The transfer fees thread

[LawCharltonBest]

Do you really think a selling club that don't win anything are going to let a cash cow walk away for nothing? How are they ever going to close the ground on Bayern if they don’t have the funds to at least compete for decent players? Holding Sancho and reducing his value makes zero sense for Dortmund.

Well they don’t really spend a lot do they

How much did they pay for Bellingham, Sancho and Haaland combined? £50m?

You wouldn’t get one of them for anywhere near that now

Dortmund could argue that they won’t close the Bayern sized gap if they constantly sell players of this quality.

And since they aren’t paying much for these players, there’s really not much being lost by keeping them for 4-5 years and then saying goodbye, or hoping they sign a new deal. They’ll still get new young players want to join them who know Dortmund is a great stepping stone.

Im not saying that ANY of the above is true. I’m sure in the boardroom they accept that Sancho will leave for the right offer. But I don’t think their need to sell is as desperate as people make out

 

[arthurka]

Again courtesy of Swiss Ramble:

Did Liverpool get that unemployment funding from the government? They look very fine indeed.

 

[Giggsy13]

I don’t think people are saying we will spend £80m on Sancho

But that’s what it would take, at least

Dortmund have every right not to sell him at a remarkably cut price £60m. There’s not really much point. May as well get 2 more seasons of Sancho while he’s approaching his peak

Sancho may not want that though. If he by Southgate’s sheer incompetence is left out of the England squad then he may start agitating for a move back to England.

 

[Isotope]

Since we have this "great" academy and "excellent" scouting system, why do we need to spend big on every transfer window?

 

[manutddjw]

I think we’ll make a marquee signing and I’m thinking it’s going to be Sancho. It’s a decision I wholeheartedly agree with. We have depth already. If you go through our first team squad we have 2 players per position. We need to upgrade what we have not add more squad players.

 

[Bird Nerd]

We have a few needs (CB, RW, Cavanni replacement) but I think CB of the right ilk is the most pressing g. And right ilk I mean one that can pass well from the back, etc. so Mac can do his thing.

 

[golden_blunder]

Well they don’t really spend a lot do they

How much did they pay for Bellingham, Sancho and Haaland combined? £50m?

You wouldn’t get one of them for anywhere near that now

Dortmund could argue that they won’t close the Bayern sized gap if they constantly sell players of this quality.

And since they aren’t paying much for these players, there’s really not much being lost by keeping them for 4-5 years and then saying goodbye, or hoping they sign a new deal. They’ll still get new young players want to join them who know Dortmund is a great stepping stone.

Im not saying that ANY of the above is true. I’m sure in the boardroom they accept that Sancho will leave for the right offer. But I don’t think their need to sell is as desperate as people make out

Their public statements would say otherwise

 

[golden_blunder]

Since we have this "great" academy and "excellent" scouting system, why do we need to spend big on every transfer window?

Because most of the academy are kids, no matter how much fans like to rave

 

[owlo]

The idea that any of us have a clue what our max transfer fee will be is nonsensical. Yes, revenue has been hit temporarily, but we're not exactly unstable.

The normal bi-annual dividend was paid in full on 7th January 2021.

The amount we spend will be purely dependent on how persausive and trusted the manager is, and how much the Glazers decide is reasonable.

Unless you're some sort of boardroom fly on the wall, I've no idea how you could make these assumptions either? Perhaps you're just bracing yourself for the shitshow of the summer transfer window?

One thing is for sure, we can afford to spend £200M on players if the board sanction it. No problem at all.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

Their public statements would say otherwise

Can you direct me? Because all I’ve seen is “we are financially ok and don’t need to sell” for the last year

Which yes, I accept could be a public front. But it’s still all I’ve heard publicly

 

[The Boy]

3 at 30m each or 4 at 30m each
So either 90m of 120m BEFORE a marquee player?
Where’s all the money coming from?

I am no transfer expert, but we know that big fees are often split over multiple seasons, so if you were spending 80M on one player that may actually turn out to be 20M between 2021 and 25. So that certainly gives flexibility.

Also unlike last summer, clubs will be much more confident about match day income next season, they'll be bale to see the closing ages of the FA cup and European comps as well as the Euros, to see how successful that'll be and it could give them a lot more confidence about future income in the 21/22 season.

There will be clubs in desperate financial straits, which could certainly encourage an easier deal spread over time for a marquee player.

Also I wonder about Man Utd sales. Would it be surprising to see Lingard, DDG, Pogba or even Martial possibly go, that would certainly up your budget as well. I am prepared for surprises this summer window. I think somes clubs will be very careful, while others might really go for it taking advantage of the situation when fees are lower than normal and as the world returns to normal those fees will inevitably rise. This is the window to get 20-30M off a big signing.

