A team who finished one place lower than the season before is on the way up while a team who finished one position higher than the season prior is on the way down? Very good.
Fabregas
- Thread starter Reapersoul20
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
- Status
United fans should understand more than any other fans regarding Arsenal's financial situation.
Granted it's not like we're in the same boat (we have better deals in place and are getting rid of the debt quicker), but it's as close as it is with any other big club.
Both clubs are in debt and therefore not capable of really competing in the transfer market with other big clubs as much as they'd like to, and both clubs are expected to spend more this summer than they have for a good while now, United because of a new manager and the goal to stay top of the league, while Arsenal are aware they need to spend in order to be able to keep qualifying for the Champions League now that other teams around them are going to strengthen themselves as well.
Ferguson has kept us on top so we didn't really notice it that much, but even though Wenger has done a marvelous job he's not exactly Fergie and the impact is more noticable at Arsenal.
Yeah, they're shit though.
That alastair fella's a bit mad, ain't he?
He only confirmed what we all knew along, he's a Liverpool supporter, hence the Harry Kewell reference. On the way up, they hardly won the 'finished above Tottenham' Cup this year
Nonsense, most our debt is the money Glazers borrowed to purchase the club and put it on our accounts. We're in a great shape financially with a record turnover and profits virtually every year, much better than Arsenal. Our squad didn't really cost much less than City's for example yet people blabber on the nonsense about the debt and not being able to compete.
You need to grasp how the debt works, virtually all companies have debt to their name, it's how it's serviced that could possibly affect the company (or the club in this case) - in our case I think we've managed it just fine.Chances of Fabregas leaving Barca this year 33/1. Chances of him joining Man Utd 100/1. Both teams should forget it.
Seriously? Worth a tenna that. Which bookies.
None. If he were 33/1 to leave Barca I'd be putting £500 on that and £100 on him joining United at this odds. Over £15k if be moves at all and extra £10k if he moves to United.
Pete's Duck 'n' Dive (I'm not laying on the caf any more).
But £600 worse off if he stays.
He has unfinished business in the Premier League, Robin's shown him how he can get a league winner's medal.
But don't you want a new avatar of both RVP and Fabregas lifting the Champions League together? I'd say it'd be the bomb.
But Doc, haven't you been keeping up with what ye olde interweb thinks? Frogie has gone and wooney might be going
We will be lucky to get past the first round of any cups and stay up next season Pete is really setting himself up for more heartache isn't he? It would be hilarious the abuse he gets if Fabregas does end up here.
Petey don't you think it's time to change your location, Van Persie played more than the rest of our strikers.
I love the transfer muppet extremists of the Caf. They fill me with Hope. and Change.Wenger can hijack Fab move to United..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...d-Arsenal-boss-Arsene-Wenger-hijack-deal.html
Key points:
1. Arsenal are apparently entitled to 50% of any transfer value, thus meaning no point Barcelona selling for anything other than a hefty price.
2. Arsenal have a buy-back clause that is triggered if any other team make a formal bid. This buy-back is £20-25m
I'm less worried about point 2, because why would Fabregas go back. It would be a step back in his career and also Arsenal have plenty of capable midfielders. This just does not sound worth worrying about.
Point 1 on the other hand is. Barcelona may not be fussed about getting back everything they paid if he is not fitting the way they would like, but they'll want to get a good chunk of it back. I would envisage they would want £40m to cover a good chunk of the £35m outlay.
If this clause is indeed part of the sale, then I think there is very little chance of any sell on.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...d-Arsenal-boss-Arsene-Wenger-hijack-deal.html
Key points:
1. Arsenal are apparently entitled to 50% of any transfer value, thus meaning no point Barcelona selling for anything other than a hefty price.
2. Arsenal have a buy-back clause that is triggered if any other team make a formal bid. This buy-back is £20-25m
I'm less worried about point 2, because why would Fabregas go back. It would be a step back in his career and also Arsenal have plenty of capable midfielders. This just does not sound worth worrying about.
Point 1 on the other hand is. Barcelona may not be fussed about getting back everything they paid if he is not fitting the way they would like, but they'll want to get a good chunk of it back. I would envisage they would want £40m to cover a good chunk of the £35m outlay.
If this clause is indeed part of the sale, then I think there is very little chance of any sell on.
Roughly the same odds as of anyone giving 2 shits about your decreasingly clever "provocations" anymore and yet on you go, you hypocrite.
If that's the odds Pete thinks are running right now, then he should stay away from the transfer specials from every bookie...
3/1 at Sky Bet....
3/1 at Sky Bet....
Arsenal probably WANT US to sign him if they have that sort of deal (which makes sense givent he circumastances he left in).
Wages are the key thing here then, the reason Arsenal wouldn't get anywhere near him and Barca may want rid even if they need to take a hit on it.
