Seriously, how much would you want United to pay for Rio?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Marcus

Full Member
Joined
Oct 3, 1999
Messages
6,427
With the financial crisis and all, how much would you want United to pay for Rio at most?

For me, I'd say 23 million quid is the limit. Anything more and United are mad.
:rolleyes:
 
I'd like to hope that we could Rio for 23m but i don't see it happening.
 
The 25 million we have offered.
If that is rejected isn't there a clause in his contract that anyone can buy him for 22 million next year?
Also if it goes over 25 surely other options like Ayala for 8 become more sensible.
 
Originally posted by alex hurley:
<strong>The 25 million we have offered.
If that is rejected isn't there a clause in his contract that anyone can buy him for 22 million next year?
Also if it goes over 25 surely other options like Ayala for 8 become more sensible.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Whoever said we can have ayala for 8 ?
Click to expand...
 
No way Ayala would go for 8 mil.
And I'd like to see 20-25 mil max, although anything above 20 is already pushing it IMO.
 
Originally posted by Marcus:
<strong>With the financial crisis and all, how much would you want United to pay for Rio at most?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

player exchange for yorke.....but if those bastards at leeds really squeeze us, might have to consider letting david may go in exchange for rio..... :mad: :mad: ....a course of action jedi master considers too extreme, i might add ;) ........
Click to expand...
 
CremboMan quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by alex hurley:
The 25 million we have offered.
If that is rejected isn't there a clause in his contract that anyone can buy him for 22 million next year?
Also if it goes over 25 surely other options like Ayala for 8 become more sensible.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whoever said we can have ayala for 8 ?
<hr></blockquote>

Re: 8 million Ayalas agent did ;)
I know that isn't the most trustworthy of sources.
Allegedly if we do get Rio, Leeds will buy Ayala for under 10 anyway. He only has a year to run on his contract hence the lower price.

Maybe Fergie can persuade him to stay so we get him on a Bosman. <img src="graemlins/angel.gif" border="0" alt="[Angel]" />
Otherwise I like jedi master yoda's transfer deal. ;)
I personally think Rio's price is vastly over-inflated and i don't like helping the sheep out of their wee cash flow problem either.
But fergie seems set on the deal and we can afford it so long as the board will allow Duff and Finnan in too.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by alex hurley:
<strong>

Re: 8 million Ayalas agent did ;)
I know that isn't the most trustworthy of sources.
Allegedly if we do get Rio, Leeds will buy Ayala for under 10 anyway. He only has a year to run on his contract hence the lower price.

Maybe Fergie can persuade him to stay so we get him on a Bosman. <img src="graemlins/angel.gif" border="0" alt="[Angel]" />
Otherwise I like jedi master yoda's transfer deal. ;)
I personally think Rio's price is vastly over-inflated and i don't like helping the sheep out of their wee cash flow problem either.
But fergie seems set on the deal and we can afford it so long as the board will allow Duff and Finnan in too.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I would prefer Ayala as well. Paying over the top now for Rio is quite illogical, especially as there is no guarantee that he will stay at United for life, and there is no way anybody will be financially in a position to buy him for more than that high price in the forseeable future.

Ayala may have age against him, but that is also an advantage in that O Shea and Wes will be able to see the light at the end of the tunnel in terms of opportunties to play in the first 11 for United.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Roy:
<strong>anything up to 30 million quid.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Length of contract? Nowadays player's values are a bit like those of cars.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>Anything up to 30 probably.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I would honestly be gutted if he signs for that ridiculous amount. I'd hate for United to become another Lazio or Leeds and worry about having to sell our players just to make ends meet.


<img src="graemlins/nervous.gif" border="0" alt="[Nervous]" />
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Marcus:
<strong>

I would honestly be gutted if he signs for that ridiculous amount. I'd hate for United to become another Lazio or Leeds and worry about having to sell our players just to make ends meet.


<img src="graemlins/nervous.gif" border="0" alt="[Nervous]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Click to expand...

30m would still be a bargin if we get a decade of football out of him. Many of those years being at the world class level etc.
 
you could have mexes for a fraction of that price, and he's the better player.
 
Originally posted by CremboMan:
<strong>

Whoever said we can have ayala for 8 ?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Same people who said we can have Nesta for 15.

