Indeed. We have a mix of that and expensive mistakes. Worst combination really
MUFC are looking at a budget of about £100m, due to FFP (The Athletic)
- Thread starter jamesjimmybyrondean
- Start date
Indeed. We have a mix of that and expensive mistakes. Worst combination really
No way for me. I get what you're saying in that you are selling a player at high value in a position we are well stocked in...but it's not something I would be considering just now.
Sancho should be the first on the chopping block when it comes to wide players. We won't get anything like what we paid but we should get something of note.
Imagine being optimistic about us selling players to raise transfer funds. It's as if some of you folks haven't seen our history on that matter. 
I mean it's not as if City's strategy to getting there was to buy 2 expensive for each position first while leaving gaping holes elsewhere.
First you actually need to be in a position of strength and actually have 1 good/great player in each position before you go down that route.
Selling Sancho unfortunately doesn't do anything for our FFP position. At current value we'd probably have to take a loss, which actually would make the whole situation worse
But he'd probably need replacing and he helps with the home grown quota. Would be a shame for Garnacho to go, and Sancho could bring in a fee.
Selling Sancho doesn't do much for our FFP position unfortunately. Selling him for less than £43m would involve us taking a loss on the book.
Eh? Surely money is money? 50 mil for Sancho or Garnacho is immaterial isn't it?
Not for FFP.
Oh really? Ah learn something new everyday.
The hot takes never stop
Basically, all else being equal, it's more beneficial to sell academy players or players who have been here long enough for their book value to have dropped.
So the likes of McTominay, Henderson, Elanga, Williams, etc., but also the likes of Martial, Fred and Lindelof.
Garnacho actually looks like he has the potential to be something special. He is worth keeping, especially as Rashford's trajectory is unknown. Of all our wide players Sancho is the one we should be getting rid of. Garnacho is the last one I would consider selling.
We think that about every fecker who steps out of the academy. Scotty 2 Hotty was meant to be the second coming of Roy Keane - many wouldn't have sold him for any amount just 3 years ago.
Sancho’s initial transfer fee is still under amortization as we paid £75m on a 5-year contract which comes at a £15m per year for the duration of his deal. He’s only spent two years here so there will be £40m remaining to be amortized.
We will of course not even consider selling Garnacho. That would be madness.
Our biggest transfer outgoing fees will come from Scott McTominay and Dean Henderson. We should’ve been shopping both of them around to every half shite team in the league from January onward.
Bailly, Tuanzebe, and Telles are “take what we can get and be happy about it deals”. Telles will go for a nominal fee to Brazil or something, we’ll probably have to subsidise Bailly on a loan again. Tuanzebe might get a small fee from a championship side.
Williams and Hannibal — we should be looking at the James Garner and Andreas Pereira deals again for similar fees.
Maguire is an awkward one - a clear PL level player but he’s on too much money for most sides to be interested to cover that and pay the type of transfer fee we want.
Sancho and Martial are more of the same above. Probably more hassle trying to get either out than actually keeping them.
Anyone I’ve missed? One of Wan Bissaka or Dalot could fetch a respectable sum, but it’s kind of an isolated pointless one because the money gained on them would just be put to replacing the one who leaves (for a more expensive player - I.E. Frimpong).
Bailly, Tuanzebe, and Telles are “take what we can get and be happy about it deals”. Telles will go for a nominal fee to Brazil or something, we’ll probably have to subsidise Bailly on a loan again. Tuanzebe might get a small fee from a championship side.
Williams and Hannibal — we should be looking at the James Garner and Andreas Pereira deals again for similar fees.
Maguire is an awkward one - a clear PL level player but he’s on too much money for most sides to be interested to cover that and pay the type of transfer fee we want.
Sancho and Martial are more of the same above. Probably more hassle trying to get either out than actually keeping them.
Anyone I’ve missed? One of Wan Bissaka or Dalot could fetch a respectable sum, but it’s kind of an isolated pointless one because the money gained on them would just be put to replacing the one who leaves (for a more expensive player - I.E. Frimpong).
In real terms yes but not neccesarily in terms of FFP? I think I'm right in saying you could theoretically sell AWB for less than it would cost to buy Frimpong but still improve your FFP position while doing so.
It's not that clear.
AWB was signed on a 5 year contract for £50m. So next season he'll have a year of amortization left at £10m. Extending his contract by 3 years reduces his amortisation for the next 4 seasons down to £2.5m a year.
Buying Frimpong for £30m on a 5 year deal means we now have an amortisation liability of £6m a year for the next 5 seasons.
Sure, but just looking at the upcoming window in particular could you theoretically free scope to spend more in the short term by replacing AWB with Frimpong? Basically with the benefit of selling being immediate but the impact of buying being spread across multiple years?
I'm assuming from the club's POV that the FFP issues are more of a short term one, because over a longer period new owners can try to find other ways to bolster our finances. So even kicking the can down the road may help.
I would sell Rashford. He's a problem for us when we eventually get a proper, goal-scoring number 9. Once he gets the ball from the wing he only wants to score when he should be getting his head up and looking for the striker.
Maybe he's going for goal because he knows our "striker" options couldn't score in a brothel?
Only positive about Maguire is that he's still somehow a key player for Southgate and I think he'll want to move to play with the Euros starting to loom next season.
