Has the money run out? - probably not. No one knows.

whitbyviking said:
I explained in a subsequent post the reasoning.

In terms of the RB is Williams, or Laird worse than AWB as bench options? Especially if AWB is basically never going to play anyway.

In terms of CBs, I said in the subsequent post we may be light, but if Maguire is not the future and is 5th choice at best then I would rather we had a project from the youth team or from a lower league, who is cheaper in fee and cheaper in wages. Even without Maguire, Bailly and Tuanzebe we would have the following - Varane, Martinez, Lindelof, Shaw, Casemiro, Project CB, Potentially McTom if they choose to sell Fred instead (which I suspect if we do bring in a midfielder we can move on one of McFred).
Click to expand...
I don't think selling Bissaka and Maguire just for the sake of it - and replace them with nothing - is the way to go to strengthen out squad - to say the least. If Maguire wants to leave (which is not obvious), then fine, but he would need to be replaced. What if Shaw gets injured? We´d be left with 3 center backs - one being an injury prone Varane and with no back-up at LB. Williams? I don't think so.

And I really don't understand the eagerness to get rid of Bissaka. Since back from injury, he's been playing quite a bit and been doing really well. If he's happy with staying and competing with Dalot for a place, he's as good a back-up as it gets.
 
whitbyviking said:
Technically we don't even need to sell well, with the following at least basically dead wood in the squad -

Maguire 20-30
Henderson 20
Bailly 10
Telles 10
AWB 10-20
McTom 10-20
Donny 10
Elanga 15
Tuanzebe 5
Jones 50p

If we got anywhere near market value for them then we'd potentially have enough money for a forward and a midfielder. Think all the fees could be targeted and if we got the lower or midpoint we'd potentially be looking at 100m + (+50p)
Click to expand...

Exactly this (minus McTominay Plus Fred) & we refinance our debt with equity from new investors saving us ~35m in interest payments. We can afford to spend another ~150m on transfers next year & the year after if both are done.
 
Yes, the money has run out. Hopefully, new owners will invest properly and we will become a real top club again. LUHG.
 
2 man midfield said:
Doesn’t seem to apply to anyone else does it
Click to expand...
THIS. 100% this.

If new owners have a lot of money and enough brains + enough connections at the rotten, corrupt UEFA, we will be fine. That place is more corrupt than Trump whitehouse :D

Galactic said:
It’s a story everyone should believe. Will be good in our future purchase negotiations.
Click to expand...

See, we are not extorted because people think we have too much money, we are extorted because people know our CEO and recruitement are suckers. City has way more money than us but they manage to do reasonable deals. We could be bankrupt and people would still give us high quotes until we have new owners with better reputation
 
Last edited:
Dve said:
I don't think selling Bissaka and Maguire just for the sake of it - and replace them with nothing - is the way to go to strengthen out squad - to say the least. If Maguire wants to leave (which is not obvious), then fine, but he would need to be replaced. What if Shaw gets injured? We´d be left with 3 center backs - one being an injury prone Varane and with no back-up at LB. Williams? I don't think so.

And I really don't understand the eagerness to get rid of Bissaka. Since back from injury, he's been playing quite a bit and been doing really well. If he's happy with staying and competing with Dalot for a place, he's as good a back-up as it gets.
Click to expand...

It's not an "eagerness to be rid of AWB". It's been reported in many different places that he is up for sale.

As I wrote in the post: with regards to CB we are carrying dead weight who won't play, my proposal is we either promote a youngster or we allow ETH to find and coach a cheaper option. Bailly and Tuanzebe or 100% surplus to requirements, Maguire is 4th or 5th choice, which is basically an emergency CB. We have options to cover and we can add a cheaper (fee and wages) option to the squad who will grow with the squad.

For all the people moaning about squad depth. If we have no money, and need to improve the team, how do you propose we do it? By keeping the existing squad together so we have "depth" and ignoring the positions were we need first choice players?

When building a squad the first consideration has to be the "first team". We can then add whatever depth we can afford. If we run with the same first team we are going to stagnate. To move on we need to at least improve the first team and then add depth however we can. Don't people see this?

If we do indeed have limited money then we sell the assets that we don't absolutely need, which are effectively the second team reserve players, or players who aren't playing. We then improve the first team within our means, and add the depth pieces however we can. We have to take risks if we want to improve, otherwise we'll be stuck struggling to qualify for the Champions League while others around us improve. With alleged limited funds we can't have our cake and eat it.
 