 

[Wewinsoon]

Since we have this "great" academy and "excellent" scouting system, why do we need to spend big on every transfer window?

Our academy is only good enough to make good players but you also need some big stars to win stuff

 

[golden_blunder]

I am no transfer expert, but we know that big fees are often split over multiple seasons, so if you were spending 80M on one player that may actually turn out to be 20M between 2021 and 25. So that certainly gives flexibility.

Also unlike last summer, clubs will be much more confident about match day income next season, they'll be bale to see the closing ages of the FA cup and European comps as well as the Euros, to see how successful that'll be and it could give them a lot more confidence about future income in the 21/22 season.

There will be clubs in desperate financial straits, which could certainly encourage an easier deal spread over time for a marquee player.

Also I wonder about Man Utd sales. Would it be surprising to see Lingard, DDG, Pogba or even Martial possibly go, that would certainly up your budget as well. I am prepared for surprises this summer window. I think somes clubs will be very careful, while others might really go for it taking advantage of the situation when fees are lower than normal and as the world returns to normal those fees will inevitably rise. This is the window to get 20-30M off a big signing.

In most cases yet, but if I remember correctly Dortmund wanted the biggest portion of it up front last season. And they wanted more than we were rightly willing to pay

 

[golden_blunder]

Can you direct me? Because all I’ve seen is “we are financially ok and don’t need to sell” for the last year

Which yes, I accept could be a public front. But it’s still all I’ve heard publicly

In one of these threads, can’t remember which one, you’ve got the BD football director basically saying they are broke unless they sell someone

 

[The Boy]

In most cases yet, but if I remember correctly Dortmund wanted the biggest portion of it up front last season. And they wanted more than we were rightly willing to pay

As did Leicester for Maguire I think, but the pandemic may make things more flexible. A steady income over 3 years could well be better than no sale right now for a lot of clubs.

 

[golden_blunder]

As did Leicester for Maguire I think, but the pandemic may make things more flexible. A steady income over 3 years could well be better than no sale right now for a lot of clubs.

Yeah possibly. One can hope. Depends on the level of debt some clubs have gotten into during this time I guess

 

[Deleted 112447]

I think we will move on and get fees for: Lingard, Dalot, Pereira and Chong. Potentially also DDG. We are probably moving on Romero, Jones and Mata, making significant room in the wage budget.

We should be able to get about 40mil in sales, maybe even double that with DDG. If that happens, we could have about 160mil in spending (say Sancho and Rice) with about half that in net. I don't see a CD coming unless we sell Bailly.

A lot of it depends on us moving players on though. Still, I'm 95% sure Sancho is going to happen regardless of sales.

 

[owlo]

In one of these threads, can’t remember which one, you’ve got the BD football director basically saying they are broke unless they sell someone

https://aktie.bvb.de/eng/content/download/2705/49340/4/file_1/H1_2020-2021_ENGL_RZ.PDF

Not 'broke,' but doesn't look too rosy for them if they don't make the CL. They're doing pretty ok as is, though cashflow doesn't look great.

These lines (copy and pasted from above link) don't make such good reading if you're a Dortmund fan.

" Qualifying for the group stage of the UEFA Champions League continues to place Borussia Dortmund in a better financial position. "

"High transfer sums often go hand in hand with a drop in quality within the team, but it cannot be ruled out that value-driven transfers will be concluded contrary to the Company's sporting interests."

"The COVID-19 crisis is also influencing the transfer market. Transfer sums for players areexpected to decrease temporarily on account of the economic uncertainties. According to theInternational Centre for Sports Studies, it is possible that transfer sums for players in Europe'sleagues will decline by several million euros."

 

[RkkMan]

We all know Utd are looking for a CB partner for Maguire, so depending on who that is and how much he costs will influence the amount left for other transfers. Hopefully we arent too greedy in selling lingaard and price him out of a move.

I dont understand the posters who think Utd will sign a RW when we have to find game time for Diallo and Pellestri will be back next season. Personally i think RW is 0% chance of a signing. CB and backup RB i think personally are nailed on. After that i think it depends on who we shift out.

There is talk of Pellistri being loaned out again this time to Club Brugge then there's Cavani with one foot out the door. A RW is still very much on the cards either that or a ST and The Athletic did say there is £70m available for a marquee signing plus CB and RB will be boosted by selling Bailly and Dalot so a decent amount of money will be there to spend.

