United's transfer dealings

CnutOfAllCnuts

Bald Boring Cnut
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
29,997
Another one seems to be heading elsewhere, and fans are up in arms about it and United's general dealings, or rather perceived lack of.

How would you want United to operate in the transfer market?

Be frugal and spend within our means, or join the likes of City, Chelsea, PSG, MAdrid etc and pay whatever is needed to get the players they want?
 
Obviously I wouldn't want us splashing whatever the feck we can on players like the above clubs do, but we do seem to time and time offer money for players that falls a few million short of what the club wants and then are just completely unwilling to budge on it, which is painfully frustrating.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
Another one seems to be heading elsewhere, and fans are up in arms about it and United's general dealings, or rather perceived lack of.

How would you want United to operate in the transfer market?

Be frugal and spend within our means, or join the likes of City, Chelsea, PSG, MAdrid etc and pay whatever is needed to get the players they want?
Click to expand...

I would want united to operate in the transfer and wage market like madrid and barca do. Every pence is used towards future transfers, current transfers, wages, capex, i.e. working towards the betterment of the club and winning trophies.

Furthermore I want united players and local media to be used to turn targets heads and generally be more ruthless in the market like our spanish rivals.

Not pissing it away on interest so the glazers can own us and profit-maximasation by keeping wages lower than even arsenal do on a wage/turnover ratio.

I would separate madrid from the psg, city, and chelsea. Look at their financials and swissramble, they run a decent financial ship.
 
Be sensible and pay what Ferguson and our scouts feel a player is worth.

We saw the stick Berbatov got because of his £30m fee, if he'd have cost £12m-£15m he'd have been a fans favourite.

If we could sign Ronaldo for £60m I think we would, it's just that there aren't many players out there that are actually worth more than £30m. It's important we have a realistic shut off point not because of the Glazers and debt but for common sense.
 
I wouldn't want to throw money around like the teams you've mentioned. I like that we're frugal, have a huge scouting network and develop and promote from within.

Its who we are.

I'm not a huge England fan (even though I am English) but I was very proud seeing Welbeck lead the attack for England at the recent Euro's. A product of our youth system going on to play at that level.
 
I dont want us splashing cash left right and centre however our expenses in the transfer market over the past few seasons leave a lot to be desired, they have not been bad but in comparison to other top clubs they have not been great. I just hope we are not completely done for the summer because although Kagawa could be great he and Powell alone are not the solution to the problems of last season.
 
Pexbo said:
Be sensible and pay what Ferguson and our scouts feel a player is worth.

We saw the stick Berbatov got because of his £30m fee, if he'd have cost £12m-£15m he'd have been a fans favourite.

If we could sign Ronaldo for £60m I think we would, it's just that there aren't many players out there that are actually worth more than £30m. It's important we have a realistic shut off point not because of the Glazers and debt but for common sense.
Click to expand...

he's worth 9 digits
 
I'd like to see Fergie finally get one of these marquee signings he's been chasing these last few years. He's not going to be able to build the squad he deserves/wants until he does. Not sure how it will happen though. I think we're relying on FFP to have some teeth. I won't hold my breath.
 
Without knowing too much about Barca's and Madrid's finances, and can't be bothered researching it, aren't both club continually being bailed out by banks and authorities?
 
VoetbalWizard said:
I would want united to operate in the transfer and wage market like madrid and barca do. Every pence is used towards future transfers, current transfers, wages, capex, i.e. working towards the betterment of the club and winning trophies.

Furthermore I want united players and local media to be used to turn targets heads and generally be more ruthless in the market like our spanish rivals.

Not pissing it away on interest so the glazers can own us and profit-maximasation by keeping wages lower than even arsenal do on a wage/turnover ratio.

I would separate madrid from the psg, city, and chelsea. Look at their financials and swissramble, they run a decent financial ship.
Click to expand...

So would I.

Of course, when it comes to sponging off the state and incredibly unfair TV deals I'm not sure how we're supposed to emulate them.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
Without knowing too much about Barca's and Madrid's finances, and can't be bothered researching it, aren't both club continually being bailed out by banks and authorities?
Click to expand...

They have in the past yeah for what I remember. Didn't Barcelona make a substantial loss when they won everything the other year?
 
I'm content with our transfer dealings. Ideally a couple signings in particular would have come off, perhaps a known quality in CM has been overlooked for a while now, that would be my one real complaint. I'm happy with the players we've brought in recent years, the prices we've paid for them and the targets we identify.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
Without knowing too much about Barca's and Madrid's finances, and can't be bothered researching it, aren't both club continually being bailed out by banks and authorities?
Click to expand...

they do get favourable rates and terms from lending institutions and the 'bailout' was the madrid city council buying their old training ground for a massive sum, which was a bit dodgy but that was over 10 years ago.

