You can't win in every negotiation, sometimes you have to take the L and pay up.
The deal would definitely be structured in a way that Favours us.
Transfer Tweets - Manchester United - 2024/25
- Thread starter mazhar13
- Start date
The deal would definitely be structured in a way that Favours us.
160m
Remember in the past we would have added 10m onto PSG's asking price just to get it done.
They paid 60 million for him last year, he’s contracted until 2028 and his stock hasn’t even really dropped, he just isn't wanted by their new manager.
He’s hardly going to be sold for peanuts.
Absolutely gobsmacked by the fee. Sickening.
Look at how quick and excited people come out of the woodwork to slate INEOS because ONE article/tweet claims we are coughing up 60m - no idea of the truth, nor of the structure of the deal or anything just pure hard on material because they want INEOS to fail deep down.. Sad.
I'm not really sure how anyone can 'win' a transfer. If you get the player you want and they do well, it doesn't really matter. The fee only becomes an issue if they flop, and to be honest at £50m, in today's market, it would hardly be the end of the world.
Seriously? Was covered to death on here.
Why? 50m pounds is an Ok fee. Not small, not big for a full time international.
I'm getting sick and tired of the stat attacks in this thread.
Will you still be saying that if he turns out amazing for us, or still moan about the money that’s not even yours?
36% of us are. This thread is in the top 94th percentile of stat posts, and I don't think that this is what the caf needs this season
I praised the new management in getting De Ligt and Mazraoui on good fees and not overpaying for them, Ugarte is not worth 60m even if it includes difficult add-ons, we need our club to operate better in the transfer market and not be forced to overpay, other clubs will not get anywhere near PSG valuation, and our club should not, the deal didn't happen but I'll put this as a negative on the new management if it ends at 60m euros.
He'll fit right in then.
As with every transfer ever, no one will know whether he’s worth the amount we pay for him or not until we see him in action in our team over an extended period of time. 12 months from now it could look like a bargain or a bust, or everything in between.
The discussion was about last season's loan, you were the one who brought his previous spell at Dortmund up.
Surely a straight swap for Sancho is best for everyone. Or am I missing something? Plus Ugarte shouldn't be on anywhere near the same wages.
They don't have any need for Sancho is the issue.
They've just signed Desire Doue who is a much bigger talent and arguably already a better player. He'd be a luxury signing for them at this point, and they definitely won't value him at 60m.
People have been claiming it, but I havent seen one solid source.
We can't play 4-2-3-1 without a possession based player who's passing range and accuracy is superb, mostly playing from the deep, who reads the game and dictates the tempo. I reckon we're linked to someone who fits the type somewhat since it's such an obvious requirement for any team seeking to dominate. No successful team plays 4-2-3-1 without one.
Rodri - Kovacic(Gundo) / Rice - Ødegaard / Endo - McAllister / Caicedo - Gallagher / Kimmich - Goretzka / Valverde - Tchou(Cama) / Gundo - de Jong / Garcia - Herrera / Ugarte - Vitinha.
The list goes on...
Mainoo / Casemiro so obviously doesn't fit the pattern here, excited to see who we're bringing in. Current state with a b2b drifter who's fairly all rounded but unfinished product coupled with a slow pure DM who's obviously a 4-3-3 type (as he was used at RM), and not fit in a pivot at all. No Backup types fit either. Eriksen is a 433 type, too offensively minded and too slow/unprecise, McTominay is technically limited and embarrassingly unintelligent in possession, awful vision and decisions, Mount is an attacking mid, roaming in the final 3rd, unfit for a 4231 pivot.
So no players except Mainoo fits into our midfield pivot. It's embarrassing to see and I can't wait for EtH so sign a suitable partner. Not doing so is begging for 7th place.
Rodri - Kovacic(Gundo) / Rice - Ødegaard / Endo - McAllister / Caicedo - Gallagher / Kimmich - Goretzka / Valverde - Tchou(Cama) / Gundo - de Jong / Garcia - Herrera / Ugarte - Vitinha.
The list goes on...
Mainoo / Casemiro so obviously doesn't fit the pattern here, excited to see who we're bringing in. Current state with a b2b drifter who's fairly all rounded but unfinished product coupled with a slow pure DM who's obviously a 4-3-3 type (as he was used at RM), and not fit in a pivot at all. No Backup types fit either. Eriksen is a 433 type, too offensively minded and too slow/unprecise, McTominay is technically limited and embarrassingly unintelligent in possession, awful vision and decisions, Mount is an attacking mid, roaming in the final 3rd, unfit for a 4231 pivot.
