Man Utd summer transfer budget capped by FFP due to 'historic spending'

[Maticmaker]

United have broken the British transfer record 6 times, between Denis Law 1962 (£115,000) up to and including Paul Pogba in 2016 (reputed £89M) . We have a reputation for paying 'through the nose', which has run through all owners and managers over this period. Is it any wonder clubs come with wheel barrows to carry off their loot!

 

[Crimson King]

Just like last year, remember we only had a budget of £100-120m per year then after selling two homegrown players ; J Garner and A Pereira for £25m combined we were able to spend £220m. The Glazers remit is the same every year £100-150m transfer budget so they can take Dividends which they can not anymore as the dividend payment opportunity per share has devalued by 600% looking at the last financial results, they have to sell, maybe not this year but with in 12 months or they potentially could take the club into a bankruptcy, especially with interest rates rising.

Well that's certainly a grim forecast. Let's just pray they see sense soon and sell!

 

[Big Ben Foster]

Wouldn't the fact we just let a £375k a week goalkeeper's contract expire not give us some leeway then?

Yes, although that impact is probably already baked into the financial plan since his contract was expiring.

 

[mitchmouse]

We need to get a lot better at selling our academy players, and at the right time. Teams like Chelsea and Liverpool have been a lot better at doing it than us in recent years.

It might not be easy to sell the likes of Maguire for FFP purposes, but you would think it should be doable for players like Henderson, Williams, McTominay and Elanga.

I wouldn't be 100% surprised if Henderson is in goal or our first game of the season...

 

[predator]

United have broken the British transfer record 6 times, between Denis Law 1962 (£115,000) up to and including Paul Pogba in 2016 (reputed £89M) . We have a reputation for paying 'through the nose', which has run through all owners and managers over this period. Is it any wonder clubs come with wheel barrows to carry off their loot!

Absolutely. Our wage bill, I believe, is also the highest in the world 'officially'.
Alot of my mates (reds and blues) don't even realise how much weve actually spent on players and wages. Not many other clubs could afford to pay what we paid Alexis Sanchez and Ronaldo during their recent disastrous spells for instance, and those that could stayed away from them.

I cant wait to see the back of the Glazers but they have spent a lot of money in all fairness. However they are terrible owners in every aspect and they don't give a shit about the club.

City becoming what they are is a result of heavy investment but also having owners that have a vision and develop every aspect of the club.

I cringe when United fans complain about city's spending. After Grealish, their next most expensive signing is KDB, who is worth his weight in gold, we've signed 5 players more expensive than him (Antony, Maguire, Pogba, Lukaku, Sancho).

 

[CM]

I wouldn't be 100% surprised if Henderson is in goal or our first game of the season...

Given his comments last year and the fact that Forest seem to be very interested, I doubt it.

 

[Maticmaker]

I cant wait to see the back of the Glazers but they have spent a lot of money in all fairness. However they are terrible owners in every aspect and they don't give a shit about the club.

I agree, but you know I am beginning to wonder what comes next?
It is almost in our 'DNA' now to pay 'top whack', even for players many of whom when they did finally arrive only really contributed to the 'shirt sales' totals in the mega store.

As you say there is a lot to be put right in the club from top to bottom and unless it is done properly, then ETH is likely to finish up another casualty to the business 'cash-cow' that is Manchester United.

IMO when Martin Edwards decided to change the Edwards family 'hobby' into the family business, it all started to seriously go wrong. True Edwards brought us SAF... got to give him that, but he also made United a target, for 'carpet-bagger's like the Glaziers, lets hope whoever comes next knows something about running a top football club.

 

[mitchmouse]

Once more I have to ask, how come Chelsea could spend (was it) £700m last summer? We need the two bidders to tell the Glazers, get on with it or get stuffed. They are going to screw any chance we have of silverware next season

 

[bond19821982]

Once more I have to ask, how come Chelsea could spend (was it) £700m last summer? We need the two bidders to tell the Glazers, get on with it or get stuffed. They are going to screw any chance we have of silverware next season

Chelsea's selling makes a difference, I guess. They are doing alright and bringing in money.