Barca did have a cashflow issue a couple of years ago that they borrowed to cover but what I am trying to say is that they are run as football clubs, not a business.

The primary goal for them is to win trophies, ours always seems to be 'become the most valuable brand in forbes".

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2012/04/truth-about-debt-at-barcelona-and-real.html
 
When it comes to us competing in the transfer market I think that in terms of fees paid we can compete with anyone within reason. Its the wages where teams like PSG and City have blown us(and all other clubs) away.

I don't think its as simple as just offer the kid what he wants. Say PSG offer him 100k a week then we cant match that because before you know it every single player(or their agent) in our squad wants parity and that will cause problems in itself. This lad hasn't proved anything yet so getting him in line with our wage structure or even going slightly above it is exactly what we should be doing.

I still get the impression people want us to spend money just for the sake of spending. This time next year we will look back at this summer and say Kagawa was the shrewdest bit of transfer business any top club made imo.
 
I'm not sure what we can do differently under the current ownership. We just don't have the financial clout to compete with the financial doping.

Though I also think Fergie's desire to get 'value' is going to become increasingly difficult to sustain.
 
I love the way we do things. Always a new target to hunt down. Also even I balk at the idea of what looks like a £40million pound plus deal for Lucas Moura.
 
Cina said:
Obviously I wouldn't want us splashing whatever the feck we can on players like the above clubs do, but we do seem to time and time offer money for players that falls a few million short of what the club wants and then are just completely unwilling to budge on it, which is painfully frustrating.
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying but is it really "just a few million" every time?

The selling club makes it seem like that but I think it's more a case of:


We will offer £22m for your player.

You are close to our valuation but we don't want to sell.

£25m

Closer but we want to keep him.

£27m

Very close now but we are not interested in selling.


Fine forget it.


"We were offered £27m but it is not quite what we wanted, £29m would have got the player"

Ok £29m send him over for a medical.

£30m is closer to what we want and his agent wants £6m.

Forget it.

"We were very close to agreeing a deal but United just couldn't quite match our valuation."






Where does it stop? With City, Chelsea and PSG it stops when they put an extra £5m+ on it and give his agent the Chairmans daughter. I'm glad we set our limits, it's just a shame the Sugar Daddies have inflated the market to such a stupid level that our limits aren't enough anymore.
 
VoetbalWizard said:
they do get favourable rates and terms from lending institutions and the 'bailout' was the madrid city council buying their old training ground for a massive sum, which was a bit dodgy but that was over 10 years ago.

Barca did have a cashflow issue a couple of years ago that they borrowed to cover but what I am trying to say is that they are run as football clubs, not a business.

The primary goal for them is to win trophies, ours always seems to be 'become the most valuable brand in forbes".

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2012/04/truth-about-debt-at-barcelona-and-real.html
Click to expand...

Not true. One of the principal criticisms of Barca in Spain is their willingness to risk burnout of their players to go around the world playing financially lucrative games/tours, which are done with the brand in mind.
 
I like our transfer dealings. Mostly younger talented players who come into the side and provide plenty of entertainment.
 
Cina said:
I think it's more so that their loans and debts are just constantly ignored, no?
Click to expand...

Whatever reason, they hardly seem to financially tight ships.

Personally, I would hate United to be like Madrid, constantly paying world record fees and showing litle or no patience with players who do not perform from day 1. Ref Sneijder and Robben.
 
VoetbalWizard said:
they do get favourable rates and terms from lending institutions and the 'bailout' was the madrid city council buying their old training ground for a massive sum, which was a bit dodgy but that was over 10 years ago.

Barca did have a cashflow issue a couple of years ago that they borrowed to cover but what I am trying to say is that they are run as football clubs, not a business.

The primary goal for them is to win trophies, ours always seems to be 'become the most valuable brand in forbes".

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2012/04/truth-about-debt-at-barcelona-and-real.html
Click to expand...

Why are you ignoring the unfairly inflated income they get from negotiating their own TV deals? A deal that has left six clubs in the Spanish top flight on the verge of bankruptcy.

