won't be better off. Not even going to comment who would buy them and pay them the wages they'd demand.

What does the academy cost have to do with the spend for a player? Academy costs are OPEX and would be calculated in the EBITDA.

You are talking about asset values when you are speculating about Greenwood's potential transfer value. That (asset values) has nothing to do with EBITDA.
 
georgipep said:
Selling Martial and Pogba? No, we won't be better off. Not even going to comment who would buy them and pay them the wages they'd demand.

What does the academy cost have to do with the spend for a player? Academy costs are OPEX and would be calculated in the EBITDA.

You are talking about asset values when you are speculating about Greenwood's potential transfer value. That (asset values) has nothing to do with EBITDA.
Click to expand...

1. We might be, and I'm fairly sure both would have lots of interest at their wages, though Pogba's fee might be lower than we'd like.

2. We're talking about buying Haaland, and I'm saying you can't use EBITDA and not consider that we also can sell players for transfer fees when looking at the overall picture and evaluating if we should buy him. Academy costs are in OPEX, but Greenwood asset value for instance is part of the overall club's financial situation and would be included in an analysis of the club's finances and debts and assets by any prospective buyer.
 
NoPace said:
1. We might be, and I'm fairly sure both would have lots of interest at their wages, though Pogba's fee might be lower than we'd like.

2. We're talking about buying Haaland, and I'm saying you can't use EBITDA and not consider that we also can sell players for transfer fees when looking at the overall picture and evaluating if we should buy him. Academy costs are in OPEX, but Greenwood asset value for instance is part of the overall club's financial situation and would be included in an analysis of the club's finances and debts and assets by any prospective buyer.
Click to expand...
Any prospective buyer of the club? Or? I don't get this argument.

As for the potential of Haaland for Martial+Pogba, I would be completely against such a deal. Haaland should be coming to challenge Martial for the striker position, not losing Anthony and be left with Greenwood (who, I guess you are also listing for transfer?) and Cavani.
 
the difference between us and City getting him could have a huge impact over the next decade

City would piss the league this season if they had him

I'd be more inclined to put up with Raiola on this occasion
 
Tarrou said:
the difference between us and City getting him could have a huge impact over the next decade

City would piss the league this season if they had him

I'd be more inclined to put up with Raiola on this occasion
Click to expand...

Yup. We’d also be comfortably top if we had him this season. This is a player that will almost guarantee 20+ league goals per season for the next decade. A striker of that caliber is simply cheat code.

If we refuse to get him for the sake of pride and he signs for City then we’ve practically dug our own grave. We’d be underdogs for most of this decade just like the previous decade.
 
As if Haaland would stick around for a decade. It would be about 2 years, 3 years max. That's Raiola's MO.
 
NoPace said:
But if we can sell for example Martial (60M), Pogba (40M) and Pereira (doing well at Lazio so maybe we 20M) for a combined 120M, aren't we better off doing that and buying Haaland than not?

You can't just look at EBITDA, you also have to look at our academy and such. Having an academy costs a certain amount, but Greenwood for example we could presumably sell for 60M tomorrow.
Click to expand...

Selling Martial would be terrible business. His link up play is exceptional these days despite not scoring enough. He would at this moment in time be a big loss.
 
Icemav said:
Selling Martial would be terrible business. His link up play is exceptional these days despite not scoring enough. He would at this moment in time be a big loss.
Click to expand...

What about next summer when Haaland's release clause is activated
 
Nero said:
As if Haaland would stick around for a decade. It would be about 2 years, 3 years max. That's Raiola's MO.
Click to expand...

I'd take that to be honest

Assuming his next destination will likely be Spain in that case, and we make a profit on it
 
I don't see why many on this site believe the Haalands want Erling to be the most hated mercenary in the history of European football by forcing a change of clubs every 2 years just so the Haalands can pocket truckloads of cash. It's plain to see that the Haalands are using Erling's time at Dortmund to hone his skills until his 68m release clause becomes effective in the summer of 2022. No club is going to spend 120m in the summer of 2021 to buy a contract that has a 68m release clause that becomes effective in the summer of 2022. In the summer of 2022, the Haalands will pick the club where Erling can retire as a much loved club legend as his mentor OGS did. It's up to Ole and Ed to maintain the current positive momentum so that United is the clear choice.
 