Dayyyyyydreamers.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

30m would still be a bargin if we get a decade of football out of him. Many of those years being at the world class level etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm sorry Raoul, I'm not aware of any players being willing to sign a decade-long contract yet. That is the catch isn't it? 35 million...scary possiblity of bye-bye for nothing after 5 years?

I think the Bosman ruling just hit football right between the eyes only these few months.
Click to expand...
 
I don't care how much we pay for Rio. Fergie will know how much he has to spend and what he wants to buy.

Anyway, should we sign Rio, be it for 5M or 100M, I'd be as happy as a child on Christmas Eve.

There isn't any defender I'd rather see playing for United next season.
 
Originally posted by osterdal:
<strong>I don't care how much we pay for Rio. Fergie will know how much he has to spend and what he wants to buy.

Anyway, should we sign Rio, be it for 5M or 100M, I'd be as happy as a child on Christmas Eve.

There isn't any defender I'd rather see playing for United next season.</strong><hr></blockquote>

If United buy Rio for 100 million, I hope you have a merry christmas, cause the cupborad will be bare for the next few chistmases.

Do I sound like a member of the board?
<img src="graemlins/nervous.gif" border="0" alt="[Nervous]" />
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Marcus:
<strong>

I'm sorry Raoul, I'm not aware of any players being willing to sign a decade-long contract yet. That is the catch isn't it? 35 million...scary possiblity of bye-bye for nothing after 5 years?

I think the Bosman ruling just hit football right between the eyes only these few months.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Click to expand...

True, no one signs decade long contracts, though signing a young English player who is hungry for trophies will dramatically increase the chances of us keeping him over that period. I'd much rather have Rio than Nesta, who would be culturally incompatible with life in the Premiership. When you weigh the pros and cons, you begin to see that Rio is our man.
 
Funny how so many people are worried about United "over-spending" on Rio. I remember a few years ago when Martin Edwards was in charge, everyone was saying United can't compete for the best, etc. Now suddenly, United are offering too much for players?

Having been to many Asian countries, there is no doubt that United is the Premiership in a lot of these countries. I really don't think United are in any danger of over-spending.
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

True, no one signs decade long contracts, though signing a young English player who is hungry for trophies will dramatically increase the chances of us keeping him over that period. I'd much rather have Rio than Nesta, who would be culturally incompatible with life in the Premiership. When you weigh the pros and cons, you begin to see that Rio is our man.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think Nesta (whom I used to favour until his declaration that he wants to stay in Italy) would be as great a risk as Rio...ok a greater risk.

But to throw money which is totally out of sync with the reality of the current climate might prove to be chillingly silly on hindsight.

I for one feel that the football bubble has burst. Nobody other than Real can possibly pay more than 20 million for Rio anyomore. There is no need to go overboard with the spending.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Cal:
<strong>Funny how so many people are worried about United "over-spending" on Rio. I remember a few years ago when Martin Edwards was in charge, everyone was saying United can't compete for the best, etc. Now suddenly, United are offering too much for players?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Key words being a few years ago. Times are changing. We should not be caught out.

If the TV money is severely reduced (say halved) for Champions League and the Premier League, do you find it inconceivable that the worlds's best players will cost at most 10 million quid.

I may be doomsaying here, but I'd be glad as anyone to get Rio if he comes.


:D
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by An Extremely Boring Man:
<strong>No more than 22-23m</strong><hr></blockquote>

I woulda said 18 million myself, but I figured that Leeds might want to make some money out of selling their Captain to us.

;)
Click to expand...
 
In the end, they have auditors to check the bit about overspending. We have a very good team and basically only need Rio, so why not make sure we get him. Makes sense spending it on one world class that improves the squad on 4 average players which might not make a difference.
 
Originally posted by Marcus:
<strong>

If United buy Rio for 100 million, I hope you have a merry christmas, cause the cupborad will be bare for the next few chistmases.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

United, or to be correct Fergie, won't buy Rio unless we can afford it. 100M is out of the question because to then we'd have to sell players to buy him. And if we're selling players to buy Rio I won't be happy. The same would be true if buying Rio means he'll be our only summer signing this season or if it means that Fergie will have less money to spend next summer.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Marcus:
<strong>

Key words being a few years ago. Times are changing. We should not be caught out.