Take that away (or at least make it fair, in the same way that the PL deal is agreed) and the whole house of cards falls down. For both Spanish clubs. What a great model for us to emulate.
 
the secret of our success has always been youth sprinkled with a bit of class

i know this thread is prompted by the Lucas news that he is talking to PSG but 30 million for someone who was virtually unknown is a lot of money

i haven't seen enough of the kid to decide whether it was a huge gamble or whether we were securing the next big thing

our transfer policy in terms of youth hasn't changed

in terms of bringing in expensive top class players like Pallister, Keane, Cole, Stam, Yorke, Rio, Ruud, Rooney, Veron, Berbatov we werent afraid to spend

now we don't seem to be able to compete with the new big boys of Barca/Madrid/Chelsea/City and now PSG

what United need to grasp is that although it might not sit well in order to buy top talent you have to grease the wheels a bit with agents fee - funny we had no problem giving Mendes over 3 million in the transfer of Bebe

we need to bite the bullet and pay the money if the player is someone who we have spent time identifying as someone who could improve the team/squad


i was in amsterdam the other week where I had to pay nearly 6 euros for a pint - much more than i would at home - it didnt stop me getting trollied

sort it out United
 
Ideally i believe we should be spending about £40-50mn net in the transfer market each year. I'd be happy for Fergie to spend it any way he wants. If he wants to buy 10 5mn young'uns, thats fine. If he wants to blow it on single marquee player, thats fine(and dandy) as well.

I also believe we should have room for £20mn or so more per year in wages.

Of course, this is in an ideal world. In the here and now, we have a sizeable debt to service and given that, i'm reasonably happy with how we've been conducting our transfer business.
 
Pexbo said:
I see what you are saying but is it really "just a few million" every time?

The selling club makes it seem like that but I think it's more a case of:


We will offer £22m for your player.

You are close to our valuation but we don't want to sell.

£25m

Closer but we want to keep him.

£27m

Very close now but we are not interested in selling.


Fine forget it.


"We were offered £27m but it is not quite what we wanted, £29m would have got the player"

Ok £29m send him over for a medical.

£30m is closer to what we want and his agent wants £6m.

Forget it.

"We were very close to agreeing a deal but United just couldn't quite match our valuation."






Where does it stop? With City, Chelsea and PSG it stops when they put an extra £5m+ on it and give his agent the Chairmans daughter. I'm glad we set our limits, it's just a shame the Sugar Daddies have inflated the market to such a stupid level that our limits aren't enough anymore.
Click to expand...

Who knows. Whatever it is we do seem to keep falling short though. I don't want us paying too much for the players but at times the club seems ridiculously stubborn when it comes to even 2 or 3 million for players.
 
Brophs said:
Not true. One of the principal criticisms of Barca in Spain is their willingness to risk burnout of their players to go around the world playing financially lucrative games/tours, which are done with the brand in mind.
Click to expand...

increase in brand to get more lucrative deals so they can pay the best wages on the planet and gun for one or two special players every window.

Rossell is more mindful of the financial situation than laporta.

read the swiss ramble piece from april of this year
 
VoetbalWizard said:
they do get favourable rates and terms from lending institutions and the 'bailout' was the madrid city council buying their old training ground for a massive sum, which was a bit dodgy but that was over 10 years ago.

Barca did have a cashflow issue a couple of years ago that they borrowed to cover but what I am trying to say is that they are run as football clubs, not a business.

The primary goal for them is to win trophies, ours always seems to be 'become the most valuable brand in forbes".

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2012/04/truth-about-debt-at-barcelona-and-real.html
Click to expand...

Reality is that United or any other English clubs could not have operated like that. Barca and Madrid are local and regional institutions, also politcally, which enables them to do this. United is not.

Business or football club, you have to work within the economical frames you have.
 
Red-Indian said:
Ideally i believe we should be spending about £40-50mn net in the transfer market each year. I'd be happy for Fergie to spend it any way he wants. If he wants to buy 10 5mn young'uns, thats fine. If he wants to blow it on single marquee player, thats fine(and dandy) as well.

I also believe we should have room for £20mn or so more per year in wages.

Of course, this is in an ideal world. In the here and now, we have a sizeable debt to service and given that, i'm reasonably happy with how we've been conducting our transfer business.
Click to expand...
i agree with the budget side of your point - we have to work within sensible constraints

I dont necessarily think we need to bring x amount of players or spend x amount of money every year

sometimes buying players can disrupt the squad/block the progress of other young players
 
Cina said:
Who knows. Whatever it is we do seem to keep falling short though. I don't want us paying too much for the players but at times the club seems ridiculously stubborn when it comes to even 2 or 3 million for players.
Click to expand...

Yeah but the point is that it is probably not 2 or 3 million. The goal posts keep getting moved and when we pull out for good they make the impression that we were very close in the hope that another club starts negotiations. It seems to have worked with PSG.
 
VoetbalWizard said:
increase in brand to get more lucrative deals so they can pay the best wages on the planet and gun for one or two special players every window.

Rossell is more mindful of the financial situation than laporta.

read the swiss ramble piece from april of this year
Click to expand...

