Lukaku - transfer speculation | Gone

Status
Not open for further replies.
Its dumb for him not to be training even if he is going to be moving on, you'd expect him wanting to be fit for his new club or if he doesn't get his move, then this will definitely make sure he doesn't see a game until he is match fit.
 
Shifting Lukaku looks like a real big ask due to Inter not being able to raise the funds, this looks like it has reached stalemate and for any progress to be made both parties are going to have to make a compromise somewhere.
 
Wednesday at Stoke said:
If you let him leave you lose all negotiating power in the future and risk the likes of Madrid offering 70M + Bale for Pogba. Inter knew what they were in for when they stuck a 50M price tag on Perisic and didn't budge at a 45M bid.

Ed would have a lot more clout as a chairman if he kept Lukaku even as a back up.

If Inter want to piss of Conte before a meaningful game is played, let them go ahead and give him Dzeko or some other third rate striker.
Click to expand...
The key difference is that we don't particularly want Lukaku anymore. That's why this is so different than the likes of Pogba, Peresic or Maguire. If it were a player that we really wanted to keep then we should definitely demand top price, but that's not the case here. And no other club is interested so we can't play them off each other.

There's a very strong possibility that we could sell him for a good fee and spend a smaller amount on a replacement striker that suits us better. We end up making money on that deal and end up with a stronger team. Win win.

Of course we shouldn't be accepting too low an offer. The original rumoured offer from Inter was obviously too low, but I remember thinking the latter ones that were reported were decent. £65-70m seems about right to me. We seem to be hanging out for £75-80m, and chances are that Inter walks away and we keep him for another season where he doesn't perform well (which makes the team weaker) and other clubs expect to only pay £50m or so next season. Of course, all those figures are just media reported so maybe we have set a more realistic figure but Inter still haven't come even close.
 
Not against this transfer falling through, while I feel Lukaku is not good enough he's always going to have a better return than Rashford because he's more clinical.

We are already light on strikers given Rashford / Martial haven't played a full season as centre forwards, there's inexperience on both of their behalfs while Romelu is a proven player. Inter are offering ridiculous money and it's their own loss, they've got a disillusioned Icardi and no one seems interested.
 
MadDogg said:
The key difference is that we don't particularly want Lukaku anymore. That's why this is so different than the likes of Pogba, Peresic or Maguire. If it were a player that we really wanted to keep then we should definitely demand top price, but that's not the case here. And no other club is interested so we can't play them off each other.

There's a very strong possibility that we could sell him for a good fee and spend a smaller amount on a replacement striker that suits us better. We end up making money on that deal and end up with a stronger team. Win win.

Of course we shouldn't be accepting too low an offer. The original rumoured offer from Inter was obviously too low, but I remember thinking the latter ones that were reported were decent. £65-70m seems about right to me. We seem to be hanging out for £75-80m, and chances are that Inter walks away and we keep him for another season where he doesn't perform well (which makes the team weaker) and other clubs expect to only pay £50m or so next season.
Click to expand...

The last offer was 54m which is 21m less than we paid 2 years ago. Factor in that we have to give 5m of any transfer fee to Everton and that represents a 26m loss on a player who is currently the best striker in international football, has scored 42 in 96 games for us in the last 2 years and at 26 is entering his prime. If we accepted that then we would be an absolute laughing stock, basically any club we want to conduct business with is going to expect us to bend over and grab our ankles.

We have not transfer listed him and the notion that we don't want him is wholly inaccurate. Ole prefers Rashford but he absolutely wants Lukaku to stay part of the squad and has made clear he will need to be replaced if he goes. It is fair to say we would be willing to sell as he is not seen as a key player but we are also perfectly happy to keep him with the reasonable expectation that he will continue to contribute. Prices are going up and not down and nothing about the last 2 years should suggest that we should accept a 35% decrease in his value, Inter are taking the piss and they need to either put up or shut up.
 
Gandalf said:
The last offer was 54m which is 21m less than we paid 2 years ago. Factor in that we have to give 5m of any transfer fee to Everton and that represents a 26m loss on a player who is currently the best striker in international football, has scored 42 in 96 games for us in the last 2 years and at 26 is entering his prime. If we accepted that then we would be an absolute laughing stock, basically any club we want to conduct business with is going to expect us to bend over and grab our ankles.
Click to expand...
some might say we are anyway nowadays
 
He hasn't been good for united. First it was seen as a Mourinho problem, now it's clearly just him.
He needs to be moved on, if we make a loss then so be it. Clubs are hardly queuing up for him. We do need a big turnaround in staff, as long as we get something for him, it can only be a good thing. I'd rather have an Academy player bursting blood vessels than him.
 