 

[JuriM]

Once more I have to ask, how come Chelsea could spend (was it) £700m last summer? We need the two bidders to tell the Glazers, get on with it or get stuffed. They are going to screw any chance we have of silverware next season

Chelsea also manages to sell their players for huge sum of money - Mount, Lukaku*, all the ones who left to Saudi Arabia now and some former academy products they have managed to load off. Our selling department is basically 0*

 

[CM]

Chelsea's selling makes a difference, I guess. They are doing alright and bringing in money.

They also used the amortisation loophole to help them out in the short term by giving everybody 8 year contracts. It might catch up to them in a year or two.

 

[Caellum]

I call bullshit on that article. Very light on the details. How will historic spending affect what we are spending today especially if we keep turning a profit every year after paying for the transfers. FFP is another way for the glazer parasites to not spend a penny and hurt the club.

Sadly its not that straight forward most players are bought on a kind of mortgage with payment terms over many years and when players leave us its usually for free or on very low fees, then there is the original loan to buy the club, outstanding debts are reported to be circa £720m, reports put United's transfer transfer debt alone at around £320m add to that dividends and the huge hike in interest rates this year. Its this £1bn debt that seems to be holding up the sale of the club.

 

[RuudTom83]

United should push the FFP narrative to counter the United-Tax.

Liverpool can play the poverty card but nobody will ever believe United are skint, so let’s use the FFP card.

 

[Yakuza_devils]

Perfectly answered assume that we have a total amortisation transfer debt of £308m

Next Season - 23/24 we are committed to probably pay about £100m from £308m future debt, Casemiro, Antony, Martinez all done on terms so £70m/ 5 year contract (12m), Antony £85m/5 year contract (17m), Martinez £50m/5 year contract (10m) They will all continue until 27/28 season whether we sell them or not, example Fred is in his last year, so next year the historical debt of £308m will fall by £10m for Fred but then increase by £11m for Mason Mount so we still owe £309m.

FFP is not really a thing this year, it’s been replaced by FSP and the new sustainability rule means we can only spend 90% of our income generated on Wages, Financials and Expenses, net amortised transfer debt, Agent and Signing fees, Net Transfer.

United Predicted revenue for season 22/23 is now expected to be £630m which means as a club our FSP threshold will be £567m.
The wages due to Europa have been predicted to fall by 16% to £325m, amortised transfer debt £100m, The financials is difficult with only three quarters of last year shown, especially with the Glazers chartering private flights everywhere on the club, but let’s take an educated guess of £80m, Agent Fees based on £200m at 7/8% = £15m.

That would leave £567m - £520m = £47m net Transfer. That doesn’t mean we have £47m but we can amortise that figure by the length of contracts 3/5 years so assume a true budget without selling any player of between £135 and £225m.

If the club sold D Henderson, B Williams and A Ellanga for a combined £35m, all these would show as true net profit as they never cost the club a penny and thus figure would be added to the £47m now showing a net transfer profit of £82m and a budget from £250-375m dependent on contracts issued to new players and wages agreed which also have to balanced.

I genuinely think the budget originally mentioned was before the increased projection on turnover to £630-640m from £570-580m.

You can explain FFP very well in a simple easy to understand way. Great job!

 

[Bebestation]

Just cheat like City & Barcelona.

Their UCL’s still count and they are still regarded as GOATs even if they play with 12 men on the pitch.

Seriously, what’s stopping us cheating? Are they just going to tell us not to compete?

 

[el3mel]

Sell Maguire and Sancho.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Just cheat like City & Barcelona.

Their UCL’s still count and they are still regarded as GOATs even if they play with 12 men on the pitch.

Seriously, what’s stopping us cheating? Are they just going to tell us not to compete?