 

[golden_blunder]

https://aktie.bvb.de/eng/content/download/2705/49340/4/file_1/H1_2020-2021_ENGL_RZ.PDF

Not 'broke,' but doesn't look too rosy for them if they don't make the CL. They're doing pretty ok as is, though cashflow doesn't look great.

These lines (copy and pasted from above link) don't make such good reading if you're a Dortmund fan.

" Qualifying for the group stage of the UEFA Champions League continues to place Borussia Dortmund in a better financial position. "

"High transfer sums often go hand in hand with a drop in quality within the team, but it cannot be ruled out that value-driven transfers will be concluded contrary to the Company's sporting interests."

"The COVID-19 crisis is also influencing the transfer market. Transfer sums for players areexpected to decrease temporarily on account of the economic uncertainties. According to theInternational Centre for Sports Studies, it is possible that transfer sums for players in Europe'sleagues will decline by several million euros."

Thank you

 

[kundalini]

According to Transfermarkt, the largest fees paid last summer were:

Havertz £72m
Arthur £65m
Osimhen £63m
Dias £61m
Pjanic £54m
Werner £48m
Chilwell £45m
Partey £45m
Icardi £45m
Ake £40m
Jota £40m
Sane £40m

Chelsea were in a unique situation, coming out of a transfer ban, with cash from the Hazard sale unspent, and a deal for Morata already arranged, allowing them to spend heavily on Havertz, Werner and Chilwell. The Arthur/Pjanic deal had more to do with accounting than sporting merits. Icardi's move had been pre-arranged after a season on loan.

I expect a similar transfer window. More loans, free transfers and deals under £5m (50% of PL transfers last summer came in these categories). A small number of clubs may have money to spend. The majority will be looking to sell a few unwanted players to raise funds; whether there will be buyers for those players is the unknown.

I'd be surprised if United's net spend is above £50m. The decrease in revenue this season due to lack of fans in the stadium is along similar lines to our average annual net spend on transfers (£105m to £110m depending on time frame used). The extra money from CL goes straight into the players' bank accounts, due to the CL clauses in their contracts. This is a new financial environment; far more uncertainty about future revenues than had previously been assumed.

The vast majority of the big names being linked with high profile transfers this summer, will still be at their current club when the transfer window closes.

I personally can’t see us spending 80m on one player when we have several holes to fill. I think we will see more 20-30m targets

This is the unknown bit. If Pogba leaves then we have a vacancy. Same if Bailly forces his way out, or if Tuanzebe decides he has had enough of sitting on the bench. Cavani opting to leave, would force us to bring in someone. In some of those cases, the likely fees for a replacement would probably be far higher than the amount we receive (zero in Cavani's case), leaving less money for our priority target.

 

[golden_blunder]

@kundalini at last, someone who is awake to the reality and not dreaming

 

[Zeno]

@kundalini at last, someone who is awake to the reality and not dreaming

I actually think you will see a strong push in the market this summer. Though you won’t see it anywhere, the budget I suspect is somewhere between 150 - 200m.

There are a number of reasons for this:
- the major investment during the mourinho period has now largely been amortised / moved-on
- a high profile recruitment team has now been put in place and this suggests significant moves
- financial certainty provided with strong sponsorship deals during an uncertain time
- economic theory demands investment during tough times - that’s when Big Fish buy assets at low prices - ask Warren Buffet

This does not mean United will pay any price for any player. For example 150m on Haaland will never make sense where there is a 75m release clause next year. But Sancho, Grealish & Rice could all happen.

 

[DSG]

I see many people still thinking that we will spend €80m or thereabouts on Sancho this summer, whilst still talking about other players too.

I want to know what’s peoples genuine thoughts on this?

United have lost £118m at last count.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.mir.../man-utd-deloitte-football-money-23385371.amp

I personally can’t see us spending 80m on one player when we have several holes to fill. I think we will see more 20-30m targets

This article is incredibly misleading as others have pointed out. You can’t “lose” revenue that wasn’t recognized, and there are certain costs that are saved due to no fans at OT.

Courtesy of Swiss Ramble. EBITDA is usually the best metric ("losing" £118m actually means a turnover reduction of £118m, but expenses reduced by over £64m at the same time meaning an impact of less than £54m to EBITDA)

The real loss is just 13m, but only when you look at amortized player costs and depreciation. The biggest issue is the lack of cash at just 50m... for a business of this size, you’d expect at least double that. Many companies would have 6 months of operating expenses in cash...

Our transfer plans are somewhat dependent on what we can raise from player sales, just looking at our cash position.