Gandalf said:
The last offer was 54m which is 21m less than we paid 2 years ago. Factor in that we have to give 5m of any transfer fee to Everton and that represents a 26m loss on a player who is currently the best striker in international football, has scored 42 in 96 games for us in the last 2 years and at 26 is entering his prime. If we accepted that then we would be an absolute laughing stock, basically any club we want to conduct business with is going to expect us to bend over and grab our ankles.

We have not transfer listed him and the notion that we don't want him is wholly inaccurate. Ole prefers Rashford but he absolutely wants Lukaku to stay part of the squad and has made clear he will need to be replaced if he goes. It is fair to say we would be willing to sell as he is not seen as a key player but we are also perfectly happy to keep him with the reasonable expectation that he will continue to contribute. Prices are going up and not down and nothing about the last 2 years should suggest that we should accept a 35% decrease in his value, Inter are taking the piss and they need to either put up or shut up.
Click to expand...

He’s not the best striker in international football - that’s in insane claim! If you like figures, then 1 goal in 23 appearances against the top 6 in two seasons, going 2.5 months without scoring a goal, and not scoring a single goal against anyone in the top 10 in the PL last season.

Your right we shouldn’t bens over and accept the first offer, and I’m sure the deal will get done. But let’s also be clear, we bought a dud (certainly not a DUDE), and if we get anywhere near what we paid for him then we would have negotiated a good deal.

If he really was the best international striker in the world - why is it only Inter who are interested in him, with no other club even remotely interested?

As for him entering his prime, when you look at his shocking fitness, pathetic endurance, and complete lack of desire, it looks like he is on a downward trajectory.
 
The only case for us to accept 54m for Lukaku is if Inter also immediately purchases Alexis (without us subsidizing any wages).
 
Wtf somebody wanted to buy him and get him off our payroll and we rejected??
Please sell him asap
 
Gandalf said:
The last offer was 54m which is 21m less than we paid 2 years ago. Factor in that we have to give 5m of any transfer fee to Everton and that represents a 26m loss on a player who is currently the best striker in international football, has scored 42 in 96 games for us in the last 2 years and at 26 is entering his prime. If we accepted that then we would be an absolute laughing stock, basically any club we want to conduct business with is going to expect us to bend over and grab our ankles.

We have not transfer listed him and the notion that we don't want him is wholly inaccurate. Ole prefers Rashford but he absolutely wants Lukaku to stay part of the squad and has made clear he will need to be replaced if he goes. It is fair to say we would be willing to sell as he is not seen as a key player but we are also perfectly happy to keep him with the reasonable expectation that he will continue to contribute. Prices are going up and not down and nothing about the last 2 years should suggest that we should accept a 35% decrease in his value, Inter are taking the piss and they need to either put up or shut up.
Click to expand...

Someone gets it, at last!

If it was down to a lot of utter halfwits on here, we'd have smashed him off already for 40-45m, paid 90m for Maguire, and wonder why we're suddenly not seeing such massive profits anymore.
 
The mirror say we have given Inter a 7 day deadline apparently, so either he is sold by next Tuesday latest, or he isn’t doing anywhere.
 
If this deal doesn't get done then we are stuck with a player on £200k a week, or 10m a year, barely contributing to the team. Now he may get a chance early doors and seize it or more likely he rots on the bench, possibly throws his dummy out and then in 12 months time when Inter will have someone else we'll be left with a 75m write off. Unless of course Conte takes over from OGS which is probably his only hope at Utd

Best option is to take whatever we can get. Some may see it as a pushover, others will think bloody hell cracking deal!
 
marko goalo said:
If this deal doesn't get done then we are stuck with a player on £200k a week, or 10m a year, barely contributing to the team. Now he may get a chance early doors and seize it or more likely he rots on the bench, possibly throws his dummy out and then in 12 months time when Inter will have someone else we'll be left with a 75m write off. Unless of course Conte takes over from OGS which is probably his only hope at Utd

Best option is to take whatever we can get. Some may see it as a pushover, others will think bloody hell cracking deal!
Click to expand...
Totally agree shift him, over hyped over weight and over the bar from two yards!!
 
finneh said:
We lose out either way. Either:

a) we accept an offer of around £65m now
b) we accept a structured loan with obligation to buy that is roughly in line with our valuation but paid over 3 Summers
c) keep a depreciating asset with a huge salary who's unhappy and doesn't fit in with how the manager wants to play

At the moment we have a £10m loss on a player who should never have been bought for the cost we bought him for. If we keep him we lose another £10m in his wages over the next 12 months and also lose £10m+ on his value as he'll almost certainly have a poor season where he's second choice (even if he doesn't he's a year older with a year less on his contract).

We should absolutely not be throwing good money after bad in the form of £20m cost to keep him for a year.
Click to expand...

