Transfer Tweets - Manchester United - 2024/25

JediSith said:
I agree. No need for major overhauls. The constant narrative of needing 11 new players for every new manager was one I never agreed with. However, the squad needed new additions to replace older players Casemiro, Eriksen, Maguire, Lindalof. If one or more of those replacements come from existing players or academy players then great or if Amorim can get a few more years from one, maybe Maguire great. But likelihood is that’s a mini rebuild.

Then we have the formation. Manager might need at least two or three players to fit his system.

So we’re still looking at a £150m summer, which is pretty much our standard summer spend. Hopefully now it will be invested more wisely. By the looks of last summer the does seem to be the case.
Click to expand...
It’s pretty standard for many PL teams now
 
Who needs a Branthwaite when we have a Kukoni at home?

Being serious though, he'd be a good addition. His two footedness would give us lots of options and his age profile is great. Just needs to be a more sensible price than the circus numbers they were bandying about last summer.
 
He would replace the games played by Evans and Lindelof. I'd be adding 1 more CB too. Possibly Diomonde in the summer.
 
Trex said:
Was there any expectation to spend money in January?
Click to expand...
Not by anyone who understands the PSR math. We went a little under budget after selling Sancho, but we can probably only do another £20M or so. Loans are more likely.

In the summer we'll have the usual ~£150M net or so available. But we have to wait for July 1st before there's more room. You can't "borrow" from next year's budget in PSR/FFP.
 
bb8 said:
Not by anyone who understands the PSR math. We went a little under budget after selling Sancho, but we can probably only do another £20M or so. Loans are more likely.

In the summer we'll have the usual ~£150M net or so available. But we have to wait for July 1st before there's more room. You can't "borrow" from next year's budget in PSR/FFP.
Click to expand...
From what I understand PSR is the bigger problem, we could probably do a bit under FFP but everything knocks on so would just impact the next window anyway.

TBH I do not see it a a massive issue we hardly every buy in Jan, and the current squad should be getting near the top 4 without any purchases, maybe a sneaky loan if there is a low upfront fee, or a fee paid on completion of the loan, as long as it is not Weghorst or Igahlo
 
bb8 said:
Not by anyone who understands the PSR math. We went a little under budget after selling Sancho, but we can probably only do another £20M or so. Loans are more likely.

In the summer we'll have the usual ~£150M net or so available. But we have to wait for July 1st before there's more room. You can't "borrow" from next year's budget in PSR/FFP.
Click to expand...
No other club comes close to us in terms of net spend in the last decade or so. £150m per year net is simply unsustainable for a club that bleeds money like we do.
 
Zed 101 said:
From what I understand PSR is the bigger problem, we could probably do a bit under FFP but everything knocks on so would just impact the next window anyway.

TBH I do not see it a a massive issue we hardly every buy in Jan, and the current squad should be getting near the top 4 without any purchases, maybe a sneaky loan if there is a low upfront fee, or a fee paid on completion of the loan, as long as it is not Weghorst or Igahlo
Click to expand...
Yes agreed. We should see how the strikers perform the rest of the year, see how Garnacho/Amad/Dalot/etc fit as wing back in this system, and evaluate more guys like Ugarte and De Ligt before rushing into big financial decisions anyway.

Devil_forever said:
No other club comes close to us in terms of net spend in the last decade or so. £150m per year net is simply unsustainable for a club that bleeds money like we do.
Click to expand...
Do you mean not sustainable from a PSR standpoint or from a "owners don't want to spend the money" standpoint? If you mean PSR, it very clearly is sustainable. We've just done it for the last 5-6 years, and PSR only looks at a three year window. You can spend 70% of revenues, and we've been under that consistently. £130-150M is our long-term annual transfer budget where we can still comply with PSR rules. We can spend £250M some years too, it just means it has to be offset by corresponding lower amounts in other years.

If you mean the "owners don't want to spend the money" standpoint, that's possible. But we've dealt with many years of the Glazers, who are very concerned with profitability, and we've still spent £150M a year. That's also what we've done in the first year under INEOS, so there's no indication that we're going to significantly decrease the summer budget.

I don't expect the big money transfers to stop in any case. Don't think Ratcliffe bought an ownership stake in the club to watch us languish in 8th place. He's got too much money and pride for that. Not to mention, in this sport getting into UCL and getting big sponsorship deals can pay back for all the spending anyway, so it might not even help profitability to try to have a cheaper squad. Lots of mid/low table Premier clubs are losing a bunch of money, so that's not some golden ticket to profits.
 
They’re not buying anyone. Spent to get the new coach in and old coach out.
 
sparx99 said:
Probably not but it’s not impossible that it’s £10m in January and then instalments for the rest.
Click to expand...
That's irrelevant. Our constraint is PSR, not actual cash. With PSR the transfer fee gets spread over the life of the contract, no matter when you actually pay the other club. So a £50M transfer on a 5 year deal costs us £10M per year for 5 years (that's before you get to wages).

Don't think we're spending £50M on anyone in the winter no matter how payments are structured, though technically it's probably possible.
 
bb8 said:
That's irrelevant. Our constraint is PSR, not actual cash. With PSR the transfer fee gets spread over the life of the contract, no matter when you actually pay the other club. So a £50M transfer on a 5 year deal costs us £10M per year for 5 years (that's before you get to wages).

Don't think we're spending £50M on anyone in the winter no matter how payments are structured, though technically it's probably possible.
Click to expand...

Yeah I can't see it happening unless Amorim really pushes for it, with the knowledge that it will come out of the summer transfer budget.
 
bb8 said:
That's irrelevant. Our constraint is PSR, not actual cash. With PSR the transfer fee gets spread over the life of the contract, no matter when you actually pay the other club. So a £50M transfer on a 5 year deal costs us £10M per year for 5 years (that's before you get to wages).

Don't think we're spending £50M on anyone in the winter no matter how payments are structured, though technically it's probably possible.
Click to expand...

That’s partly my point though. It’s only going to cost £10m to do a £50m deal. We don’t know exactly how tight the PSR constraints are so maybe we sell someone and that gives us enough room or we have enough as it is anyway. We don’t need £50m cash or PSR room.
 
Theo would be a dream signing. One of those who you know is not going to fail, and will likely become one of the leaders of the group.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.