Just be sure to ignore the bit about the TV deal, right?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Why are you ignoring the unfairly inflated income they get from negotiating their own TV deals? A deal that has left six clubs in the Spanish top flight on the verge of bankruptcy.

Take that away (or at least make it fair, in the same way that the PL deal is agreed) and the whole house of cards falls down. For both Spanish clubs. What a great model for us to emulate.
Click to expand...

even if barca and madrid sold collective rights like the premiership did, they would not have unproductive debt/interest to service (their debt is incurred to better the club on or off the field) nor would they be slaves to maximizing wage/turnover ratio.

It is not only the revenue mix i am comparing between us and them, it is the attitudes towards transfers and wages.

Even the NFL, which is lauded by wage control fans and financial analysts the world over in terms franchise value generation and sustainability, calculates wages for players to be about 55-60% of total revenues.
 
Pexbo said:
Yeah but the point is that it is probably not 2 or 3 million. The goal posts keep getting moved and when we pull out for good they make the impression that we were very close in the hope that another club starts negotiations. It seems to have worked with PSG.
Click to expand...

How do we know that? If anything, reports suggest that we were never willing to move on the £26m at all.
 
buckooo1978 said:
i agree with the budget side of your point - we have to work within sensible constraints

I dont necessarily think we need to bring x amount of players or spend x amount of money every year

sometimes buying players can disrupt the squad/block the progress of other young players
Click to expand...

That's another discussion. Obviously if Fergie doesn't want the money (and i can't believe he wouldn't), it can be diverted to increased capex in other areas- say Stadium expansion funds.
 
VoetbalWizard said:
even if barca and madrid sold collective rights like the premiership did, they would not have unproductive debt/interest to service (their debt is incurred to better the club on or off the field) nor would they be slaves to maximizing wage/turnover ratio.
Click to expand...

They wouldn't have been subjected to a leveraged buyout at some point in the past? Well shit, that's the secret of their success! If only we could copy them. Where's my time machine...

It is not only the revenue mix i am comparing between us and them, it is the attitudes towards transfers and wages.

Even the NFL, which is lauded by wage control fans and financial analysts the world over in terms franchise value generation and sustainability, calculates wages for players to be about 55-60% of total revenues.
Click to expand...

And the revenue to wages ratio in the Premier League is - on average - 70%. That probably could be brought a bit more under control by a select few clubs if the likes of MUFC could negotiate their own tv deals, fecking over the rest of the league in the process, pushing half of the rest of the league into administration and removing any semblence of competitiveness from the league as a whole. Brilliant idea.
 
VoetbalWizard said:
even if barca and madrid sold collective rights like the premiership did, they would not have unproductive debt/interest to service (their debt is incurred to better the club on or off the field) nor would they be slaves to maximizing wage/turnover ratio.

It is not only the revenue mix i am comparing between us and them, it is the attitudes towards transfers and wages.

Even the NFL, which is lauded by wage control fans and financial analysts the world over in terms franchise value generation and sustainability, calculates wages for players to be about 55-60% of total revenues.
Click to expand...

The debt we have is just a reality, and hence we have to deal with it and work with the constraints associated with it.

Barca has a debt of €300-400m apparently. I.e have not worked within their means.

Both Barca and Real have healthy wage ratios compared to turnover, so your last point is irrelevant.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
They wouldn't have been subjected to a leveraged buyout at some point in the past? Well shit, that's the secret of their success! If only we could copy them. Where's my time machine...



And the revenue to wages ratio in the Premier League is - on average - 70%. That probably could be brought a bit more under control by a select few clubs if the likes of MUFC could negotiate their own tv deals, fecking over the rest of the league in the process, pushing half of the rest of the league into administration and removing any semblence of competitiveness from the league as a whole. Brilliant idea.
Click to expand...

The nfl comparison was made to show that if WE personally ran 55-60% wage/turnover, we would still be sustainable, for US.

It wasn't a league to league comparison. If owners in the permier league were more financial disciplined and took a hard line to wages, they could drop their ratios as well on a club by club basis.

Currently, We can stand to raise our wage/turnover ratio (while keeping the collective tv deal) but other clubs need to lower theirs to more sustainable levels.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I'd like to see Fergie finally get one of these marquee signings he's been chasing these last few years. He's not going to be able to build the squad he deserves/wants until he does. Not sure how it will happen though. I think we're relying on FFP to have some teeth. I won't hold my breath.
Click to expand...

Don't you think van Persie would fit this tag? Didn't Berbatov fit that tag when he came? Verón?
 
Kagawa was a good deal and Powell could be a good deal if he kicks on. But we're shit at big money deals because they just won't happen anymore. I can't get excited about reports of us looking at players because there's always too many stumbling blocks (fee, wages, agents etc)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.