The cost of failure

I think most agree the problems on the pitch are because of how inadequate we are off the pitch
 
Not sure there is a 'cost of failure', at least to the club?

Probably more income was lost because of Covid requirements than anything else. The income streams to the club seem almost limitless, true some income may be lost now the decision to part company with Aeroflot has been taken, but overall whilst we dominate news (speculative anyway) and the clubs name continues to appear on the front pages of newspapers as well as the sports sections, and (so it seems) the world and his wife are producing podcasts, etc. about the club. Then money will continue to roll in and the club makes money faster than it can waste it!!

However for the fans any season without silverware/being entertained etc. is a cost ...and one which cannot be recovered.
 
I think 40M is peanuts compared to how much we overspent on underperforming players, huge wages for the same players and missing out on CL football in some seasons after Sir Alex left.
The root of our problems began when hiring Moyes and the rest of managers, so surely the culprit is upstairs all along.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rood
Is that all? I'd say a modern club needs to bake in about £10m per season for sacking a manager. So we've underspent by about £50m in the last 9 years, by not going through of them
 
40m over 8 years is a problem? What about the 40m revenue loss by cancelling the Aeroflot sponsorship? What about the revenue loss when fans raid the pitch resulting in game postponement? Nobody said they were problem.
 
fergiewherearethou said:
I think 40M is peanuts compared to how much we overspent on underperforming players, huge wages for the same players and missing out on CL football in some seasons after Sir Alex left.
The root of our problems began when hiring Moyes and the rest of managers, so surely the culprit is upstairs all along.
Click to expand...

Overspent by £40m on Maguire alone. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. We are horrendous at both selling and buying players and have paid out far more wages than that due to pointless contract renewals. In short we haven’t a bloody clue what we’re doing at the executive level.
 
Liverpool paid over 15m after firing Rodgers and had paid 5m to hire him in the first place.

Chelsea have paid 112m since Abramovich took over.

Barcelona paid at least 20m on Valverde, Setien, and Koeman.

I can't find numbers for Bayern but they must have paid decent money to Ancelotti and Kovac.

I don't think this stuff is very meaningful. Unless you have a situation like getting Guardiola or Klopp for many years and then leaving at the end of their contract, or Zidane quitting RM twice, you're paying up.
 
40m a small price to pay for not having to be managed by Moyes, Jose or Ole.
 
Paying compensation to sacked managers is not the cost of failure, but the cost of success.
 
cyril C said:
40m over 8 years is a problem? What about the 40m revenue loss by cancelling the Aeroflot sponsorship? What about the revenue loss when fans raid the pitch resulting in game postponement? Nobody said they were problem.
Click to expand...

I think this falls under the category of 'least of our worries'
 
Cost of Failure 40m.

The Cost of Quality 1.3bn.
(Money spent to win a Europa, FA and League Cup).

One cost deserves more scrutiny than the other.
 
Last edited:
40m is peanuts. In that time United had a turnover of around 4 billion.

Meanwhile our attacking options for the front 3 positions cost less than 100mil in total.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.