As facetious as this is it does beg the question, why not?

How can they enforce any kind of punishment on ANY team until they punish City?

Of course, the Glazers don’t want to invest and are simply using FFP to excuse their lack of supporting ETH, but for a Newcastle for example - what can the PL do?

If Newcastle breach FFP, say 10 times, how they can punish Newcastle without literally throwing City out of the PL and stripping all their honours?

 

[ShinjiNinja26]

Just cheat like City & Barcelona.

Their UCL’s still count and they are still regarded as GOATs even if they play with 12 men on the pitch.

Seriously, what’s stopping us cheating? Are they just going to tell us not to compete?

Unlike those clubs our owners have no ambition to be the best so why would they cheat to do so? If anything it gives them a convenient excuse not to spend money.

 

[Bebestation]

Unlike those clubs our owners have no ambition to be the best so why would they cheat to do so? If anything it gives them a convenient excuse not to spend money.

Maybe we become a bit more ‘dirty’ under the new Qatar ownership.

 

[OldSchoolManc]

As facetious as this is it does beg the question, why not?

How can they enforce any kind of punishment on ANY team until they punish City?

Of course, the Glazers don’t want to invest and are simply using FFP to excuse their lack of supporting ETH, but for a Newcastle for example - what can the PL do?

If Newcastle breach FFP, say 10 times, how they can punish Newcastle without literally throwing City out of the PL and stripping all their honours?

The Glazers aren’t sportswashing a bottomless pit of money.
Instead they are siphoning money from United and throwing crumbs that leave us in debt and with crumbling stadium, training and infrastructure.
It’s going to be ever decreasing circles until the Glazers go.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

The Glazers aren’t sportswashing a bottomless pit of money.
Instead they are siphoning money from United and throwing crumbs that leave us in debt and with crumbling stadium, training and infrastructure.
It’s going to be ever decreasing circles until the Glazers go.

Not sure you read my post properly tbf.

 

[OldSchoolManc]

Not sure you read my post properly tbf.

Do you mean why not Newcastle cheat?
Yeah can see that as a serious possibility IF there is no proper punishment for City.
A precedent needs to be set or it’s gonna get worse

 

[DJ_21]

Mount, Hojlund and Onana are not enough to challenge for the league. They’re gonna be our main 3 signings but we need more. Arsenal have improved massively, city are still improving their squad, the scousers have bought quality additions. Chelsea will improve next season (can’t do any worse) spurs may be a surprise package with a new playing style. I feel like we’ve got the right manager and on the right track but a bad window here could set us back and we’ll struggle for top 4.

 

[GoldanoGraham]

Buying a top GK - able to play and pass out against the press will transform us. Last season we turned over possession so often and easily and the good teams capitalised on this weakness. This will be a game changer if we can get the right keeper in.

Mount will aid the press from the front and has high energy and product - if ETH thinks that he will be a good fit then that’s great.

Then we’ve got the forward issue - im thinking that this is being left to last so that we can bolster the coffers with some sales

The key to improvement for us is getting starter players into the team that provide azz a

 

[JustCoco]

No offence kid but you need to follow things a bit better.
Firstly he decided to have a pre-emptive moan about the situation based on a remote assumption which is basically getting annoyed at a hypothetical madeup in his own head.

I mean, christ you just did it again in this reply - saying he assumed things! He didn't, you complete clown.

Second, my scenario is more likely based on the series of events. Ten Hag himself is aligned to the DoFs, Ten Hag said he wanted to keep DDG, a contract was offered and it was stalled on any agreement for a long time. It was also well briefed that it was Ten Hag himself who changed his mind - so my premise isn't on assumption but based on tier one reporting. His however is based on loose assumption from pre-existing dislike toward Murtough.

Stay in your lane, and be more subtle in the name calls. You'll be stuck in the newbies for a while.

Yes he had a moan, and?