Rather than give Arsenal 20-25M for free I'd raid them for Wilshere
fat chance I know sad.gif
Wages are the key thing here then, the reason Arsenal wouldn't get anywhere near him and Barca may want rid even if they need to take a hit on it.
Rather than give Arsenal 20-25M for free I'd raid them for Wilshere
fat chance I know sad.gif
Is it not 50% of any profit? 50% of any fee at all sounds very unusual.
where exactly is the nonsense?Nonsense, most our debt is the money Glazers borrowed to purchase the club and put it on our accounts. We're in a great shape financially with a record turnover and profits virtually every year, much better than Arsenal. Our squad didn't really cost much less than City's for example yet people blabber on the nonsense about the debt and not being able to compete.
I know damn well the debt is there because of the glazers, just like Arsenal's debt is there because of the stadium, and if you'll recall I did mention us being in a great position to get rid of said debt because of our huge turnover in commercial deals, etc.
And also, Ferguson has kept United on top, while we're not exactly a poor side one can hardly argue we can compete with City and Chelsea financialy at this moment in time.
Mug punters being fleeced (they won't be laying that at 1/3 he stays). The only bet I'd have is Suarez at 2/5 to feck off with betfair.
I was only trying to wind up pete.But Doc, haven't you been keeping up with what ye olde interweb thinks? Frogie has gone and wooney might be going
The nonsense is in the concept that bank loans will keep us from spending. It's a normal business practice to bankroll an investment through a loan which is what Glazers have done. It doesn't restrict our ability to spend money on players any more than Glazers paying for takeover from their own money would have. We can spend money. No one can compete with City and Chelsea because they have sugar daddies, any other club we can compete with.
No chance it'd be 50% of the fee!
Transfers tend to be on the profit, otherwise it'd turn out to be a massive loss maker for Barcelona.
They were unlikely to ever make a profit on him, if they wanted to keep him, he was going to stay, if they didn't breaking even would be a best case scenario.
If that article is to be believed they'd have to sell him for £70mil to break even. If they sold him for what they bought him for they'd have to give Arsenal £17.5mil on top of the £35mil they already gave them. They'd make a net loss of £17.5mil. Sounds ridiculous to me, and I don't think the Mail have it right. It'll surely be 50% of anything above what they bought him for, no?
Wonder what the odds of RVP joining Utd were last may.
I don't think there's any clause of a sort at all. The idea of the transfer was to keep Fabregas at Barca for the rest of his career or at least well into mid 30s when he's hardly worth anything, Arsenal had no interest in demanding such clause because it effectively prevents Barcelona from selling him on. Even at £30m Barca would only get £15m which they wouldn't endorse obviously. And how does that exactly work alongside the buy-back clause?
The buy-back clause would override the transfer fee clause. Nothing else would make sense!
Well that is one way of looking at it, but on the other hand a player can leave at the end of the contract for free, thus looking at it strictly as a loss is technically not correct!
Yes but it's stupid. So Barcelona could accept a £30m from United and would then be forced to accept a £25m bid from Arsenal in which case a lower bid from Arsenal would actually give them far more money than a higher bid from United. Surely they would never accept United's bid knowing that, and hence Arsenal's bid couldn't be placed either because there is no bid accepted from another team which is what almost always triggers these clauses (just making a formal bid never does because Anzhi or Zenit could make a bid just for fun and it'd force the club to accept Arsenal's bid, pointless). It's going around in circled and no scenario makes even remote sense for Barcelona.
The only time putting a 50% sell on clause makes any sense is when a small team from a poor league sells a player to a club famous for developing players and selling them on - Benfica, Porto, Ajax etc. They could put their player there for €2m and receive 50% of €20m to €30m fee these players command if it works out, there's no point putting these clauses for players like Fabregas who move for €30m and are supposed to stay at their new clubs. Paper nonsense I say.
This thread doesn't look like it's been Gambit Endorsed so I don't know if I should fully commit. So far it seems to be wannabe muppets and Gooners doing all the posting.
Fabregas was 'going home', they probably thought they would never want to sell him, so based on that I think it's entirely feasible that they agreed to whatever stupid clauses Arsenal asked for.
It's not. Alcantara has been though.
every time i see this thread bumped my hopes get raised a little.
Then i remember how ridiculously unlikely this would be.
Chap who bins his absolute legend status at Arsenal to move back home, a move even the usually scummy foul mouthed Arsenal mob accepted, a couple years on decided to come back to England to their big rivals.
Yep, that'd make sense!
Then i remember how ridiculously unlikely this would be.
Chap who bins his absolute legend status at Arsenal to move back home, a move even the usually scummy foul mouthed Arsenal mob accepted, a couple years on decided to come back to England to their big rivals.
Yep, that'd make sense!
I am not at all saying this transfer is likely but RVP did it directly
All I know is he would be absolutely perfect.
In fact, I can't see a single more perfect signing.
In fact, I can't see a single more perfect signing.
- Status