DOTA said:
Yeah, I don't really get this. Do people regret us signing Ronaldo?
Click to expand...

I do. Imagine the player Chris Eagles would have been if we hadn’t signed that mercenary who left for Real. Chris would have never left us if we hadn’t suppressed his talent.
 
NoPace said:
But if we can sell for example Martial (60M), Pogba (40M) and Pereira (doing well at Lazio so maybe we 20M) for a combined 120M, aren't we better off doing that and buying Haaland than not?

You can't just look at EBITDA, you also have to look at our academy and such. Having an academy costs a certain amount, but Greenwood for example we could presumably sell for 60M tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Nobody is going to pay us £60m for Martial for Christ’s sake!
 
croadyman said:
What about next summer when Haaland's release clause is activated
Click to expand...

why would we sell Martial? He would be a great player to assist Haaland at the very least. Aside from the fact that we want squad depth which is one of the reasons we so dangerous at the moment.
 
Icemav said:
why would we sell Martial? He would be a great player to assist Haaland at the very least. Aside from the fact that we want squad depth which is one of the reasons we so dangerous at the moment.
Click to expand...

You think Martial would be happy to stick around as a back-up?
 
NYAS said:
You think Martial would be happy to stick around as a back-up?
Click to expand...

Do I care? Only if he performs badly. And who is to say Haaland will be a success? At the moment we combine and rotate between Martial, Rashford, Cavani, Greenwood. In the future it may be Martial, Rashford, Haaland, Greenwood. Lets see but I doubt the club are considering selling any of our young strikers at the minute unless there is a transfer request.
 
NoPace said:
But if we can sell for example Martial (60M), Pogba (40M) and Pereira (doing well at Lazio so maybe we 20M) for a combined 120M, aren't we better off doing that and buying Haaland than not?

You can't just look at EBITDA, you also have to look at our academy and such. Having an academy costs a certain amount, but Greenwood for example we could presumably sell for 60M tomorrow.
Click to expand...
World Cup winning, World class, Captain, Paul Pogba. 40m :lol:
 
Guys, I understand we all want him play for us. If his agent is really Raiola, we must definitely forget about it. Just NEVER do any business with him, period.
And, some even want to sell Martial to get it done! I am speechless...
 
There is a lot of great players in the market so we'll definitely have a fair chance of getting him in my opinion. Salah, Mbappe, Sancho, Neymar, Messi and a few other top players is probably looking to move. There is not that many top clubs. If we're doing well in the league we might be a destination for one of these players if not Haaland. Chelsea have already invested heavily in attack. Real Madrid have done the same with millions spent on Hazard, and Brazilian talents, they don't seem to have that much money to spend and would probably buy Mbappe if they could. Barcelona, well they have wasted money and is probably not in for huge transfers but might want to bring Neymar back if they sell Messi. Bayern might be in for someone like Salah. Liverpool might be in for Sancho and Haaland if they sell Salah, but they probably do need to sell to invest in such signings.

All I'm saying is that there is a lot of big money transfers waiting to happen, and a few of the traditional top clubs are struggling for money so I think any club in a good financial position looking to step up can capitalise on this. Someone like Mbappe might even consider Bayern or United if he can't go to Real.
 
AaronRedDevil said:
World Cup winning, World class, Captain, Paul Pogba. 40m :lol:
Click to expand...

Yeah, but a 28 year old this summer with one year left isn't netting 60M, right? 40M however maybe someone pays it to secure him having agreed on an extension.
 
georgipep said:
You don't have to convince me, I'm a huge Haaland fan but I'm also incredibly cheap and practical when it comes to investment cases. I don't have a proven model to estimate commercial benefits from signing a worldwide football star (as I'm sure he will sell a lot of merch and drive social media engagement through the roof) thus cannot take that into account when evaluating potential transfers. £120m is more than our mandatory annual EBITDA. Considering the uncertainty around this season (record number of new PL player COVID infections last week) and the not-so-remote possibility to have a new hiatus, which would destroy revenue projections, I would never sanction such a transfer fee if I were in charge.