Oh if the offer is in the region of £65m we accept it but £54m then you keep him cause the £20m a year is the same value and he will score 10 goals this season.
 
This is one that won't happen. Inter are the only club showing interest and they can't raise the money to buy him. Think he will have to stay put, unless they offer a player that we like, and cash
 
Seeing the size of him at the side of the pitch in pre-season, wow! He has a long path ahead of him to play the high press and energy game that Ole wants.

We should accept he's not in our plans, that we bought badly and will take a loss - much prefer this than have him having around like a spare part as clearly he is not motivated to do the necessary on the fitness side. 60/65M from Inter? I'd bite their hand off.
 
Bestietom said:
This is one that won't happen. Inter are the only club showing interest and they can't raise the money to buy him. Think he will have to stay put, unless they offer a player that we like, and cash
Click to expand...
What I don’t get is that usually when you want to keep a player, you up the price to scare off potential suitors.

Here, the manager clearly doesn’t want him but we are still asking for a huge fee and scaring off potential suitors.

I’m not saying we should sell him for peanuts, but maybe our valuation is not realistic and we will end up stuck with him because of it.
 
Why should we sell him for less than his value.

This is the list of £30m plus fees for strikers this window so far with APPS:GOALS:ASSISTS(in that order across all leagues)

Perez £30m 236:64:24
Jimenez £34m 275:80:41
Joelinton £40m 127:35:22
Haller £45m 232:92:39
Jovic £54m 143:53:15
Griezmann £108m 459:185:68
Felix £113.4m 87:34:17

Now compare Lukaku
Lukaku 422:194:69

Based on those stats he’s a better goal scorer than Griezmann and younger! Yet inter are looking to offer
Jovic level fees. They are taking the Micky!

I’m not saying Lukaku is worth £100m plus but £75m is a fair offer and not something we should budge from just to appease Conte.
 
BenitoSTARR said:
Why should we sell him for less than his value.

This is the list of £30m plus fees for strikers this window so far with APPS:GOALS:ASSISTS(in that order across all leagues)

Perez £30m 236:64:24
Jimenez £34m 275:80:41
Joelinton £40m 127:35:22
Haller £45m 232:92:39
Jovic £54m 143:53:15
Griezmann £108m 459:185:68
Felix £113.4m 87:34:17

Now compare Lukaku
Lukaku 422:194:69

Based on those stats he’s a better goal scorer than Griezmann and younger! Yet inter are looking to offer
Jovic level fees. They are taking the Micky!

I’m not saying Lukaku is worth £100m plus but £75m is a fair offer and not something we should budge from just to appease Conte.
Click to expand...

You can make stats say whatever you want (lies, damn lies, and statistics etc...)

If we were to accept a lower fee, we wouldn't be doing it to appease Conte - we'd be doing it to get rid of a player we don't want, and one who doesn't fit into the plans of the manager. One who is unfit, and offered very little last season.

I'd prefer we take 60-65M and reinvest that in Fernandez or a RW that actually improves the team. We'd recoup any loss in the additional prize money qualifying for the CL.
 
FrenchRed said:
You can make stats say whatever you want (lies, damn lies, and statistics etc...)

If we were to accept a lower fee, we wouldn't be doing it to appease Conte - we'd be doing it to get rid of a player we don't want, and one who doesn't fit into the plans of the manager. One who is unfit, and offered very little last season.

I'd prefer we take 60-65M and reinvest that in Fernandez or a RW that actually improves the team. We'd recoup any loss in the additional prize money qualifying for the CL.
Click to expand...

Well you can’t make them say anything... and I think it’s clear £54m over 3 years is derisory.

He has put a football in the back of a net as well as and better than £100m players and in a very tough league with the PL. For his age he is in the top bracket of PL goal scorers.

To replace him with just a decent option based on those fees we are looking at minimum £40m for a decent young CF which does not represent good value for money.

We have a poor history of underselling players and when has anyone from United said we want rid of Lukaku? He has many years left on his contract is a proven goal scorer and while he didn’t have the best season last year can you blame him given the style of play and lack of service?

Inter want the flashy new car without having to pay flashy new car prices. In the current market £65m is underselling him.
 
FrenchRed said:
I'd prefer we take 60-65M and reinvest that in Fernandez or a RW that actually improves the team. We'd recoup any loss in the additional prize money qualifying for the CL.
Click to expand...

The shareholders won't see it that way. They will see it very coldly as a £20m loss on an asset. No business would want that and no good business would accept it. Currently, whether he is playing or not or in the managers plans, he is viewed as an £80m asset. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
romufc said:
Oh if the offer is in the region of £65m we accept it but £54m then you keep him cause the £20m a year is the same value and he will score 10 goals this season.
Click to expand...

