Mason Greenwood, Marseille Footballer | Read the thread rules in the OP before posting

VWW said:
So Getafe do get 20% afterall....thanks a lot John Murtough. I am so glad that guy is nowhere near this club anymore after years of incompentence.
Click to expand...

Murtough genuinely the worst thing that happened to his club in the last 3-4 years. Absolute clown.

Cant believe there were folks here who used to prop him up as the messiah, and wouldnt hear a negative word about him.

And yeah, Getafe also get 20% of whatever we make when Marseille sell Greenwood.
 
So, if true, Getafe would get 20% of United's 50% (assuming all the numbers are accurate, which they may very well not be; I don't trust journos or leaks when it comes to the exact terms of contracts). That's brilliant negotiating from Getafe.

Also, I thought the Getafe cut would only apply to the transfer window immediately after the loan (this one), so I was wrong apparently, but I thought it was extremely unlikely it would only apply if a move happened during the loan. That would have been awful negotiating by Getafe.
 
cafecillos said:
So, if true, Getafe would get 20% of United's 50% (assuming all the numbers are accurate, which they may very well not be; I don't trust journos or leaks when it comes to the exact terms of contracts). That's brilliant negotiating from Getafe.

Also, I thought the Getafe cut would only apply to the transfer window immediately after the loan (this one), so I was wrong apparently, but I thought it was extremely unlikely it would only apply if a move happened during the loan. That would have been awful negotiating by Getafe.
Click to expand...
It makes sense though, they took all the risk and should stand to benefit if he ends up being a success. They must have also known no one else was interested to be in a position to suggest it too.
 
Well, if that's what it took to persuade Getafe to take him, then fair enough. I'm just happy he's gone and that we're getting any money at all for him given the circumstances.
 
You have to understand it was a huge risk Getafe were taking to play him right after that scandal AND he hadnt played for a long time. Just think of that 20% as their payment for essentially "making him sellable" to other clubs. Because they now have a proof that Greenwood can still perform decently.

Anyway he scored 8 and assisted 6 in 33 matches.

Hojlund scored 15 and assited 2 in 38 matches, in his first season at United. And that is without beating anybody up. I know which one I'd prefer.

Move on. The fees we get are a bonus for getting rid of this shitshow maker.
 
Last edited:
duffer said:
Click to expand...


Wild.

I wasn’t too critical of the 20% they got now for the Marseille move. I can understand that, as they took on all the PR risk with the loan. But of future sales too? That’s crazy
 
It could be a decreasing % with successive moves, there could be a total amount cap... I don't think journos know the exact wording and stipulations of the real terms and clauses.
 
It was right at the end of the transfer window and we were desperate for any mug to take him so I don't think it's fair to criticise anyone for agreeing to that clause. I'd say the opposite really and give them credit for coming up with a creative way of getting rid.

And once that was inserted it's standard for them to get a further cut if he moves. Any add-ons are part of the transfer fee so they're entitled to their percentage.
 
So people dont want this guy anywhere this club but at the same time they want the clubs who take the risk with him to bear the risk for free. Thats a hypocritical way of looking at things. Getafe helped us put him in the shopping window.
 
Utd spent almost all that summer’s transfer window finishing that 6-month internal review.

Then, with just over a week left of the transfer window, they announced the decision to let him go.

Then, the loan seemed very last minute and rushed—Lazio apparently ran into deadline issues.

So, definitely partly Murtough‘s fault that we had to make that rushed money losing deal with Getafe.
 
Last edited:
Highfather_24 said:
Murtough genuinely the worst thing that happened to his club in the last 3-4 years. Absolute clown.

Cant believe there were folks here who used to prop him up as the messiah, and wouldnt hear a negative word about him.

And yeah, Getafe also get 20% of whatever we make when Marseille sell Greenwood.
Click to expand...

The alternative was he eventually just leaves for free. We had no leverage in the negotiations. It's a miracle we got anything at all for him.
 
Gavinb33 said:
Why are people so weird over Greenwood, there is a reason Getafe took him on loan and under terms that benefitted them, I'll let you all figure out why that was the case........
Click to expand...

"I will stop supporting this club if he ever plays for us again" . Also them "other clubs should take all the risk without the benefits"
 
Having him no longer bring the club into disrepute is worth more than the payments Getafe will receive in the long run.
 
Gavinb33 said:
Why are people so weird over Greenwood, there is a reason Getafe took him on loan and under terms that benefitted them, I'll let you all figure out why that was the case........
Click to expand...

