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

Smores said:
Only thing that's true is most people don't know how FFP works. The debt is irrelevant and I've pointed this out a number of times in the past but people just want to get giddy over sugar daddy money.

The only benefit of Qatar to FFP will be if they invest to raise our income from off field activities. In the short term they'll be no money thrown around on signings.
Click to expand...

Explain it better so we all understand one last time!

So you can spend what you turnover as a football club?

Calculating Annual Turnover
To calculate the portfolio turnover ratio for a given fund, first determine the total amount of assets purchased or sold (whichever happens to be greater), during the year. Then, divide that amount by the average assets held by the fund over the same year.
 
MegadrivePerson said:
It's hilarious how so many people don't realise that just selling lots of players wont help against FFP!

Making big losses on Maguire and AWB won't help at all. Making 100% pure profit on Mctominay and Henderson will.

Lot's of fans also seem to be ignoring the fact we were told that we effectively spent the summer 23 transfer budget a year early on Antony and Casemiro.
Click to expand...

So selling Mctominay, Elanga,Laird, Williams, Tuanzebe and Henderson would benefit us best. Shaw, Marcus, AWB, Heaton, Sancho, Maguire (probably leaving) who else do we have for homegrown quota.
 
Doesn’t bother me either way. It’s more important to be well run under the new owners than spending a billion in 5 years.
 
Telsim said:
Chickens coming home to roost. A squad full of expensive failures, like Martial, Maguire, Sancho, Van de Beek, massive wages, and an utter failure when selling players.

I don't think it's a bad article at all. Just reality, unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Don't forget Antony
 
mu4c_20le said:


Saw this on my feed, not sure how true it is, somehow Jassim has a way to get around FFP ??
Click to expand...

Bulshit. Debt and FFP unrelated in the strict sense of it. Our compliance with FFP has nothing to do with the incoming owner.
 
golden_blunder said:
What happens when you’re already paying for a few over 5 years?
Click to expand...

Not really sure how it would work, whether the budget is on top of the previous amortisation payments, or if they are included. If I had to guess, I'd say it is the former.

I don't even think it matters if you pay in full, because the player goes on the books as a depreciating asset, so you can still spread the cost over the contract length.

Take Maguire. We signed him in 2019. Did he have a 5 year contract? Let's assume so. So that's £17.5million per year. He's in the final year of his contract (has he renewed? Can't remember) so if we can sell him for over £17.5million we can actually book a profit.

At least that's my basic understanding. Someone will kindly correct me no doubt.

With United though the Galzers put a load of transfers on the Capital One card, which is due imminently. Not sure how that impacts things or of we can still spread the costs in the accounts anyway.
 
On that tweet from the ultra reliable QatariFC, who's 100% fail rate is a sign of impeccable consistency, ask yourselves... How on earth would they know Ratcliffes budgets?

With that you can file it away in the bin.
 
100m isn't that bad if

a- we're capable to get rid of the deadwood
b- we spend it wisely

Let say we get 35m for Maguire, 20m for Fred, 20m on Martial, 15m on VDB, 15m on Elanga and 20m for McT. Then we'll have a transfer kitty of around 225m. There are also some good free agents that deserve a good look like Ndicka, Rabiot, Tielemans and Thuram while players like Ndidi and Rice are have just 1 year left in their contract. Its time for the likes of Murtough to stand up and be counted.
 
RedRonaldo said:
Of course we do, like 4 years ago on one occasion.

In fact if you care to check our players sales over past 5 years, the figure we’ve got here is kind of depressing.

Players out (Euros)
22-23: 13m
21-22: 30m
20-21: 19m
19-20: 80m
18-19: 30m

Avg income from players sales per season: 34m


Remember every summer we have threads all over here with optimistic people talking about their wish lists offloading our deadwoods to generate extra 70-100m funds for our summer buys?

That’s reality (avg 34m) vs expectation (70-100m) I guess, like every summer over the past 5 years I have experienced over here.
Click to expand...
As I said, there is 1) new people in charge of that remit and 2) players that actually have buyers on the market.

So you can talk all you want about previous years, they aren't really comparable to the situatuon this window. Like it or lump it, Henderson, McT and Maguire will fetch more suitors than Martial and Jones.
 
FreakyJim said:
Let me correct that for you.
Click to expand...

