MUFC are looking at a budget of about £100m, due to FFP (The Athletic)

Okay so we've got £120m to play around with, including another 200m from the sales of Maguire, McTominay, Sancho, Martial, Lindelof, Dalot, Fred, Pellestri, Greenwood, Bailly, Telles, Tuanzebe, Henderson, Van de Beek, Chong, Elanga and Shoretire.

If we spunk £160 on Mbappe and another £160 on Brighton's backroom staff then we'll be title winners by January :drool:

Daily prayers will also be needed to keep the entire first team fit and able to play every game.
There’s no way I see us recouping £200m from sales this summer. In fact I’d be amazed if we even recouped £100m. We have to be the worst selling club in the league. Mainly down to the fact we are trying to dispense players who are on huge contracts that buyers won’t match.
 
On the FFP balance sheet any sale goes directly into income. So even if Forrest bought Henderson and paid the £30mill off over 50 years, it would still register as £30 million worth of income today. It would also mean you are able to invest say £100 mill, because you won't pay above £30mill towards the selling club today. You'll pay the total across the length of the players contract

Its a farce
Yeah sounds like juggling money around to allow them to keep spending big money. It will all suffer a huge crash some year
It's not a farce. It's basic accrual accounting.

It impacts future years as well, so you still have to be careful about how much you spend even if it does "unlock" more spending this summer.
 
Mount
Rabiot
Hojlund

Sell few players, recoup 80-100 mill, new CB or another CF within the budget
 
Very few people actually understand it and think that selling Maguire for £20 million means an extra £20 million to spend!

Given his purchase price wouldn't Maguire actually be about 20 million on the books at this stage? Might not even get that extra 20m FFP room....
 
There’s no way I see us recouping £200m from sales this summer. In fact I’d be amazed if we even recouped £100m. We have to be the worst selling club in the league. Mainly down to the fact we are trying to dispense players who are on huge contracts that buyers won’t match.

I'd be more than happy if we brought in 50. Anyone lower? :)
 
I just disagree with the idea that selling Henderson alone will equate to an extra 100 million. I’m not a financial expert so I was just laughing at that notion. Happy for someone to explain how that one sale will free up that wiggle room?

Don't comment on matters you know nothing about then.
 
Given his purchase price wouldn't Maguire actually be about 20 million on the books at this stage? Might not even get that extra 20m FFP room....
I think you're right. He signed a 6 year contract when he joined so his book value would be roughly 26m (80 ÷ 6 × 2 remaining years), so we'd have to take a hit there. We'd get some FFP room from his wages (reportedly about 10m / year) falling out. In net terms, not much of a gain.
 
Add Fred, Mctominay, Martial and DVB and we could add another £1 billion to the budget. :lol: :nervous:
He's right though - it's not that Henderson being sold would improve our cash position by that much, but that it would have a multiplicative effect on what we're allowed to spend according to FFP rules.
 
Wow. Condescending. Nice.
Ever heard of forums?
This isn't aimed at you, but I'm going to defend OP here. His original comment on the impact of player sales on FFP restrictions was completely accurate, and yet it received plenty of ridicule from posters who have a strong opinion on something they know nothing about. I can see why he'd be frustrated about that.
 
He's right though - it's not that Henderson being sold would improve our cash position by that much, but that it would have a multiplicative effect on what we're allowed to spend according to FFP rules.
I’d be genuinely interested to know how that works. I said the other players in jest but surely the same could apply to other players we have who have a couple of years left on contract at least?
 
This isn't aimed at you, but I'm going to defend OP here. His original comment on the impact of player sales on FFP restrictions was completely accurate, and yet it received plenty of ridicule from posters who have a strong opinion on something they know nothing about. I can see why he'd be frustrated about that.
I think everyone understands selling players improves your FFP position with regards to extra transfer budget. But £100m extra to spend by selling Henderson?
 
Accrual accounting is genuinely a worry? So you think a basic accounting principle that was invented over 100 years ago is now suddenly going to be the root cause of football clubs failing? Right.
Imagine that poster's reaction when they find out that virtually every business uses these accounting principles!
 
I guess the only reason we have run close to the FFP limit is Covid followed by no CL.

We should be fine going forward..
and for this window, a few sales would boost the FFP limit quite a bit..

Henderson, Elanga, Williams.. 30-40 m between them would be a very nice boost.
 
I guess the only reason we have run close to the FFP limit is Covid followed by no CL.

We should be fine going forward..
and for this window, a few sales would boost the FFP limit quite a bit..

Henderson, Elanga, Williams.. 30-40 m between them would be a very nice boost.
The biggest factor is because we spent £300m last summer and a lot of money in the previous 2/3 years too. All of them on chunky contracts.
 