I can’t read the article but the top line of owing £300 million on transfers probably sounds a lot worse than it actually is. I would imagine a large amount of that figure is for players like Sancho, Antony, Martinez, where the cost would likely be spread across their contract - certainly from an accounting point of view (as far as I understand).

Selling players like Maguire and AWB to fund other squad options is what most football clubs do anyway. There’s only one team that can sell squad players for sums big enough to buy first 11 players and that’s City.
 
I am confident they will never do a thing on pitch to a club of our stature. Especially not when they've let minnows get away with it for so many years. Football's money men need us as much as we need them.
 
Even if this was the case, ways around it. Such as loan deals with an option to buy
 
New owners with deep pockets can easily siphon money to the club through sponsorships coming from their own companies. Thus if Saudi buy us then we'll have a visit Saudi shirt sponsor on silly money and a zillion sponsors from there
 
Apply the infamous Fiorentino Perez 'Zidanes and Pavans' concept. We dont need squad players on 200k so Maguire, Sancho and AwB (because he is saleable and replaceable) go in addition to McT amongst others. Replace them with Laird , Pellistiri and Meijbri (spelling!!) and then bring in the striker and CM.

If we get bought out by an oil state or someone with deep pockets all this will be moot because there immediate measures that can be taken to boost revenues like a new shirt deal, who at EUFA would argue against a ten year £100m/yr shirt deal for the world's most famous club with 30% of it paid in advance?
 
United doesn't do business like others & no one wants to buy mediocre players from us.
Giving DDG sancho mega contract surely helped United.
 
NewGlory said:
THIS. 100% this.

If new owners have a lot of money and enough brains + enough connections at the rotten, corrupt UEFA, we will be fine. That place is more corrupt than Trump whitehouse :D



See, we are not extorted because people think we have too much money, we are extorted because people know our CEO and recruitement are suckers. City has way more money than us but they manage to do reasonable deals. We could be bankrupt and people would still give us high quotes until we have new owners with better reputation
Click to expand...
Grealish for £100m a reasonable deal?
 
AneRu said:
Apply the infamous Fiorentino Perez 'Zidanes and Pavans' concept. We dont need squad players on 200k so Maguire, Sancho and AwB (because he is saleable and replaceable) go in addition to McT amongst others. Replace them with Laird , Pellistiri and Meijbri (spelling!!) and then bring in the striker and CM.

If we get bought out by an oil state or someone with deep pockets all this will be moot because there immediate measures that can be taken to boost revenues like a new shirt deal, who at EUFA would argue against a ten year £100m/yr shirt deal for the world's most famous club with 30% of it paid in advance?
Click to expand...

Finally! This is my point too.
 
Dve said:
I don't think selling Bissaka and Maguire just for the sake of it - and replace them with nothing - is the way to go to strengthen out squad - to say the least. If Maguire wants to leave (which is not obvious), then fine, but he would need to be replaced. What if Shaw gets injured? We´d be left with 3 center backs - one being an injury prone Varane and with no back-up at LB. Williams? I don't think so.

And I really don't understand the eagerness to get rid of Bissaka. Since back from injury, he's been playing quite a bit and been doing really well. If he's happy with staying and competing with Dalot for a place, he's as good a back-up as it gets.
Click to expand...

But that's because the incompetent football side of United had made you believe that we need squad players at 30m-80m. That's not true. We won the treble with a CB we've bought from Besiktas having previously spent his entire career in Norway. Decades later we won our third CL with a CB we've bought from Russia and who only had 1 European side interested in him enough to bid for him ie mighty Fiorentina.

SAF was always careful not to invest too much on squad members preferring to bolster that with either cheap signings (ex Ole, Park, Forlan etc) and players from the youth academy. That allowed him to go bonkers when the right player was available with the right age/talent (ex Rio, Rooney etc). Don't let the incompetent bunch we've got dubbed you in thinking that spending big/retaining top salary players to be squad players makes sense. Most clubs in the world would only dream to be able to spend half we spend. Take Juventus for example who bought Vlahovic on 'big money' ie 12m more to what United spent on frigging AWB. Napoli replaced Koulibaly with a South Korean CB whose already being taunted to 60m move to the EPL. Do you know how much money they spent on him? 18m euros. That's around half to what we've spent for Lindelof. These deals can be made. All we need is a top DOF, great scouts and competent people in the youth academy capable of developing decent players (they don't necessarily need to be WC) to become squad players.
 
nickm said:
Grealish for £100m a reasonable deal?
Click to expand...
They thought he was new Zidane. And that was the price quoted to everybody, not just them. He just didnt work out.