So no players except Mainoo fits into our midfield pivot. It's embarrassing to see and I can't wait for EtH so sign a suitable partner. Not doing so is begging for 7th place.
What on earth... First off, Caicedo and Gallagher makes your list of ideal double pivots? Gallagher was most effective as an industrious ten last season, and was far from being some kinda of tempo setter.
Then you've got Endo and MacAllister, when Liverpool play a 433 and don't bother picking Endo because he isn't very good at all. The Barca pair you picked also played in a 433 with Gundogan and FDJ operating a free 8s ahead of a pivot. The PSG pair were also in a 433, with Vitinha taking over Ugarte's position over the course of last season rather than them playing together all that much.
Oh and there's Kimmich and Goretzka, the former of whom plays at right back and the latter of whom Bayern badly want to ship out. Even the Rice and Odegaard 'pair' are typically played in a 433, and when Arsenal do play a double pivot, Odegaard is in the ten with Jorginho coming in alongside Rice.
You're right about there being something "embarrassing to see" here, but it isn't what you think it is.
And I think the main point is we didn’t value him at that, so why pay that? He’s not currently a £50m+ player
Do we have any number one target then or are we just throwing €50m at any midfielder til it sticks
Everyone knows our number 1 target, it’s no secret
I’ll consult my crystal ball
Not everything you read is true. Ugarte is clearly our number one target. And PSG want to sell. Just putting pressure on them to try and get them to accept a lower offer.
Glad there’s always someone around on the caf to answer the rhetorical
Happy enough with that compromise. I can see why there was an impasse. PSG only bought him for 60M euros a year ago, which means selling him for 50M euros this summer would barely cover his book value. It may even equate to a loss, depending on currency changes and all that stuff. No point in them selling him at a loss from their point of view, may as well keep him for another year. So there was little pressure for them to drop their price.
From our point of view I suspect the issue was not about the valuation of the player, but how he fits into the overall financial envelope. 50M vs 60M is not a dramatically different valuation. More likely we want to give ourselves room to keep investing in the squad this summer, which is why we needed to haggle.
For both of us this is a good outcome. For them, they not only sell him for their preferred price, but they do so in a year when his book value is lower. Which equates to a better profit margin on the same transfer fee.
But for us, to all intents and purposes we get him on credit for a year, which means we still have that transfer budget free for this summer for another player. Granted it impacts our expenditure next summer, but I think most fans would rather have an additional player in the squad this summer instead of waiting a year. Im certain the manager will do. I strongly suspect this means we will bring in at least one more player by the end of next week.
From our point of view I suspect the issue was not about the valuation of the player, but how he fits into the overall financial envelope. 50M vs 60M is not a dramatically different valuation. More likely we want to give ourselves room to keep investing in the squad this summer, which is why we needed to haggle.
For both of us this is a good outcome. For them, they not only sell him for their preferred price, but they do so in a year when his book value is lower. Which equates to a better profit margin on the same transfer fee.
But for us, to all intents and purposes we get him on credit for a year, which means we still have that transfer budget free for this summer for another player. Granted it impacts our expenditure next summer, but I think most fans would rather have an additional player in the squad this summer instead of waiting a year. Im certain the manager will do. I strongly suspect this means we will bring in at least one more player by the end of next week.
I think it'll be to give us room in January for anything that comes up rather than this summer. Last couple January windows we've been so desperate for a signing and could only afford loans of veterans, hopefully nothing comes up, but it'd be nice to be able to react if needed.
Could be. We have a few problem areas, notably left back, where it could go either way. By Christmas we could have 2 fit and firing specialist LBs, or both Shaw and Malacia could still be on the treatment table. So there is a degree of wait and see.
However I think this deal looks a lot less tidy if we don't buy anyone with the fee we've "saved". If we're not buying anyone, it would have been better to just pay the 60M now. Indeed since there is, presumably, a loan fee involved, it would mean we've essentially paid more in total that if we just bought him this summer. So unless we truly couldn't afford him, or there's some other financial incentive we're not party to, it feels like a much worse deal if we don't use the opportunity it affords us.
Oyedele has also announced his departure via Instagram:
Last edited:
I've never heard of a loan with obligation having a loan fee to be honest, it's usually just accounting tricks to move it to a different year, coupled with the fact PSG want rid and we've been haggling on price I certainly wouldn't be expecting it to be more than if we bought him now.
The most likely reason we're pushing it back is simply that we can't afford what PSG want within PSR