1. If Liverpool got Nunez done early because they had been working on it during the season, why don't we do that with our transfers in as well? I'm not just referring to FDJ. Fans have been fed up because our club in particular seems to love dragging these deals out compared to other clubs.
2. Demands of the other club, their responsiveness: Our slow deals have not happened with just Barcelona. Again, this has been a fairly consistent thing that our fans have gotten fed up with.
3. Yes, deadline day deals may be considered financially impudent for a reason - if the selling team HAS to sell that is. It can also backfire spectacularly like it did with Fellaini, or we may end up paying what the selling team wanted in the first place (Maguire). What are all the other teams not doing this then? Because our board is smarter? Could it also be that even though it may save the club some money in transfer fees and wages, other clubs have decided that getting the players in as early as possible and have them integrate into the team with a full season is what they want?
4. Lastly, few days? I think the fans would be very happy if it only took a few days. That's what other clubs seem to be doing. They actually started much earlier? Maybe, although with how the media works these days, I'd be surprised that nobody talked about those deals if there were offers going back and forth. And what don't we do the same with our deals?
I think answer your point #1 will trickle down to the rest of the points.
United has undergone some massive restructuring within the organisation. New leadership and hopefully a new approach to running the business. While you are not incorrect in the points you have mentioned, the fact that this is a new management team and with a new approach -- Arnold recognises it and is hands-off on the footballing side as mentioned in the pub interview.
That's a clear change in direction where the signs were that Woodward was the man in control who just didn't delegate his authority much. That's why reports a few years ago that the DOF position which was turned down a number of times because it was a glorified PR role -- whilst maintaining the control under Woodward.
Arnold also recognises that the Woodward regime pissed away £1.2Billion with little to show for.
That for me at least is a start -- the recognition that things were done pretty badly. There is a new team in place and a manager who only arrived a few weeks ago has the final say in each transfer -- which based on the reports hasn't been the case in the Woodward regime.
Ultimately ETH needs to look at the players on the training ground to make his own final judgement on their utility. Some are more obvious than others that they won't suit the current role (eg AWB) in the new system. Then other obvious gaps are in the central midfield.
He knows he has a budget to work within -- despite the naive chest-thumping comments made by Arnold. How does he balance out the most immediate needs versus the constraints of the summer's transfer budget?
He will have a much better idea next summer when he knows the players better. And the management team will have a better idea of his approach to the game.
The other top clubs have had their management team in place for a few seasons now. And certainly, any club that paid a British record transfer fee for a player like Andy Carroll -- cannot be seen as some unicorn of club transfer efficiency or be smug about how well run they are.
Business is cyclical. Football clubs aren't immune to that.