 

[golden_blunder]

Our transfer plans are somewhat dependent on what we can raise from player sales, just looking at our cash position.

Now you’re starting to get it.

but remember a lot of clubs have no money and may get by with loans and freebies. It doesn’t necessarily mean we will be able to sell this summer.

edit: reference to the article this is what Ed Woodward has been saying recently too. We’re not broke but we’re not as well off as we were

 

[golden_blunder]

I actually think you will see a strong push in the market this summer. Though you won’t see it anywhere, the budget I suspect is somewhere between 150 - 200m.

There are a number of reasons for this:
- the major investment during the mourinho period has now largely been amortised / moved-on
- a high profile recruitment team has now been put in place and this suggests significant moves
- financial certainty provided with strong sponsorship deals during an uncertain time
- economic theory demands investment during tough times - that’s when Big Fish buy assets at low prices - ask Warren Buffet

This does not mean United will pay any price for any player. For example 150m on Haaland will never make sense where there is a 75m release clause next year. But Sancho, Grealish & Rice could all happen.

Crackers. If you think we have a budget of 150-200m, you’re absolutely crackers. United are already down financially

 

[Zeno]

Crackers. If you think we have a budget of 150-200m, you’re absolutely crackers. United are already down financially

Crackers perhaps! But you need to take a closer look at the figures. An accounting loss in any particular year due to exceptional circumstances is somewhat irrelevant. Look at the fundamentals. Take a close look at the reasons i provided earlier.

I would add that United have shown in the past that they are prepared to spend big.

It should be an interesting summer!

 

[DSG]

Now you’re starting to get it.

but remember a lot of clubs have no money and may get by with loans and freebies. It doesn’t necessarily mean we will be able to sell this summer.

edit: reference to the article this is what Ed Woodward has been saying recently too. We’re not broke but we’re not as well off as we were

Having experience in corporate finance, I think your headline/original post is misleading. United didn’t lose 118m last year. We more or less broke even. The issue with transfer fees is transfer net spend and our cash. You can lose 100m (net operating loss), but if you have 1billion in cash, it may not impact transfer spend. We have 50m in cash which will no doubt improve as we head towards summer (shirt sponsor, EL revenues, etc). Still quite light for my taste and I think we need to sell as much as we can to reduce net spend.

one trend that is very healthy is that we reduced wages significantly and my guess is that if we loan out DeGea and sell Pogba and replace with younger players on lower wages, we’ll continue to see a reduction there.

 

[golden_blunder]

Having experience in corporate finance, I think your headline/original post is misleading. United didn’t lose 118m last year. We more or less broke even. The issue with transfer fees is transfer net spend and our cash. You can lose 100m (net operating loss), but if you have 1billion in cash, it may not impact transfer spend. We have 50m in cash which will no doubt improve as we head towards summer (shirt sponsor, EL revenues, etc). Still quite light for my taste and I think we need to sell as much as we can to reduce net spend.

one trend that is very healthy is that we reduced wages significantly and my guess is that if we loan out DeGea and sell Pogba and replace with younger players on lower wages, we’ll continue to see a reduction there.

Look you have more experience than me, I’ve been following what Woodward has been saying.

who is going to spend big on Pogba? The teams that wanted him can’t afford him, unless we take trades.

I would welcome getting DeGea off the salary bill even if only a transfer, I think we’ve

 

[Bastian]

Look you have more experience than me, I’ve been following what Woodward has been saying.

who is going to spend big on Pogba? The teams that wanted him can’t afford him, unless we take trades.

I would welcome getting DeGea off the salary bill even if only a transfer, I think we’ve

I'm waiting for the next chapter

 

[davidmichael]

The Athletic are suggesting one marquee signing around the fee of £70m and then two more at less than half that fee.

Transfer kitty will be bolstered by sales or Lingard, Romero, Tuanzebe, Pereria etc.

So hopefully Sancho for £70 million, Rice for £40 million plus Lingard and maybe Milenkovic for £15-£20 million ? We’ve got De Gea, Romero, Dalot, Jones, Pereira, Mata and Chong to get off the wage bill too which is at least £800K a week so say £40 million odd a year.

 

[Isotope]

Our academy is only good enough to make good players but you also need some big stars to win stuff

Good team makes their own stars. They purchased one or two ready-made stars, and then supplementing them by improving others.
Why do we keep boasting having "excellent" scouting then, if you end up targeting the likes of Haaland, Rice, Grealish, and Sancho every summer?

Might as well get rid off the academy and only keep 1-2 scouts. Then just Google "Best (young) players in 2020/21 season", and go from there. It's cheaper, and gives the same result.