Putting into consideration the fact that winning the league doesn't really bring in that much MORE revenues. For example, two years ago (when City became champions) the first placed team took home only £6m more than the 4th placed (who also qualify for the CL).

image.png


I reailze there are additional benefits of being champions but in the world of corporate finance, Profit/Loss statements and business management, an over-investment of nearly £50m really isn't justified by the expected benefits.

I would be very surprised if Manchester United does any serious business this month. We don't have serious injury problems, have considerable depth in every position and are even considering selling and loaning out a few players. Also, why would Dortmund sell Haalad mid-season? Do you think his value will decrease until the summer? If anything, he will continue scoring goals, further proving his class. The summer transfer season will allow clubs to have a more realistic assessment of their financial situations and Dortmund can reasonably expect better returns from a potential bidding war. (unless someone really comes to blow other teams out of the water now with a £120m bid, which as I said, is highly unlikely)
Click to expand...
red thru&thru said:
You put this sooo much more eloquently than I was.

Also touching on your point about only winning about £6m more in prize money...winning the league usually means bonuses for all involved, which soon eats away into the money made by winning.

I'm convinced this is why Arsenal were always happy to just finish in top 4 than to ever really try to win the league.

Winning the league obviously gives you more than just money in the short term. For a marketing juggernaut like us, it helps to pull in and charge extra to be associated with the best team in the best league in the world.
Click to expand...
You obviously have sensible points and it's hard to disagree with what you are saying.
On the other hand we had 100M on the table for Sancho in September and it would trigger a lot of positive ring effects. How fast did RM earn back the transferfee for CR7 in merch sales back in 2009? I don't think it will happen and if the money isn't there it isn't there, but I don't think it would be very risky business and I would give my full support if we went for it.
 
georgipep said:
Any prospective buyer of the club? Or? I don't get this argument.

As for the potential of Haaland for Martial+Pogba, I would be completely against such a deal. Haaland should be coming to challenge Martial for the striker position, not losing Anthony and be left with Greenwood (who, I guess you are also listing for transfer?) and Cavani.
Click to expand...

1. Wiki has Haaland at 68 goals in 67 season the past 3 years in all comps for club (2 dortmund, one in the Austrian league but he was 19 to be fair) and country. I think Martial is a good striker, but I don't think any neutral would expect him to seriously challenge Haaland for a starting spot. Greenwood as a backup 9 with Cavani challenging him for one year while he beds into that role (and gets some time at RW or when we play 2 up top) seems right to me. We are at the moment struggling to attack down the right with him out wide, but his finishing and 2-footedness in the middle should ensure enough goalscoring there for him not to hurt us while he develops, which he has so far at RW, where he's been our worst starting player by a distance this year (De Gea hasn't been great and the back 4 has conceded a lot, but they've been better).

If Rashford and Bruno are locked in as our LW and #10, which they are for me, the question is should our next big attacking buy be a 9 or a RW. We have Greenwood, Martial, Diallo and James to consider, with Cavani here for this year and presumably we pick up his option and he's here next year too. I look at that group (and with Greenwood a #9 and not a RW in my mind) and to me we could sell Martial this summer and I'd still be more worried about the RW spot than the #9 spot, as Cavani and Greenwood as our 9s (with Rashford and even a false 9 in Van de Beek as an option) seems stronger to me than Greenwood, Diallo (who looks great but odds are won't be starting quality for at least a year at his age) and James playing on the right. Rashford can of course play there too, but unless it's a specific counter attacking thing with James preferred at LW I don't see that as optimal.

So yeah, I'd sell Martial if it meant we could throw another 30-50M or so and get Haaland or Sancho or another proper 3rd star attacker, which Martial just ain't, even if he does link play very well and scores 1 in 3.

2. Never suggested we should sell Greenwood, you've misread. I'm saying players' values as potential sales go into determining the squad and club's value and show why paying say 120M for Haaland isn't crazy if he the club think he's the next Lewandowski or Van Nistelrooy.
 
troylocker said:
You obviously have sensible points and it's hard to disagree with what you are saying.
On the other hand we had 100M on the table for Sancho in September and it would trigger a lot of positive ring effects. How fast did RM earn back the transferfee for CR7 in merch sales back in 2009? I don't think it will happen and if the money isn't there it isn't there, but I don't think it would be very risky business and I would give my full support if we went for it.
Click to expand...