If that’s the case then:

Sell: 133.3m (835k)
McFred & VDB - 25m at best (300k)
Dean Henderson - 20m (Forest buy clause) (100k)
DDG - out of contract (19.5m salary)
Maguire - 10m (200k)
Bailly - 0m (4.2m salary)
Bissaka - 10m (90k)
Martial - 0m (13m salary)
Pellistri - 0m (20k)
Jones - (50k)
Brandon Williams 0m (3.4m)
Greenwood 10m (75k)
Sancho 0m (18.2m salary)

Buy: 230m (830k)
Striker 100m (300k)
Rabiot - Free (200k)
Lavia - 35m (80k)
Diogo Costa - 65m (140k)
Frimpong - 30m (100k)
Butland - Free (same salary)

Net:
-96.7m and +5k wages.
 
UNITED ACADEMY said:
Sell: 133.3m (835k)
McFred & VDB - 25m at best (300k)
Dean Henderson - 20m (Forest buy clause) (100k)
DDG - out of contract (19.5m salary)
Maguire - 10m (200k)
Bailly - 0m (4.2m salary)
Bissaka - 10m (90k)
Martial - 0m (13m salary)
Pellistri - 0m (20k)
Jones - (50k)
Brandon Williams 0m (3.4m)
Greenwood 10m (75k)
Sancho 0m (18.2m salary)

Buy: 230m (830k)
Striker 100m (300k)
Rabiot - Free (200k)
Lavia - 35m (80k)
Diogo Costa - 65m (140k)
Frimpong - 30m (100k)
Butland - Free (same salary)

Net:
-96.7m and +5k wages.
Click to expand...

That's actually a decent window which solves the first XI issues,only thing it lacks is a backup striker/CB which we still need
 
croadyman said:
That's actually a decent window which solves the first XI issues,only thing it lacks is a backup striker/CB which we still need
Click to expand...
I would play Casemiro as CB and play Lavia as DM if both Lindelof and Varane are injured. Move Rashford as striker if the main man cost 100m and 300k is injured.
 
UNITED ACADEMY said:
I would play Casemiro as CB and play Lavia as DM if both Lindelof and Varane are injured. Move Rashford as striker if the main man cost 100m and 300k is injured.
Click to expand...

So you mean if Kane/Osimhen/Kolo-Muani is unable to play you move Rashford into their position,is that right
 
flappyjay said:
We also have to decide if Laird has a long term future at the club. We could get a few millions for him too.
Click to expand...
I'd forgotten about Bailly and Telles too. The amount of dross we've accumulated really is astounding. Just dropping the wages will surely be a big help going forward.

For what it's worth I always liked Laird, but don't think he's pulled up trees this season. Perhaps worth keeping on loan for another year to see how he gets on? Or alternatively sell him with a buyback clause.
 
Our players doesn't have high value in the market. At best we can hope for a 50M sale this summer nothing much. Nevertheless, we can also hope for a decrease of the wages by selling big earners (quick estimation around 75M)

De Gea signing with a lower salary (can hope for a 10M decrease)
Martial (13M less)
Maguire (10M)
Fred (7M)
Van de Beek (7M)
Greenwood (4M)
Jones (4M)
Bailly (4M)
Williams (4M)
Henderson (5M)
 
croadyman said:
Yeah that could work,do you think we should go for Maddison or does he not fit anywhere in this team at all
Click to expand...
Maddison would be competing with Bruno. Good player though for sure. We should probably look for a cheaper stand in for Bruno, since our budget will be tight.
 
Makes total sense. Murtough said as much last September: that we had gone beyond our summer budget and was therefore further ahead in our spending than expected, meaning spending would be restricted in the coming windows. I don't know why people have just forgotten about that and convinced themselves that we'd spend the same this season.

70-80 million on Kane and a 50 million midfielder along with some sales should leave us in a decent enough place.
 
I’d say we are waiting to see who will be relegated this season so we can pick up a few bargains from the teams going down. Southampton are done, Forest I reckon will be another and then Leeds. Reckon Everton Leicester have decent run ins they will pick a win each and that should be enough.
 
AbusementPark said:
I’d say we are waiting to see who will be relegated this season so we can pick up a few bargains from the teams going down. Southampton are done, Forest I reckon will be another and then Leeds. Reckon Everton Leicester have decent run ins they will pick a win each and that should be enough.
Click to expand...

Lavia is the absolute no brainer
 
Do we not get this rubbish every year and turns out to be wrong?
 
NLunited said:
Maddison would be competing with Bruno. Good player though for sure. We should probably look for a cheaper stand in for Bruno, since our budget will be tight.
Click to expand...

Yeah fully expecting him to join Newcastle
 
Lee565 said:
Do we not get this rubbish every year and turns out to be wrong?
Click to expand...

We get "Man Utd's transfer budget is X" stories every year, which are horseshit.

This is slightly different as it isn't about what the club will allow us to spend but rather what we have scope to spend under existing regulations. And while I have no idea how they arrived at that specific figure, the broad point is 100% correct. Without sales we would be limited in what we spend this summer.
 