We should have negotiated on a 2 year loan with obligation to buy basis.

Their first offer was £9m loan fee and £54m transfer fee in 2 years. I'm sure that could have been negotiated to around £15m loan fee and £55m in 2 years.

The problem seems to be that we refused that kind of structure, which given that instead we're likely to receive nothing this summer instead of the £9m and have to pay a further £10m in wages is bizarre.

So essentially we have a player who isn't committed to the team, who doesn't suit the managers style and who earns a huge salary whilst being on the bench, all for the pride of turning down the only good deal on the table.

I also don't by that the 10 goals you speak of are 10 extra goals compared to another player in the centre forward position. I believe if his minutes were given to a different attacker next season we'd see more goals scored, not less (likely shared between James, Martial, Rashford and possiboy Greenwood).
Volumiza said:
The shareholders won't see it that way. They will see it very coldly as a £20m loss on an asset. No business would want that and no good business would accept it. Currently, whether he is playing or not or in the managers plans, he is viewed as an £80m asset. Nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. A good business knows when to hold them and when to fold them.

Throwing good money after bad in the form of depreciation and wages is a stupid business decision. If you make a mistake financially you don't stubbornly stick by your mistake; you recognise it early and mitigate it as much as is possible.
 
He's gotta go, he's had absolutely 0 pre-season and he's going to only play a Fellaini type role if he stays. Inter, stop dicking around!
 
Lash said:
He's gotta go, he's had absolutely 0 pre-season and he's going to only play a Fellaini type role if he stays. Inter, stop dicking around!
Click to expand...
Frankly, we should just accept 60m.
 
finneh said:
We should have negotiated on a 2 year loan with obligation to buy basis.

Their first offer was £9m loan fee and £54m transfer fee in 2 years. I'm sure that could have been negotiated to around £15m loan fee and £55m in 2 years.

The problem seems to be that we refused that kind of structure, which given that instead we're likely to receive nothing this summer instead of the £9m and have to pay a further £10m in wages is bizarre.

So essentially we have a player who isn't committed to the team, who doesn't suit the managers style and who earns a huge salary whilst being on the bench, all for the pride of turning down the only good deal on the table.

I also don't by that the 10 goals you speak of are 10 extra goals compared to another player in the centre forward position. I believe if his minutes were given to a different attacker next season we'd see more goals scored, not less (likely shared between James, Martial, Rashford and possiboy Greenwood).


Nonsense. A good business knows when to hold them and when to fold them.

Throwing good money after bad in the form of depreciation and wages is a stupid business decision. If you make a mistake financially you don't stubbornly stick by your mistake; you recognise it early and mitigate it as much as is possible.
Click to expand...


But you do realise, if we sell him for £15m loan this summer, we will still have to replace him? And a replacement is not going to be £15m, any signing will be £50m plus, so Utd lose out on that. And the wages we will have to pay another top signing will be similar to Lukaku.

And with 10 goals, if Rashford or Martial are injured or in bad form for 6 weeks or so, you still need someone on the bench to come make a change for you. If you are losing 1-0 and Lukaku is on the bench, he will give you another option, even if you are not willing to play him. He is still a top top striker.
 
finneh said:
Nonsense. A good business knows when to hold them and when to fold them.

Throwing good money after bad in the form of depreciation and wages is a stupid business decision. If you make a mistake financially you don't stubbornly stick by your mistake; you recognise it early and mitigate it as much as is possible.
Click to expand...

And right now we are being a good business. Selling a footballer isn’t an isolated deal like most businesses if we get fleeced in Lukaku other clubs will continue to low ball for our players.

Lukaku is not past it, he’s still consistently scoring goals despite United having an awful season last year and he’s a proven international and PL striker. He is an elite striker and while he doesn’t fit the United profile perfectly that doesn’t change that he is worth more than what Inter will offer. Their cash problem is not our fault. If they can’t afford him fine we keep a very good striker if they can fine but on our terms.

It’s time for Woodward to show backbone.

Lukaku isn’t a mistake and he’s professional enough that he wouldn’t down tools for a season or he’d risk his career. He’s a smart guy.

We literally hold all the cards on this one so for once we should hold firm for our fee. Inter are desperate for him Conte is desperate so pay up.
 
Any pictures of him being unfit from the pre-season tour?
 
finneh said:
Nonsense. A good business knows when to hold them and when to fold them.

Throwing good money after bad in the form of depreciation and wages is a stupid business decision. If you make a mistake financially you don't stubbornly stick by your mistake; you recognise it early and mitigate it as much as is possible.
Click to expand...

And we're holding him so you're correct. He's still a top striker whether you think so or not. We can't rely on Rashford and Greenwood alone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.