Of dozens of deals they have done, how many others do you have that are overpriced? Remember how much did they get Haaland for? Very cheap
 
whitbyviking said:
It's not an "eagerness to be rid of AWB". It's been reported in many different places that he is up for sale.

As I wrote in the post: with regards to CB we are carrying dead weight who won't play, my proposal is we either promote a youngster or we allow ETH to find and coach a cheaper option. Bailly and Tuanzebe or 100% surplus to requirements, Maguire is 4th or 5th choice, which is basically an emergency CB. We have options to cover and we can add a cheaper (fee and wages) option to the squad who will grow with the squad.

For all the people moaning about squad depth. If we have no money, and need to improve the team, how do you propose we do it? By keeping the existing squad together so we have "depth" and ignoring the positions were we need first choice players?

When building a squad the first consideration has to be the "first team". We can then add whatever depth we can afford. If we run with the same first team we are going to stagnate. To move on we need to at least improve the first team and then add depth however we can. Don't people see this?

If we do indeed have limited money then we sell the assets that we don't absolutely need, which are effectively the second team reserve players, or players who aren't playing. We then improve the first team within our means, and add the depth pieces however we can. We have to take risks if we want to improve, otherwise we'll be stuck struggling to qualify for the Champions League while others around us improve. With alleged limited funds we can't have our cake and eat it.
Click to expand...
Yes, and there have been even more reports linking us to a new RB, if you get my drift. It's highly unrealistic that sales will fix this squad. 11 players won't win us any trophies.
 
Last edited:
devilish said:
But that's because the incompetent football side of United had made you believe that we need squad players at 30m-80m. That's not true. We won the treble with a CB we've bought from Besiktas having previously spent his entire career in Norway. Decades later we won our third CL with a CB we've bought from Russia and who only had 1 European side interested in him enough to bid for him ie mighty Fiorentina.

SAF was always careful not to invest too much on squad members preferring to bolster that with either cheap signings (ex Ole, Park, Forlan etc) and players from the youth academy. That allowed him to go bonkers when the right player was available with the right age/talent (ex Rio, Rooney etc). Don't let the incompetent bunch we've got dubbed you in thinking that spending big/retaining top salary players to be squad players makes sense. Most clubs in the world would only dream to be able to spend half we spend. Take Juventus for example who bought Vlahovic on 'big money' ie 12m more to what United spent on frigging AWB. Napoli replaced Koulibaly with a South Korean CB whose already being taunted to 60m move to the EPL. Do you know how much money they spent on him? 18m euros. That's around half to what we've spent for Lindelof. These deals can be made. All we need is a top DOF, great scouts and competent people in the youth academy capable of developing decent players (they don't necessarily need to be WC) to become squad players.
Click to expand...
This isn't 90s anymore. It's impossible to compete with City when they have 22 players that are all top quality and your bench is 17-18 year old kids.

Granted City is struggling this year but you understand times have changed since oil money has been poured into EPL.

But I agree with you that we need top recruitement department so they can find us the likes of new Ole and Park for cheap.

We had such chances. Rangnick was begging our idiot owners in January to buy Enzo Fernandez for 20 million. They ignored him. Now Enzo is priced at 100 million plus. So there is that
 
NewGlory said:
This isn't 90s anymore. It's impossible to compete with City when they have 22 players that are all top quality and your bench is 17-18 year old kids.

Granted City is struggling this year but you understand times have changed since oil money has been poured into EPL.

But I agree with you that we need top recruitement department so they can find us the likes of new Ole and Park for cheap.

We had such chances. Rangnick was begging our idiot owners in January to buy Enzo Fernandez for 20 million. They ignored him. Now Enzo is priced at 100 million plus. So there is that
Click to expand...

Players like Johnsen and Vidic would walk straight in our first team and had more talent in their right toe then AWB-Maguire put together. Its not about the name. Its about the player's characteristics, their attitude and United's ability to identify those talent before others do. Bargains do happen and quite frankly that's how football work outside the EPL bubble. Actually, City themselves (petrodollars etc) thought it was silly to spend 80m on Maguire and half a million a week in salary to a 37 year old. Hence why these players ended with us.
 
Don't think so. Even if we are still under the Glazer regime, the credit card is still open because the ability to pay back is still there, especially under a new owner.