Skills said:
It wouldn't. I don't understand what people are on about.

Our budget restrictions are due to the FFP rules which state that we can not spend more than X% of our revenue on player amortisation + wages.
Click to expand...

I May be wrong but doesn’t existing transfer debt also factor into the equation? Because we have instalments due on players bought in previous windows, if that debt was cleared, I believe it would positively impact FFP.
 
UNITED ACADEMY said:
If that’s the case then:

Sell: 133.3m (835k)
McFred & VDB - 25m at best (300k)
Dean Henderson - 20m (Forest buy clause) (100k)
DDG - out of contract (19.5m salary)
Maguire - 10m (200k)
Bailly - 0m (4.2m salary)
Bissaka - 10m (90k)
Martial - 0m (13m salary)
Pellistri - 0m (20k)
Jones - (50k)
Brandon Williams 0m (3.4m)
Greenwood 10m (75k)
Sancho 0m (18.2m salary)

Buy: 230m (830k)
Striker 100m (300k)
Rabiot - Free (200k)
Lavia - 35m (80k)
Diogo Costa - 65m (140k)
Frimpong - 30m (100k)
Butland - Free (same salary)

Net:
-96.7m and +5k wages.
Click to expand...

Giving Sancho away for free would lower allowed spend by around £40m, Maguire for 10 is a 16m loss.
 
Obviously we intend to sell quite a few players, so there's only so much value in saying "without sales we can only spend X". And depending on the players you sell you quickly get scope to do quite a bit more business.

The more salient point is probably around transfer timing. While we would ideally want transfers to be wrapped up quickly (and there have been reports that ETH wants the same) the reality is that between any delays the ownership situation causes and the need to make player sales first, we could easily see a lot of incoming transfers once again being held up until later in the window.
 
UNITED ACADEMY said:
If that’s the case then:

Sell: 133.3m (835k)
McFred & VDB - 25m at best (300k)
Dean Henderson - 20m (Forest buy clause) (100k)
DDG - out of contract (19.5m salary)
Maguire - 10m (200k)
Bailly - 0m (4.2m salary)
Bissaka - 10m (90k)
Martial - 0m (13m salary)
Pellistri - 0m (20k)
Jones - (50k)
Brandon Williams 0m (3.4m)
Greenwood 10m (75k)
Sancho 0m (18.2m salary)

Buy: 230m (830k)
Striker 100m (300k)
Rabiot - Free (200k)
Lavia - 35m (80k)
Diogo Costa - 65m (140k)
Frimpong - 30m (100k)
Butland - Free (same salary)

Net:
-96.7m and +5k wages.
Click to expand...

AWB is easily worth more than 10m and we can't give Martial or Sancho for free.
 
flappyjay said:
We could have easily gotten 30m for Henderson if he wasn't on 120k a week.
Click to expand...

Liverpool or Chelsea would have got 50/60 million for the pair of them. It’s always felt to me like we stockpile players and bump up their contracts for accounting purposes more than anything football related. It also covers the owners “ yes we are terrible but look how much we are spending” they constantly sit on their hands and give the managers the players they want late, second rate options or do nothing at all. They make the players unsellable and untouchable because of their business model.
 
sullydnl said:
Obviously we intend to sell quite a few players, so there's only so much value in saying "without sales we can only spend X". And depending on the players you sell you quickly get scope to do quite a bit more business.

The more salient point is probably around transfer timing. While we would ideally want transfers to be wrapped up quickly (and there have been reports that ETH wants the same) the reality is that between any delays the ownership situation causes and the need to make player sales first, we could easily see a lot of incoming transfers once again being held up until later in the window.
Click to expand...

Wasn't that the case also last summer? We only ended up selling Chong, Garner and Perieria who were all not part of the first team.
 
I kind of thing this sort of news is leaked by the club to reduce expectations, and so when they do spend a bit more, it looks like they've gone above and beyond. Deliberately lowering expectations.
 
Isn't FFP basically toothless at this point? Feels like every sanction against a big club has either been a slap on the wrist or reversed entirely.
 
Adisa said:
Maguire won't get 40m, Bailly won't get 10m and Mctominay won't get 40m.
You forget about the first two's wages and the fact that Bailly is made of glass and had a poor season in France. Maguire is 30 on big wages and his stock is so low. I won't be surprised if Maguire is a loan.
Click to expand...

We can definitely get 40 for Maguire, captain of United, still in his prime, England starter and for a team like West Ham he might actually be decent. English tax drives up the prices of players and there’s no reason we can’t benefit from that, for once. Mctomminy is admired by Newcastle and if they want him they’ll have to pay. We shouldn’t even consider a sale if we aren’t getting between 35-40m.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.