Tbf, if people believe we'd have got better terms if we had immediately decided to move Greenwood on (as opposed to moving him on after we'd engendered a high-profile backlash against the club by initially planning to reinstate him), then there's scope to criticise the club as well as Greenwood for the outcome.

It's Greenwood's fault the club were in that position, but that doesn't mean they didn't make things worse for themselves in how they handled it. I'd possibly argue that the backlash the club brought onto itself made their negotiating position worse.
 
Highfather_24 said:
Murtough genuinely the worst thing that happened to his club in the last 3-4 years. Absolute clown.

Cant believe there were folks here who used to prop him up as the messiah, and wouldnt hear a negative word about him.

And yeah, Getafe also get 20% of whatever we make when Marseille sell Greenwood.
Click to expand...
Low bar but It was actually probably his best ever deal, with the alternative being us getting nothing for him.
 
Leftback99 said:
Low bar but It was actually probably his best ever deal, with the alternative being us getting nothing for him.
Click to expand...
Lets not pretend those were the only 2 options. We dithered for the whole summer, and then panicked on deadline day. A competent DOF would have got rid of him much sooner.
 
sullydnl said:
Tbf, if people believe we'd have got better terms if we had immediately decided to move Greenwood on (as opposed to moving him on after we'd engendered a high-profile backlash against the club by initially planning to reinstate him), then there's scope to criticise the club as well as Greenwood for the outcome.

It's Greenwood's fault the club were in that position, but that doesn't mean they didn't make things worse for themselves in how they handled it. I'd possibly argue that the backlash the club brought onto itself made their negotiating position worse.
Click to expand...

The reason Getafe worked so well because no one really cares bar their own small fanbase, look at the deal to sell him now even when he is less toxic than I'd argue he has been since the whole shit show started and then even for a reasonable price he didn't go for loads of money, have a bidding war or even to a top tier league or club, the longer it gets away from the release of that clip the better for him only we couldn't wait that long and then tied the deal in so we at least would make more money the longer he keeps his head down
 
People talking about the 20% and the loan deal in general as if it was business as usual... It was an entirely unprecedented situation and it was a fine clause to have.
 
Whatever the deal was, in the end I'm happy we got some actual money for him + he fecked off to France instead of to another PL club.
 
sullydnl said:
Tbf, if people believe we'd have got better terms if we had immediately decided to move Greenwood on (as opposed to moving him on after we'd engendered a high-profile backlash against the club by initially planning to reinstate him), then there's scope to criticise the club as well as Greenwood for the outcome.

It's Greenwood's fault the club were in that position, but that doesn't mean they didn't make things worse for themselves in how they handled it. I'd possibly argue that the backlash the club brought onto itself made their negotiating position worse.
Click to expand...

It's not even an argument - the club undoubtedly made a total mess of it last summer, took far too long to announce anything and left hardly any time to find an alternative.

Getafe werent the only option though, Lazio boss is on record as saying they had an offer on the table last summer and this. Who knows the details.

Reasonable to give Getafe a % while he was there, even this summer is understandable but a share of all future transfers is madness (if true and I have my doubts).

Glad all those involved (Arnold/Murtough/Stewart) have been kicked out.
 
That clause is a definite head scratcher. The whole Greenwood situation was badly mismanaged last summer and I guess that clause was the cherry on top.
 
Adding a few more incentives into any loan deal might actually improve the success of the loan system.

As United fans we are forever moaning about terrible loans with young players getting very few minutes when they are away.
 
I have no issue, if we could have sold him last season then we would have. No one would take him so we gave a little incentive.

Makes Getafe look like a shitty club "We would never let someone who's done that play for us and be our best player ever..that's disgusting... unless wink wink" but who cares, nothing to do with us in the long run.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
People talking about the 20% and the loan deal in general as if it was business as usual... It was an entirely unprecedented situation and it was a fine clause to have.
Click to expand...

People are also talking about “future sales” too which is a misunderstanding.
If we sold Greenwood outright with no sell on clause for 25m, Getafe would rightfully be due 5m and the case/transfer/clause would be done with.
We didn’t though, and Getafe are rightfully due 20% of Manchester United’s sale of Mason Greenwood; which is 5m ish now, and whatever that 50% clause amounts to.

I’d imagine that’s how these things always work, else what’s to stop Marseille selling him for 20m with an 80% sell on clause next Summer to feck United over.
 
people talking about the 20% clause but why do we have a buyback clause is a bigger mystery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.