Why do we seem to get fleeced so often?

Annihilate Now! said:
The weird thing about Maguire was that he was seemingly the only choice for both us and City... as if there wasn't another centre back in the world.
Click to expand...

This might stand for City also, but our club wanted someone with leadership ability that was PL ready and good on the ball. Thats why Maguire was considered the only option. We already have a load of defenders on our books that were more speculative buys from other leagues, commanding lesser fees and it hasn't been really effective.

Maguire was slightly overpriced because he was England's first choice from a PL rival. It was a fairly rare set of circumstances. I doubt this forms the foundations of our transfer strategy, as you saw with Bruno. Clearly we are not prepared to splash to same on Jadon atm as he is coming from outside the Prem from a known feeder club and is not an established international yet.
 
stevoc said:
Are Roman Abramovich and Daniel Levy football people?
Click to expand...

Chelsea have a Director of football Marina Granovskaia, who does all the transfer dealings and negotiations.

Roman just wants results.
 
I don’t think it helps that when we go for a player we usually seem to be desperate for them, it's puts us in quite a weak negotiating position to begin with. We've basically been playing catch up for the last 7 years which has basically forced us to overpay for players who had no right to be going for the amount of money they have been doing.

I also don’t think we’re necessarily smart with our signings either, targetting players on long contracts and the club we're negotiating with being in no need to sell, just look at Dortmund this season with Sancho. Also, take Maguire for example, it's well reported that we could have bought him for £60m in the 2018/2019 season, if we'd have been willing to take a gamble we could've had him for £20m the season before that. It's not like he was an unknown entity to us, he bossed our attack in 3 seperate games in the 2017/2018 season. In that same set of games Andy Robertson was running us ragged, he was then picked up by Liverpool for about £8m and has ended up one of the best LBs in the country. Looking at the example of Ferran Torres too, City took advantage of the turmoil surrounding Valencia, perhaps if we hadn't had such tunnel vision for Sancho we could have been the ones picking him up for £25m.

Thing is we can do things sensibly, I think we've shown we can get good value for money. Lindelof, Blind and Herrera were all bought for modest fees, relatively speaking, and we got a good service out of each. Blind has since reached a UCL SF and Herrera has since reached a CL final. What I don't understand is how we've managed to end up spending £49m on someone like Fred, who realistically should be much more in line with the price we paid for Herrera and Lindelof. We've also found a bit of success with more pricy teenage gambles, Shaw and Martial were probably two of the first names on the team sheet this season, Dalot hasn't worked out that well but we'll probably be able to recoup most of our money on him. It's an avenue I'd like to see us explore a bit more often.

I think it's telling that the best team, in my opinion, we've put together since SAF retired isn't a team of overpriced mercenaries cobbled together from a collection of middling teams from abroad but from players we signed as talented teenagers (such as Martial and Shaw) and a fantastic collection of academy graduates supplemented with quality expensive ready made "stars". Pogba, Greenwood and Rashford are all from the academy and are among our best players (Rashford and Greenwood accounted for 39G & 16A this season for a combined cost of £0). Although Pogba did cost us £89m, we did originally identify him as a 15 year old and could have had him for essentially nothing as well. Not to mention we also have Dean Henderson on our books who's considered one of the hottest goalkeeping prospects on the market. I think we're going to have to keep our fingers crossed our substantial academy investment continues to pay off, history does suggest it will.
 
All the rich clubs get fleeced, us more than anyone. Its just the nature of the game.

But what I dont understand is that we are so transparent in which our main transfer targets are.

If we could at least pretend to look at different players and not stating again and again "X is our main target" it could help...
 
I don't think we have good enough negotiators.

Ed may be good at getting sponsorship deals but is dreadful when it comes to negotiating transfers. We leave everything till very late after the transfer fee shoots through the roof and either pay insane money for the player of our choice or worse still, splash out insane money for another player in a state of panic.
 
1) Ed did dick swinging to tell everyone we have lots of money. Otherwise also everybody would have known but Ed made it worse.
2) Clubs also know we are very desperate to get back to top and Man United walking away from a player after interest is public, reflects very badly on club with fan pressure and protests (physical or social media wise).
3) As we aren't at top, players too aren't dying to join us and we don't have much leverage. They are not forcing their club to let them go which makes selling club's position stronger
4) We don't have a great negotiating team.
5) We say we have multiple targets for a position but rarely walk away and buy an alternate if first one seems overpriced.

In the end, we, RM, Barca will be the clubs who will be overpaying anyways, but we can gain leverage if/when we get back to winning and players are themselves very keen to come to us. Our efforts on investment in academy and scouting are also important so that we keep working on getting players earlier at United and develop them. Transfer market otherwise should mostly be used for a marquee signing when needed and sufficient background work needs to happen well before the transfer window approaches so that we don't end up frustrating all involved parties.
 
romufc said:
Chelsea have a Director of football Marina Granovskaia, who does all the transfer dealings and negotiations.