I think you're right. He signed a 6 year contract when he joined so his book value would be roughly 26m (80 ÷ 6 × 2 remaining years), so we'd have to take a hit there. We'd get some FFP room from his wages (reportedly about 10m / year) falling out. In net terms, not much of a gain.

This biggest gain would be not being able to play the fecker
 
I just disagree with the idea that selling Henderson alone will equate to an extra 100 million. I’m not a financial expert so I was just laughing at that notion. Happy for someone to explain how that one sale will free up that wiggle room?
In very simple and oversimplified terms, since Henderson is an academy product, his book value for us is 0. Selling him would net us 25/30m in FFP for this year, while a £100m signing amortised over 4 years would be £25m for this year, hence selling Henderson would allow us to sign a £100m player within FFP framework.

Of course, you have to find the rest of the money in subsequent years, but for this summer, a few sales can substantially increase what we can spend far beyond the money received.
 
I’d be genuinely interested to know how that works. I said the other players in jest but surely the same could apply to other players we have who have a couple of years left on contract at least?
I think everyone understands selling players improves your FFP position with regards to extra transfer budget. But £100m extra to spend by selling Henderson?
Yup, I'll explain. Going to keep it simple here, so will ignore wages and one-time fees like signing bonuses and agent fees.

The transfer fee you pay for a player is the value that goes on your books. So you pay £100m for Kane and he's recognized as a £100m asset. He signs a 5 year contract, so that asset value is amortized over the 5 years. In other words, every year his asset value goes down £20m (100/5).

This £20m amortization expense is what gets counted against FFP each year, not the actual transfer fee outlay of £100m. So it's treated as if we're spending 20m this year, 20m next year, and the following three years.

Back to Henderson. Let's say we sell him for £20m this summer. That is an immediate benefit that frees up the £20m FFP space for Kane this year. It doesn't provide a benefit for next year and beyond, so it doesn't mean you can go crazy with spending, but it does give you the near-term FFP flexibility needed to manage this summer's constraints.
 
Isn’t it a bit rich to talk about condescension when you’re the one who replied with a laughing emoji to something you were completely wrong about due to your financial illiteracy?
Wow.
I posted in JEST about the thought of Henderson being sold and being able to free up that wiggle room. How is that not funny?
 
Even though we need 5 players, i think we can make do with 3 within a 100-120mn budget

Hojlund - 40
KMJ - 50 (?)
Neves - free

Then we sell our players - Realistically I only see Maguire getting anything ,the rest are dross and will leave for pennies. But if by some miracle we get 30-40mn for the lot we can go for a CDM like Lavia
 
In very simple and oversimplified terms, since Henderson is an academy product, his book value for us is 0. Selling him would net us 25/30m in FFP for this year, while a £100m signing amortised over 4 years would be £25m for this year, hence selling Henderson would allow us to sign a £100m player within FFP framework.

Of course, you have to find the rest of the money in subsequent years, but for this summer, a few sales can substantially increase what we can spend far beyond the money received.
Thank you for the clarity in your post, appreciated
 
The biggest factor is because we spent £300m last summer and a lot of money in the previous 2/3 years too. All of them on chunky contracts.
Our average net spend over the last 5 years is 122m euros (~£104m) according to Transfermarket (not the most accurate, but a fair idea)

A club with our revenues should be able to afford that..
the dip in revenue is the issue.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/271665/revenue-of-manchester-united/

fVOtO42.png
We'll be fine.. we can continue to spend the way we have been ..
 
Last edited:
In very simple and oversimplified terms, since Henderson is an academy product, his book value for us is 0. Selling him would net us 25/30m in FFP for this year, while a £100m signing amortised over 4 years would be £25m for this year, hence selling Henderson would allow us to sign a £100m player within FFP framework.

Of course, you have to find the rest of the money in subsequent years, but for this summer, a few sales can substantially increase what we can spend far beyond the money received.
Yup, this second paragraph is key. Still have to be wise about how we spend the money, or else we're just kicking the can down the road.

Of course, this summer splurge could still be worth it if you believe the new ownership will bring in a level of revenue growth that will make the constraints less of an issue going forward.
 
All this talk is a waste as the one thing we have never been good at is letting go of players. That is not changing this summer.
 
I quite liked the noises that we were going for that Swiss keeper at Bayern for a reasonably cheap price. Guess that rumour died an early death :rolleyes:

Get the feeling we'll get:
Kim min jae
Rabiot
Mount
New striker

There is some quality in the first three of those players and i guess we'll have to wait and see who the new striker is. No right back or goalkeeper for now though :(

Agree with posters that are saying that Martial will stay. It just seems logical with his wages and the final year of his contract.