If the TV money is severely reduced (say halved) for Champions League and the Premier League, do you find it inconceivable that the worlds's best players will cost at most 10 million quid.

I may be doomsaying here, but I'd be glad as anyone to get Rio if he comes.


:D </strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, thinking like that we won't be buying anyone this summer and that would be no trophys next season.

Maybe in five years the best players will cost only 10M but that won't help us this season. And for this season the best players cost much more than 10M.
Click to expand...
 
Fergie's already stated that there are only a handful of players (3-4) playing at the highest levels that would enhance the team.

Rio is clearly one.

As for the money side of things - Utd do not rely as heavily on TV money as many of the other teams as the new £300 million Nike deal illustrates. Believe me the PLC know what they can and cannot afford. And on that score I still expect more signings after Rio.

On the point of how much? £30 million max.
 
30 million max...would prefer 25 to 28 million.

As for Rio only being around for 5 years...He will be around for longer. Why? Because we win trophies and he will have a higher wage than at most clubs....thats why Disco doesnt want to leave.

If he leaves it will be around 31-32.
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

True, no one signs decade long contracts, though signing a young English player who is hungry for trophies will dramatically increase the chances of us keeping him over that period. I'd much rather have Rio than Nesta, who would be culturally incompatible with life in the Premiership. When you weigh the pros and cons, you begin to see that Rio is our man.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I also agree with that. That's why Fergie also can't hide his interest to get Rio. We should try our best to test Leed's determination to keep Rio. I don't mind if we can get him for an amount equals or below 30m.
Click to expand...
 
Pay the 35m if that what it takes. Anything less being a bonus. He's head and shoulders above any other options for 2 reasons; he's 23 and he's English (i.e. already a prem player).

Nesta, Ayala, Thuram would all add to the squad but a Rio deal blows them all away.

Dont worry about debt. If we pay it, it's cos we can afford it (think plc). And if he's the only signing - who cares - we have quality everywhere else... :)

The only other problem area is cover at full back and let's face it, it's not exactly the hardest position to play! I'll do it for free if we're really struggling ! ;)
 
Originally posted by MancFanFromManc:
<strong>Pay the 35m if that what it takes. Anything less being a bonus. He's head and shoulders above any other options for 2 reasons; he's 23 and he's English (i.e. already a prem player).

Nesta, Ayala, Thuram would all add to the squad but a Rio deal blows them all away.

Dont worry about debt. If we pay it, it's cos we can afford it (think plc). And if he's the only signing - who cares - we have quality everywhere else... :)

The only other problem area is cover at full back and let's face it, it's not exactly the hardest position to play! I'll do it for free if we're really struggling ! ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually I don't see we have any problem in full back. We have Gary, Phillip, Micky and Wes, there should be enough personnel. Our need for a backup striker is more urgent IMO. If Ole and Ruud both get injured at the same time we will be in big trouble.
Click to expand...
 
Actually, why should we care how much he might be bought for? It seems that we can afford it so why shouldn't we pay it?
 
Originally posted by Dans:
<strong>Actually, why should we care how much he might be bought for? It seems that we can afford it so why shouldn't we pay it?</strong><hr></blockquote>

I agree. If some of us want him at the club, we shouldn't care about the fee. Leave that to the accountants.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by uranushk1:
<strong>

Actually I don't see we have any problem in full back. We have Gary, Phillip, Micky and Wes, there should be enough personnel. Our need for a backup striker is more urgent IMO. If Ole and Ruud both get injured at the same time we will be in big trouble.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You're a big fan of Forlan then (then there's Giggs and Yorkey.....!) <img src="graemlins/nervous.gif" border="0" alt="[Nervous]" />
Click to expand...
 
just think you could have had 10 or more sami hyypias for the money you are talking about spending on ferdinand. and hes a better player anyway. a good knowledge of world football always prevails over watching the world cup and picking out the best player when it comes to transfer targets.
 
Originally posted by rab:
<strong>just think you could have had 10 or more sami hyypias for the money you are talking about spending on ferdinand. and hes a better player anyway. a good knowledge of world football always prevails over watching the world cup and picking out the best player when it comes to transfer targets.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You could have had 8 Solskjaer's for the price you paid for Heskey.

Hey, thats just the way the world goes.

And as has been mentioned here before (by me), United made an enquiery about Rio before the WC.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.