Roman just wants results.
Click to expand...

Im aware doesn’t really answer my question though.

This “football person” myth is a load of old bollocks in my opinion. I have no idea how good woodward is at his job but he’s as much of a football person as most people running football clubs these days.
 
Being one of the richest clubs in the world if we would hire the best closures in the business we'd save millions. PSG, Chelsea et all have tonnes of money too but look at how they are negotiating and making sure they're getting their targets. Incompetent people in the negotiation chamber is te problem.
 
Matriac said:
Would we ever have been in for someone like Doherty? I don't think so.
We tend to target high quality, so the price follows.
But then it becomes a paradox that if we target someone that must mean they are quality, right? If not we wouldn't be in for them? And quality costs.

Also the fact that if you are selling a rare item with no set and tangible price because of limited supply, perhaps one of a kind. And you have an interested buyer, you know this person has historically had a lot of money from other purchases. You'd be more inclined to try and get as much money as possible out of them. Whereas if another possible buyer that hasn't spent as much in the past, you'd be more inclined to come to an agreement to ensure you get the deal through.

If you need the money that is, and/or the item is sentient and really wants a new owner.
Click to expand...

Doherty was the best attacking rightback in 18/19 and one of the better ones last season. So yes we could have been in for him instead of Wan Bisakka
 
romufc said:
Chelsea have a Director of football Marina Granovskaia, who does all the transfer dealings and negotiations.

Roman just wants results.
Click to expand...

And she wasn't a football person. After 15 years in football, I think that most people would consider that Woodward is a football person. Now he may not be good at doing parts of his job but it's not because he is some sort of football outsider.
 
Is it that we put all our eggs in one basket? Everyone knows who our no.1 target is , there are never 2 options. That kind of puts us right in the selling clubs trap who says pay up or move on. Not having a back up plan means than we panic and end up playing over the odds.
 
Ed Woodward “There is no fixed budget. We can do things in the transfer market other clubs could only dream of. Watch this space.”
 
I'm not sure this is true though. We are, financially at least, in the same league as Real Madrid and Barcelona; they are also having to pay premium for almost any player. It's the cost of being rich. Barca payed 120-130 mil for Dembele so we also need to pay the same for Sancho coming from the same club.
 
Tom Cato said:
Doherty is 28 and scored 4g 3a last season. This is his last big long term contract. But he is the player he is, there is not significant development left there. £15m is a good deal but he's not worth £50m even before covid. Ben Chillwell being sold at £50m is very close to matching the price of AWB, at a similar age, this price is extremely comparable.

I think you're looking at a bit of confirmation bias here.

MUFC DOES pay somewhat a premium on transfers, but what have we bought that was out of price?

AWB? Young, proven talent. ~£50m, Sold to direct competitor under long term contract at the peak of footballs financial boom
Harry Maguire, - World record transfer, Sold to direct competitor under long term contract at the peak of footballs financial boom. England international Centerback.
Dan James, highly regarded talent. bought for reasonable fee
Bruno Fernandes, highly regarded international player at the start of his prime years, bought for a resonable fee

Negotiating for Jadon Sancho. One of football greatest talents, under long term contract in a club that does not need to sell with CL ambition.

Where are we getting fleeced here? None of these players were bought for a higher price than the market dictated. Leicester never had any incentive to sell Harry Maguire. Their only incentive was enough money.

There are a number of things that dictate player transfer values: Contract term, production, age, talent status, selling club financial status, buying club financial status, market player is bought in, players desire to leave the club. Football clubs are tradeable companies and ROI is absolutely a factor in determining how high they're willing to go.

I actually disagree that we're paying too much for players to the tune of "our negotiators are piss poor". The players we target are different than say, Tottenham.

Ed Woodward saying things in public about our financial muscles is unimportant, clubs don't see that and realize that we can ask for anything. Selling clubs actually do due dilligence, they already know how much money the club has to throw around, the club accounts are largely open to the public from the previous fiscal year. - Add that to the previous list and you have the ballpark figure you negotiate a transfer fee in.

I mean, I'm just a fan and even I have a pretty good idea what transfer fees we can operate with - Although my professional background certainly helps. Actual poweraccountants at say, Dortmund, aren't fooled by public press.

The club lack what Chelsea have, an owner that is willing to funnel money INTO the club, our owners take substantial share dividends, so we have to be more careful than a club like Chelsea or Manchester City that are supported by keen investors.

MUFC don't have bad negotiators, but why progress appear to draw out so much I honestly can't tell besides common stalling tactics and considerations.
Click to expand...

Excellent post.
 
We also set a horrible precedent with Mourinho, that if the manager isn't given everything he wants he'll be allowed to kick off and drag the club through the mud for it.