The whole point of my post is that he never assumed anything and you had the nerve to do precisely that whilst accusing him of doing what you actually did.

I mean, you literally did it again - saying he was assuming, when he didn't and then trying to assume yourself, I don't care how you try and word salad your way around it, you're a hypocrite and not a bright one.

You have need your head checked
More time reading, less time waffling eh pet?

Can tell you've never been smacked, talking like the big man over nothing.

Oh no! Stuck in 'newbies', please get a grip.

 

[VP89]

Yes he had a moan, and?

The whole point of my post is that he never assumed anything and you had the nerve to do precisely that whilst accusing him of doing what you actually did.

I mean, you literally did it again - saying he was assuming, when he didn't and then trying to assume yourself, I don't care how you try and word salad your way around it, you're a hypocrite and not a bright one.

You have need your head checked
More time reading, less time waffling eh pet?

Can tell you've never been smacked, talking like the big man over nothing.

Oh no! Stuck in 'newbies', please get a grip.

Re. The bold he did, learn to read. I also stopped reading after that sentence, too much waffle, and you've already proven to not follow posts well.

 

[edcunited1878]

This is an easy 'story' to pick off and dispute, just showing how complex the FFP really is and the fact that there aren't real concrete, transparent rules shows that there's a lot of loopholes. All figures are in Euros and sourced from Transfermarkt.us.

Club​	21/22 Transfer In (Expenses)​	21/22 Transfer Out (Revenues)​	Profit/Loss Transfer (21/22)​	22/23 Transfer In (Expenses)​	22/23 Transfer Out (Revenues)​	Profit/Loss Transfer (22/23)​	Total Profit/Loss (2-years)​
Manchester United​	142m​	31m​	-111m​	243m​	13m​	-230m​	-341m​
Newcastle​	130m​	0​	-130m​	185m​	14m​	-171m​	-301m​
Arsenal​	167m​	31m​	-136m​	192m​	24m​	-168m​	-304m​
Chelsea​	118m​	149m​	31m​	611m​	68m​	-543m​	-512m​

And for additional context, Newcastle was not qualified for Europe in 20/21, 21/22, nor 22/23. So they've missed out on European revenue for many, many years, until the upcoming season, but their UEFA coefficient is extremely low because of their lack of European participation via CL or Europa.

Manchester United do pay large wages, but that's never stopped them from spending big on transfers nor playing large wages because their revenues to turnover ratio on a year-over-year basis is rather healthy.

 

[NotThatSoph]

This is an easy 'story' to pick off and dispute, just showing how complex the FFP really is and the fact that there aren't real concrete, transparent rules shows that there's a lot of loopholes. All figures are in Euros and sourced from Transfermarkt.us.

Club​	21/22 Transfer In (Expenses)​	21/22 Transfer Out (Revenues)​	Profit/Loss Transfer (21/22)​	22/23 Transfer In (Expenses)​	22/23 Transfer Out (Revenues)​	Profit/Loss Transfer (22/23)​	Total Profit/Loss (2-years)​
Manchester United​	142m​	31m​	-111m​	243m​	13m​	-230m​	-341m​
Newcastle​	130m​	0​	-130m​	185m​	14m​	-171m​	-301m​
Arsenal​	167m​	31m​	-136m​	192m​	24m​	-168m​	-304m​
Chelsea​	118m​	149m​	31m​	611m​	68m​	-543m​	-512m​

And for additional context, Newcastle was not qualified for Europe in 20/21, 21/22, nor 22/23. So they've missed out on European revenue for many, many years, until the upcoming season, but their UEFA coefficient is extremely low because of their lack of European participation via CL or Europa.

Manchester United do pay large wages, but that's never stopped them from spending big on transfers nor playing large wages because their revenues to turnover ratio on a year-over-year basis is rather healthy.

Shouldn't you use the last three years?

 

[edcunited1878]

Shouldn't you use the last three years?

