bsCallout
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2017
- Messages
- 4,278
Does this saga outline our scouting weaknesses? Surely we should know of alternatives at a fraction of the price.
If this is the case, RE: “Punchline 4” — why haven’t we been working even harder to shift players? This club confuses me sometimes.I'm a Sancho optimist but I have to admit, reading the below has drained all of the optimism out of me, if true...
https://medium.com/football-bureau-of-investigation/jadon-sancho-the-circus-strategy-2904b788999e
And who told you that is United's negotiating tactic? You are reading things off Twitter and treating them as facts? It is only painful to watch if you are deluded enough to believe those stories. Ole knows what he wants the Club have told him what he can get and the rest is noise. As it stands, United are not buying Sancho because they can't afford him. It's hardly the crime of the century. The fact that Sancho is not pushing for a move tells you that United have not seriously shown Dortmund that they want Sancho at all costs.Reality is there is no money. No football club apart from Chelsea are spending record amounts which should be a clear sign to everyone that there is no money in football at the moment. Manchester United are not immune to that.
It certainly isnt that bad that it seems we're barely over water?I’ve been trying to explain this all Summer. But we also have so many financially literate fans who insist we can ‘just pay the money’ because ‘we are Manchester United’ and any fan who explains the reality of our COVID-19 finances is a ‘Glazer Stoodge’.
It’s possible to hate the Glazress and understand the constraints of our balance sheet at the same time!
You two points combined push towards the only option for clubs is to borrow money. Which is probably what will happen, but if I were the board and the options were sell a player now, in uncertain times for 100m or have to go to banks to negotiate loans in order to pay wages, I know which I would pick.
Businesses can't just 'accept making losses' for an uncertain duration of time.
If that article is true we're not far away from bankruptcy.
Yeah, fair enough. That'll be the calculation: (Sancho value next year - Sancho value by United) - (interest on required loans)They have already said that they opened up credit lines. I think the latest report was that they secured over €100m if need be. And sure, you don't just take losses indefinitely, but it wouldn't surprise me if they decided to borrow their way through this season on the hopes of a vaccine and then reevaluate their stance next season, before they just flat out burn squad value just to avoid debt at all cost, when they are one of the clubs who can definitely afford to have some.
Well that surely wont happen.It might take bankruptcy for the leaches running our club to finally leave. It would be painful to watch but our club name carries huge weight globally so there would be plenty of billionaires interested in saving our club.
As the article points out, we have the highest non sugar daddy operating costs and the highest COVID-19 losses. And then a minimum level of profits that we have to hit.It certainly isnt that bad that it seems we're barely over water?
What will be considered the worse screw-up?
Kenyon with Ronaldhino
Or
Woodward with Sancho
absolutely - The UK, more specifically England is going to get hammered by the second wave far more than European nations - we will be in a bigger, longer second wave so should have secured sancho as an asset rather than just burnt through existing capital. With bigger assets and larger merchandising revenue we could have leveraged larger amounts of capital to tide us over for longer.You are aware that's its autumn soon and covid number could be way worse? I'm not saying it as an excuse for Ed but dont expect this to get better and be over soon.
I’ve been trying to explain this all Summer. But we also have so many financially literate fans who insist we can ‘just pay the money’ because ‘we are Manchester United’ and any fan who explains the reality of our COVID-19 finances is a ‘Glazer Stoodge’.
It’s possible to hate the Glazress and understand the constraints of our balance sheet at the same time!
As the article points out, we have the highest non sugar daddy operating costs and the highest COVID-19 losses. And then a minimum level of profits that we have to hit.
we are not close to going under but we can’t spend £100m in capital without going close to the bone. Not surprising given the circumstances.
So you many of these points don't add up.Ever wondered why EPL teams assemble very expensive squads that hardly match up to Bayern , Madrid or Barcelona? Well this is it. You pay 120million for the 3rd best player of a team that doesn’t even threaten to win the champions league.
I’m willing to bet that Mason Greenwood in BVB will score 20goals a season and probably get some odd 15 assists. Is he worth 100million? Not yet.
it was the same with Pogba. Good midfielder but not the best in Juventus at that time. Vidal and Pirlo were better.
Next time if you wonder why we spend 400 million and still lose to Juventus or BVB then there is your answer.
People can talk all they want about the market changing but why does it not change for other leagues in Europe? Only EPL teams and Barcelona fall victim
Does this saga outline our scouting weaknesses? Surely we should know of alternatives at a fraction of the price.
It’s not rocket science is it? Everyone can see that the stadium’s is empty. No spectators, no ticket money...
Of course the market is shaky when 2/3 of the highest revenue streams are very uncertain in the year/years to come.
It’s not rocket science is it? Everyone can see that the stadium’s is empty. No spectators, no ticket money...
Of course the market is shaky when 2/3 of the highest revenue streams are very uncertain in the year/years to come.
For one other clubs aren't spending big either and secondly the article is making the point that unlike say Dortmund United can't just say they'll take the losses, because they signed obligations to constantly post profits.
However even if all this is true everyone is aware of the current pandemic and United wouldn't be the first to get cut some slack from their creditors.
Maybe not "spending big" but taking a look at the Premiership alone many clubs are spending approximately what we have already spent. So far we on a par with clubs like Newcastle and Everton. I get that the finances have to be cut back but that should be proportionate to the wealth and resources of a club
I certainly think we can't afford to commit to what we are being asked currently.What kind of deal do you think we can afford? What is Woodward’s best bid?
Does this saga outline our scouting weaknesses? Surely we should know of alternatives at a fraction of the price.
Very interesting read. Puts many things that were hard to understand in this transfer window into context, I believe. Will be interesting to see what United will do once they've sorted the situation out.
The former is the better player, absolutely no doubt about that.What will be considered the worse screw-up?
Kenyon with Ronaldhino
Or
Woodward with Sancho
On the contrary, I think he wouldn’t have told them he would be happy to move if there was no chance. To me it means BVB would sell him is we pay up.Unless Sancho’s side puts some pressure on Dortmund there’s zero chance of this happening at this point. May as well close this thread now.
That only makes the context of offering Mata, Jones & Lingard renewed and more lucrative contracts, even more inexplicable.
It seems imperative to have axed the deadwood and reduced the wage bill, but to date only Sanchez has gone.
We've had offers for Dalot, we've had offers for Smalling, and Romero should be easy to shift, so why aren't we pushing deals along???
But the article didn't name the transfer fee as the problem. Of course you could activate the fee but the 65m pound profit would be in danger because Sancho would increase your wage bill so drastically that you couldn't afford it without getting other players off the books. And the salaries can't be activated after IFRS if I'm not mistaken.
Also, what about agent fees? Are they considered part of the transfer fee, e.g. could you activate Sancho for 120m pound if you paid Dortmund 108m and the intermediary another 12m?
This could explaine the differing reports regarding United having reached an agreement on personal terms.
They used Tottenham and Everton as examples of other clubs who are debt laden and "haven't spent" only to recently go on and spend a lot moreI'm a Sancho optimist but I have to admit, reading the below has drained all of the optimism out of me, if true...
https://medium.com/football-bureau-of-investigation/jadon-sancho-the-circus-strategy-2904b788999e