Making money back from shirt sales is a myth, especially in our kit deal. I can't quite remember the exact figures but they're around 8% per shirt, with Lfc being the only one's who receive more in the PL at 20%.

As I say, business is not what it was before. 18% of our main revenue has been wiped out. This percentage caters for match day associated income. That's a lot.
 
troylocker said:
You obviously have sensible points and it's hard to disagree with what you are saying.
On the other hand we had 100M on the table for Sancho in September and it would trigger a lot of positive ring effects. How fast did RM earn back the transferfee for CR7 in merch sales back in 2009? I don't think it will happen and if the money isn't there it isn't there, but I don't think it would be very risky business and I would give my full support if we went for it.
Click to expand...
Our offer (from what we know from media) in the summer was based on add-ons and conditional bonuses. That is a completely different story. We don't know what was the hard base (guaranteed amount, paid immediately) of that offer.

As for CR7 and 2009, we are in a different world now. Players and their agents keep most of their image rights while social media engagement power is on the player's side, not the club's. I'm sure there are great commercial benefits of singing a superstar player but do they outweigh £50m+ of overspending on the transfer fee?

On top of that, if historical dealings with Mino Raiola are anything to learn from, we can fully expect him to take care of his (and Haaland's father's) cut of the pie. One way or another we would be paying for it (either directly or as an increased transfer fee to Dortmund, who would pay them).
 
NoPace said:
1. Wiki has Haaland at 68 goals in 67 season the past 3 years in all comps for club (2 dortmund, one in the Austrian league but he was 19 to be fair) and country. I think Martial is a good striker, but I don't think any neutral would expect him to seriously challenge Haaland for a starting spot. Greenwood as a backup 9 with Cavani challenging him for one year while he beds into that role (and gets some time at RW or when we play 2 up top) seems right to me. We are at the moment struggling to attack down the right with him out wide, but his finishing and 2-footedness in the middle should ensure enough goalscoring there for him not to hurt us while he develops, which he has so far at RW, where he's been our worst starting player by a distance this year (De Gea hasn't been great and the back 4 has conceded a lot, but they've been better).

If Rashford and Bruno are locked in as our LW and #10, which they are for me, the question is should our next big attacking buy be a 9 or a RW. We have Greenwood, Martial, Diallo and James to consider, with Cavani here for this year and presumably we pick up his option and he's here next year too. I look at that group (and with Greenwood a #9 and not a RW in my mind) and to me we could sell Martial this summer and I'd still be more worried about the RW spot than the #9 spot, as Cavani and Greenwood as our 9s (with Rashford and even a false 9 in Van de Beek as an option) seems stronger to me than Greenwood, Diallo (who looks great but odds are won't be starting quality for at least a year at his age) and James playing on the right. Rashford can of course play there too, but unless it's a specific counter attacking thing with James preferred at LW I don't see that as optimal.

So yeah, I'd sell Martial if it meant we could throw another 30-50M or so and get Haaland or Sancho or another proper 3rd star attacker, which Martial just ain't, even if he does link play very well and scores 1 in 3.

2. Never suggested we should sell Greenwood, you've misread. I'm saying players' values as potential sales go into determining the squad and club's value and show why paying say 120M for Haaland isn't crazy if he the club think he's the next Lewandowski or Van Nistelrooy.
Click to expand...
Understood about Greenwood's potential value.

As for selling Martial (and Pogba, which might be inevitable anyway) to fund Haaland's purchase, I think it isn't as simple as comparing stats. This would be a huge outlay and letting go of one of our key players for a player who undoubtedly puts out incredible numbers, but remains an unknown for the Premier League and Manchester United's squad and tactics.

I'm all for getting both Haaland and Sancho (more Haaland than Sancho, to be honest) but not to the expense of Martial (and maybe this is my Martial fan side speaking) as I think he has a big role to play in this team in the years to come.

For the rest of your post, I agree 100%, our relative strength with Haaland upfront would be greater than having Martial there and Greenwood+Diallo+James on the right. In an ideal world, we have Martial and Haaland as our two main striker options with Greenwood pushing for a spot too. Then on the right, fingers crossed Diallo and Pellistri both work out, in the meantime Rashford looks like a great stop-gap option.
 