I'm going off the crap article that was shared in the OP. We can go farther, but it's primarily used (2 years) to dispute the article and the nonsense.

 

[NotThatSoph]

I'm going off the crap article that was shared in the OP. We can go farther, but it's primarily used (2 years) to dispute the article and the nonsense.

Ok, but if you want to dispute the conclusion, why wouldn't you use 3 years? It might even be 4, I'm not sure.

 

[Sylar]

Our selling is questionable

But how did city sell / about to sell a keeper who is 20 and been on loan for a league one team for 19m? And we struggle selling our youth, or anybody even those who aren't on big wages

 

[Remember the geese]

We aren't hindered by FFP whatsoever. Pure lies.

 

[edcunited1878]

Ok, but if you want to dispute the conclusion, why wouldn't you use 3 years? It might even be 4, I'm not sure.

Because the article, it's all based on the article, just used the past 2 seasons. I'm not sure either what the full parameters are for FFP. But the point is, those writing about United's FFP restraints aren't really in the know. And way too many people are too gullible about the doom and gloom.

 

[NotThatSoph]

Because the article, it's all based on the article, just used the past 2 seasons. I'm not sure either what the full parameters are for FFP. But the point is, those writing about United's FFP restraints aren't really in the know. And way too many people are too gullible about the doom and gloom.

This article is written because the topic has been written about a lot, it doesn't matter that this specific article is bad. What matters is the fact. The regulations uses the last three years, but there was this thing, possibly covid related, that might make it 4 right now. I can't remember, but other people (like Swiss Ramble) do.

The rules are known. United's transfer expenditure is known to a pretty certain degree. Salary costs are known to a reasonable degree. Revenue is known. Getting to the exact allowed expenditure is difficult, but a ballpark figure isn't.

 

[Skills]

Our selling is questionable

But how did city sell / about to sell a keeper who is 20 and been on loan for a league one team for 19m? And we struggle selling our youth, or anybody even those who aren't on big wages

Quite simply, because we wouldn't have sold him in that scenario. We could've got upwards of £30m for Henderson after his PL season with Sheffield United, probably could've got even more for him after the season he started for us.

But nah, there's no chance we sell an academy product until their situation at the club becomes almost untenable and then at that point their stock in football is low.

 

[edcunited1878]

This article is written because the topic has been written about a lot, it doesn't matter that this specific article is bad. What matters is the fact. The regulations uses the last three years, but there was this thing, possibly covid related, that might make it 4 right now. I can't remember, but other people (like Swiss Ramble) do.

The rules are known. United's transfer expenditure is known to a pretty certain degree. Salary costs are known to a reasonable degree. Revenue is known. Getting to the exact allowed expenditure is difficult, but a ballpark figure isn't.

And thus the article is wrong, that's my entire point. It's a shite article that 'paints' United specifically in a negative light, yet that light should easily be spread to at least a couple other clubs namely Newcastle and Arsenal.

 

[NotThatSoph]

And thus the article is wrong, that's my entire point. It's a shite article that 'paints' United specifically in a negative light, yet that light should easily be spread to at least a couple other clubs namely Newcastle and Arsenal.

Then why didn't you attempt to do so?

 

[Xaviboy]

There doesn't seem to be any strong rumours of any of our players making a transfer away from club.

 

[Champ]

Quite simply, because we wouldn't have sold him in that scenario. We could've got upwards of £30m for Henderson after his PL season with Sheffield United, probably could've got even more for him after the season he started for us.

But nah, there's no chance we sell an academy product until their situation at the club becomes almost untenable and then at that point their stock in football is low.

Despite just selling two academy players last week?

 

[edcunited1878]

Then why didn't you attempt to do so?

Those clubs, per usual, don't get the same level of scrutiny as United because they aren't Manchester United, even if they have similar financial spending without the known revenue.

And this sets off unnecessary panic and complaints from supposed supporters who just cannot let it go and let it be.