We are mega far away from not being able to pay fees for players.
 
devilish said:
Players like Johnsen and Vidic would walk straight in our first team and had more talent in their right toe then AWB-Maguire put together. Its not about the name. Its about the player's characteristics, their attitude and United's ability to identify those talent before others do. Bargains do happen and quite frankly that's how football work outside the EPL bubble. Actually, City themselves (petrodollars etc) thought it was silly to spend 80m on Maguire and half a million a week in salary to a 37 year old. Hence why these players ended with us.
Click to expand...
I agree with you on bargains, I was disagreeing about ability to use recent academy graduates as squad players in EPL games. It has become less possible. That's all I was saying.
 
NewGlory said:
This isn't 90s anymore. It's impossible to compete with City when they have 22 players that are all top quality and your bench is 17-18 year old kids.

Granted City is struggling this year but you understand times have changed since oil money has been poured into EPL.

But I agree with you that we need top recruitement department so they can find us the likes of new Ole and Park for cheap.

We had such chances. Rangnick was begging our idiot owners in January to buy Enzo Fernandez for 20 million. They ignored him. Now Enzo is priced at 100 million plus. So there is that
Click to expand...
Yes, we always hear of the ones that got away both alvarez and Fernandez were a bargain 6 months ago. My problem is are we any nearer at being in pole position for any of the next ones of the conveyer belt in South America?. I do wonder if we have planned activities, scouts or anything else down there which worries me. I may be wrong, but to have no apparent interest in either alvarez and enzo looks negligent.
 
Need to win the league and cups then don't we, earn some cash.
 
Dan_F said:
I can’t read the article but the top line of owing £300 million on transfers probably sounds a lot worse than it actually is. I would imagine a large amount of that figure is for players like Sancho, Antony, Martinez, where the cost would likely be spread across their contract - certainly from an accounting point of view (as far as I understand).

Selling players like Maguire and AWB to fund other squad options is what most football clubs do anyway. There’s only one team that can sell squad players for sums big enough to buy first 11 players and that’s City.
Click to expand...

We spent 200m last summer, even after amortisation that sum is still 160m outstanding. If you add up the Nx100m spent on Sancho, Maguire.

Unless someone expect the Club to spend another 200m next summer, then another 200m, then another
 
Galactic said:
It’s a story everyone should believe. Will be good in our future purchase negotiations.
Click to expand...
Yep.

I'm not bothered. Its evident we aren't going to spend big while the owners are trying to sell, anyway. Once new owners come in hopefully they'll help sort out the farcical debt and normal service will resume. I have no issue with us being more careful about spending- every summer can't be a mental one. But that joke of a debt imposed by the parasites should not be the cause. feckwits.
 
Also do fans really expect a TOP CM and a TOP CF in the summer? You have to be clever and find some smart deals too.
 
Given how well capitalized any buyer who can meet the Glazer’s price tag for the club must be, I don’t see transfer debt being an impediment to spending. If you’re spending 6+bn for the club, would you not want to spend like Chelsea, plug any holes in the lineup and compete on all fronts in your first year? So why wouldn’t you just pay off the transfer debt as part of the acquisition of the club?

Yes, the club has to sell “well”, but isn’t that a given considering the price?
 
The clubs balance sheet is pretty poor. I would say there's very little room to spend big unless cash is injected.
 
cyril C said:
We spent 200m last summer, even after amortisation that sum is still 160m outstanding. If you add up the Nx100m spent on Sancho, Maguire.

Unless someone expect the Club to spend another 200m next summer, then another 200m, then another
Click to expand...

That’s the bit I’m unsure about. According to reports the Maguire and Casemiro fees were massively paid up front, hence the cash reserves being so reduced. So have we emptied the cash and still owe £300 million on transfers?

Looking over what we’ve spent in previous seasons, a net spend of £100 million is likely next summer. We did the same thing the summer after signing Bruno, which was similar to the Casemiro signing in that it wasn’t really money budgeted for that window.
 
DevilRed said:
Given up on our sales :lol:

Nobody buys our players and if they do its for peanuts.

Maguire might be the only one who will fetch anything close to 20m.
Click to expand...
It looks like you might have the same problem Arsenal did, ageing high earners. Even £20m might be a stretch for Maguire in the Summer as he'll be the an out of sorts 30 year old on £190,000 p/w. I’m struggling to think of a club that could afford him who would want to sign him and that he’d want to sign for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.