I think maybe he'd take a pay cut to get out of this perpetual nightmare that is his United career. Probably still a top half player, and would do well in a team that play a deeper back line.
Even if we only got 60m for all the deadwood and spent the combined on two top class starters, the net gain for the overall team would be massive. Would like to see us ship Fred and McTominay out, add a midfielder and make Sabitzer permanent.
That's potentially 3 signings (new CM, Sabitzer and a CF). Problem is, it doesn't address replacing Maguire or exploring the possibility of replacing De Gea.
Unfortunate that the ownership hasn't been sorted yet, but a quick resolution there may give us some more leeway.
I guess we'll see.
It is slightly different this year with Financial Sustainability rules coming into play, we can only spend 90% of turnover on Financials, Wages, Net Transfer fees which can be amortised and Agent’s fees which can not.
So let’s say united turned over £550m this year season 22/23 and as predicted wages probably reduced from £385m to £325m but the club made another loss of £115m like the previous year the sustainability figure just with Financials and wages would be at £440m that’s 80% right there, you are right however it’s mostly guess work As the financials for this season are not posted yet.
Hypothetically if what I just predicted is indeed fact it would mean that the club as more than £100m transfer budget as most transfers could be amortised, for example we buy 4 players on 5 year contracts for £250m and sell no one we amortise £50m net position plus £25m of upfront Agent Fees which now have stricter FIFA rules.
Total costs £325m+115m+25m+50m = £515m/£550m = 93% Non Compliant
So we would have to sell players and the obvious ones are ; D Henderson, B Williams and A Elanga all for let’s say £30m that figure is net profit so would be deducted from £50m so the new figures would be £325m+115m+25m+20m
= £485m/550m = 88% and compliant to FSP
Of course I’m assuming the wages dropped significantly due to Europa League clause. The rumours on the year before were different, mostly about an actual lack of cash as reserves were being depleted , there was no sustainability rules and we came 2nd so although we lost money, the Glazers gambled on their only existing credit line left and maxed it out, the huge turnover of £583m helped as did selling two home grown players , Andreas Pereira and James Garner for £22m which would have shown on our account as net profit.
The truth is our net transfer position last season was £205m but all 4 players were signed on 5 year contracts with Eriksen signed on free and a 3 year contract so £41m - £22m meant our net transfer spend was £19m the true issues with FFP was the huge loss of the clubs accounts mostly due to dividends being taken last year and the £40m of interest paid on the clubs debt which suffered due to monetary exchange rates.
This was the second year running we made a huge loss after posting similar results 20/21 season and this is the main reason we are struggling with FFP.
We have a lot of players that we need to get off the wages list, some high earners as well as some of the deadwood. We can then add more to our budget by balancing the books.
MG, can we get any decent money for him if the club decide he’s out
(before anyone kicks off a conversation about rights and wrongs, guilty or not guilty, that conversation will be deleted. I am only asking about how much we might get for him)
Garnaucho has a €100m buyout clause, so we won’t be selling him for £60-70m plus he’s homegrown, we have to be very careful about selling very good young homegrown players.
Is "amortization" the hipsters word of the week or something?
It’s an interesting question — I’ve seen the Sun report that Juventus are one of a few Italian clubs willing to give him a chance to kickstart his career.
He will hopefully never play here again but after being a full, what, 18 months(?) without any competitive football — what can we realistically ask for? At the same time, if he does get back into football and gets close to similar levels to what he was at before… he’s a £100m+ level talent.
Struggle to see how we can ask for much, considering why we want to get rid. Italian teams that are interested looks like they'll offer very little.
What's more likely if we're interested in any players from their squads, we can do some clever accounting.
Surely the only sensible thing to do is to loan him out, get him match fit, let him remind the world of his immense talent and then sell.
If I was the club I'd probably ask for a symbolic sum of something like £3-5m, but with a 50% sell-on clause.
You can’t be moral and then immoral at the same time. Either let him go for free or keep him and let him play. It’s that simple. Otherwise EVERYONE is just a hypocrite.
The worrying thing is I dare say most of us thought these 3 were long gone.
That they're still on our books is madness.
I wonder if we can use him as part of Osimhen or even Maignan from AC Milan (Milan also might need new young striker). Greenwood is world class talent, and I’m sure they will be very interested if we use him as part of the swap deal to reduce the transfer fees.
Would be a good deal.
You can't attribute (or even hope for) morality or consistency to/from the people currently running us - the most you can hope for is reputational management and/or responsiveness to sponsors who are in turn acting in their own reputational interest in order to arrive at a partially 'virtuous' outcome. If they calculate that blowback for a 50% sell-on is minimal to negligible, and they can get the buyer to agree due to competing offers, then they'll take it...
Barcelona sold levers to cover losses of these last 2 years, pay debts and also raise the salary cap.
And this year the wage bill will be lowered considerably. So the club will be better off financially.
You need to add the salary of the players bought and subtract that of the players sold.
Williams got injured during preseason and that lasted until the end of 2022. Elanga was being given a chance by ETH as he just arrived and Elanga's a young player who showed promise so was in the same category as Garnacho.
Depends on what the outcome of the investigation is.
For example, say the conclusion is "We accept the the outcome of the police investigation. However, our discussions with players, staff and other stakeholders have made it clear that allowing Greenwood to return would cause undue disruption and concern within the club". There wouldn't be any hypocrisy in selling him on that basis, as it isn't based on a moral judgement.