IMO, the Haalands put the 68m release clause that takes effect in the summer of 2022 in his contract so they could pick his next club without a transfer fee bidding war between top English and Spanish clubs. He's not leaving Dortmund in the summer of 2021 because the Haalands want to pick Erling's next club in the summer of 2022. The Haalands will not be seeking a new contract in the summer of 2021 because they want a new contract with the club they choose in the summer of 2022. Dortmund knew they signed Erling for 2 1/2 seasons and then the Haalands would pick his long term destination when they agreed to the 68m release clause that takes effect in the summer of 2022. The club the Haalands pick in the summer of 2022 will not be a stepping stone like RB Salzburg or Dortmund. If United show the Haalands that they are a well run organization from the board room to the training grounds, United will be well positioned to be the Haaland's choice for Erling's long term destination in the summer of 2022.
 
yo@Kirk said:
IMO, the Haalands put the 68m release clause that takes effect in the summer of 2022 in his contract so they could pick his next club without a transfer fee bidding war between top English and Spanish clubs. He's not leaving Dortmund in the summer of 2021 because the Haalands want to pick Erling's next club in the summer of 2022. The Haalands will not be seeking a new contract in the summer of 2021 because they want a new contract with the club they choose in the summer of 2022. Dortmund knew they signed Erling for 2 1/2 seasons and then the Haalands would pick his long term destination when they agreed to the 68m release clause that takes effect in the summer of 2022. The club the Haalands pick in the summer of 2022 will not be a stepping stone like RB Salzburg or Dortmund. If United show the Haalands that they are a well run organization from the board room to the training grounds, United will be well positioned to be the Haaland's choice for Erling's long term destination in the summer of 2022.
Click to expand...

Isn't there a new rule limiting the amount of earnings of agent fees, which would be coming into effect sometime after 2021? I am sure Raiola will try to convince his biggest assist, Haaland, for a big move next summer, if thats the case.
 
yo@Kirk said:
IMO, the Haalands put the 68m release clause that takes effect in the summer of 2022 in his contract so they could pick his next club without a transfer fee bidding war between top English and Spanish clubs. He's not leaving Dortmund in the summer of 2021 because the Haalands want to pick Erling's next club in the summer of 2022. The Haalands will not be seeking a new contract in the summer of 2021 because they want a new contract with the club they choose in the summer of 2022. Dortmund knew they signed Erling for 2 1/2 seasons and then the Haalands would pick his long term destination when they agreed to the 68m release clause that takes effect in the summer of 2022. The club the Haalands pick in the summer of 2022 will not be a stepping stone like RB Salzburg or Dortmund. If United show the Haalands that they are a well run organization from the board room to the training grounds, United will be well positioned to be the Haaland's choice for Erling's long term destination in the summer of 2022.
Click to expand...
I agree that their original plan was for him to stay for 2,5 years and then choose his next destination, but things have changed a bit since he signed that contract. The original plan when he went to Salzburg was also more long term than what actually happened. Dortmund is struggling at the moment, Favre is gone and they will have to up their game to get a CL spot next year. The Haalands could not know that he would hit the ground running like he did either. There is no reason why they wouldn't consider an offer before 2022 if BVB accepts it and it is the right club in the other end.
I think he will stay till 2022 though, but I would like our chances better if we cut off the competition and made an offer for marked value, which is a lot higher than his clause, before that.

We don't have to be the best in England or the world, but if that's our ambition; there lies our path
 
Don't want him anywhere near thee club. Another toxic player.
 
Houdini said:
Don't want him anywhere near thee club. Another toxic player.
Click to expand...

He's almost the furthest from toxic you can get. He's just a little cocky in the international media, an act. He's very down to earth in Norwegian media. He would be a popular person in our group of players I'm sure.
 
Matriac said:
He's almost the furthest from toxic you can get. He's just a little cocky in the international media, an act. He's very down to earth in Norwegian media. He would be a popular person in our group of players I'm sure.
Click to expand...
He looks like a player who thinks that he is bigger than the club. He is a huge talent though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.