 

[owlo]

This article is incredibly misleading as others have pointed out. You can’t “lose” revenue that wasn’t recognized, and there are certain costs that are saved due to no fans at OT.




The real loss is just 13m, but only when you look at amortized player costs and depreciation. The biggest issue is the lack of cash at just 50m... for a business of this size, you’d expect at least double that. Many companies would have 6 months of operating expenses in cash...

Our transfer plans are somewhat dependent on what we can raise from player sales, just looking at our cash position.

Cash is a weird metric in football. Clubs don't tend to sit on large amounts in general, especially mid season. Take Dortmund, and their 581k cash for example! It's only in the last few years that the majority of EPL clubs even had 5M+ in their cash accounts mid season. There are of course reasons to do so, and some clubs do, but it's not 'the done thing' as a rule.

 

[hungrywing]

Crackers. If you think we have a budget of 150-200m, you’re absolutely crackers. United are already down financially

I don't understand why the staff hasn't stickied certain financials/financial related info. It's been pointed out countless times that our financials were supporting around a 90m transfer budget each year. There really shouldn't be these numbers of people discussing wildly unrealistic amounts.

Ditto any 'b-b-but the Glazers have spent' type posts. There should be zero fans who don't understand that the Glazers have not spent a penny of their own money (and are actually drawing money out of the club.)

 

[crossy1686]

Good team makes their own stars. They purchased one or two ready-made stars, and then supplementing them by improving others.
Why do we keep boasting having "excellent" scouting then, if you end up targeting the likes of Haaland, Rice, Grealish, and Sancho every summer?

Might as well get rid off the academy and only keep 1-2 scouts. Then just Google "Best (young) players in 2020/21 season", and go from there. It's cheaper, and gives the same result.

Well we've tried to sign Haaland twice, and that was before he became a star. We tried to sign Bellingham last summer, which caused a lot of media attention around him. Pogba, Mejbri, Elanga were all scouted at a young age and moved into our academy.

The scouts are doing their job but you can't sign everyone whenever you want to.

 

[owlo]

I don't understand why the staff hasn't stickied certain financials/financial related info. It's been pointed out countless times that our financials were supporting around a 90m transfer budget each year. There really shouldn't be these numbers of people discussing wildly unrealistic amounts.

Ditto any 'b-b-but the Glazers have spent' type posts. There should be zero fans who don't understand that the Glazers have not spent a penny of their own money (and are actually drawing money out of the club.)

I don’t understand it, letalone the majority. Please point out or link to relevant information, and explain why it supports a c90m transfer budget.

 

[Isotope]

Well we've tried to sign Haaland twice, and that was before he became a star. We tried to sign Bellingham last summer, which caused a lot of media attention around him. Pogba, Mejbri, Elanga were all scouted at a young age and moved into our academy.

The scouts are doing their job but you can't sign everyone whenever you want to.

Haaland was Ole's boy. No need scouting. Bellingham, I give you that. Although we tried to sign him with Dortmund (a German team) was already in talk with him. Why not discovered him sooner?

Pogba, hmm.. he went to Juve to get regular time. Mejbri and Elanga, hmm.. it's too soon to know if they become regular at United.

 

[crossy1686]

Haaland was Ole's boy. No need scouting. Bellingham, I give you that. Although we tried to sign him with Dortmund (a German team) was already in talk with him. Why not discovered him sooner?

Pogba, hmm.. he went to Juve to get regular time. Mejbri and Elanga, hmm.. it's too soon to know if they become regular at United.

Dortmund scout the UK youth players heavily because there's huge sell on value for them there, but we were also scouting Bellingham. It's pretty hard to discover a good player at younger than 16 unless of course they're Messi.

Mejbri and Elanga are just two current examples of our scouts finding young talent and getting them signed up, which is what you said they weren't doing. Of course it's too early to tell if they're good enough to play for United but there's no shame in that, many, many, many players aren't cut out for it.

 

[hungrywing]

I don’t understand it, letalone the majority. Please point out or link to relevant information, and explain why it supports a c90m transfer budget.

If you go in any of the finance threads the finance gurus post about it and how our cash flow looks like it'd support around 90m/year.

Not sure what the word 'majority' is referring to.

 

[owlo]

If you go in any of the finance threads the finance gurus post about it and how our cash flow looks like it'd support around 90m/year.

Not sure what the word 'majority' is referring to.

I'd caution against paying the finance gurus too much heed then. "Cash flow supports around 90m/year" is vague and fluffy anyway. It could mean any number of things, but is essentially just wrong.