We should've nipped that shit in the bud immediately that season. But we let Mourinho, the club and the clubs own fanbase drag the clubs reputation through the mud for 4 months.
 
Offside said:
Ed Woodward “There is no fixed budget. We can do things in the transfer market other clubs could only dream of. Watch this space.”
Click to expand...
Ed Woodward says Manchester United’s Bastian Schweinsteiger will ‘send send shivers down spine’ of opponents next season
 
JPRouve said:
And she wasn't a football person. After 15 years in football, I think that most people would consider that Woodward is a football person. Now he may not be good at doing parts of his job but it's not because he is some sort of football outsider.
Click to expand...

But she has shows to make good decisions, Ed hasnt.
 
Do people really think we'd have got Doc for 15m?

Either he has one year left and has insisted he won't sign again or something very odd is going on here.
 
romufc said:
But she has shows to make good decisions, Ed hasnt.
Click to expand...

Which is the only argument that should be used, but it's also worth mentioning that they do not have the same title or role within each clubs. At Chelsea Woodward is Laurence.
 
Why don’t we use buyers agents if there is a perception that there is a united tax.
Just get a third party to negotiate a fee and don’t disclose who the buying club is.

*and I know, I would have more agents in football. But since there’s already a heap...
 
Because once we start paying over the odds for players other clubs see that and try to fool us into doing the same.
 
  • We dont have people with good negotiation skills
  • We often come across very desperate in the end by not having a proper backup plan
  • We are not really successful in last 7 years hence we have less pulling power in the current marker
  • We dont have a charismatic proven manager which will be a factor if players have a choice to play for managers like Pep/Klopp.
  • Despite all this our financials are still great so everyone know we can splash money if we want a certain player or pay good wages to renew players
 
1. Being rich
2. Years of mediocrity

Clubs know we have money to spend (this goes for players also with their contracts)
They also know for the most part we are desperate and it always seems our shortlist is very 'limited' - If we want a player, that seems to be the only one we want.

Leicester knew that we wanted Maguire and there wasn't any other options, so they could hold out, and they did.
The same seems to be going for Sancho. They know we're desperate for a RW, and he's the only option, so why settle for less than they want.

Look at Liverpool with Thiago. Obviously I don't know what they will end up paying, or if they will get him, but it comes across that they're not that bothered. With or without him, they'll still challenge next season. Bayern will ultimately lower his price if it came to it, or keep him, but for Liverpool it isn't detrimental either way.

We're playing catch up, making bad decisions along the way and it's costing us heavily every year
 
Tom Cato said:
Doherty is 28 and scored 4g 3a last season. This is his last big long term contract. But he is the player he is, there is not significant development left there. £15m is a good deal but he's not worth £50m even before covid. Ben Chillwell being sold at £50m is very close to matching the price of AWB, at a similar age, this price is extremely comparable.

I think you're looking at a bit of confirmation bias here.

MUFC DOES pay somewhat a premium on transfers, but what have we bought that was out of price?

AWB? Young, proven talent. ~£50m, Sold to direct competitor under long term contract at the peak of footballs financial boom
Harry Maguire, - World record transfer, Sold to direct competitor under long term contract at the peak of footballs financial boom. England international Centerback.
Dan James, highly regarded talent. bought for reasonable fee
Bruno Fernandes, highly regarded international player at the start of his prime years, bought for a resonable fee

Negotiating for Jadon Sancho. One of football greatest talents, under long term contract in a club that does not need to sell with CL ambition.

Where are we getting fleeced here? None of these players were bought for a higher price than the market dictated. Leicester never had any incentive to sell Harry Maguire. Their only incentive was enough money.

There are a number of things that dictate player transfer values: Contract term, production, age, talent status, selling club financial status, buying club financial status, market player is bought in, players desire to leave the club. Football clubs are tradeable companies and ROI is absolutely a factor in determining how high they're willing to go.

I actually disagree that we're paying too much for players to the tune of "our negotiators are piss poor". The players we target are different than say, Tottenham.

Ed Woodward saying things in public about our financial muscles is unimportant, clubs don't see that and realize that we can ask for anything. Selling clubs actually do due dilligence, they already know how much money the club has to throw around, the club accounts are largely open to the public from the previous fiscal year. - Add that to the previous list and you have the ballpark figure you negotiate a transfer fee in.

I mean, I'm just a fan and even I have a pretty good idea what transfer fees we can operate with - Although my professional background certainly helps. Actual poweraccountants at say, Dortmund, aren't fooled by public press.

The club lack what Chelsea have, an owner that is willing to funnel money INTO the club, our owners take substantial share dividends, so we have to be more careful than a club like Chelsea or Manchester City that are supported by keen investors.

MUFC don't have bad negotiators, but why progress appear to draw out so much I honestly can't tell besides common stalling tactics and considerations.
Click to expand...

Quality must read post.
 
transfer negotiations work on game theory. When you combine that with the knowledge that our squad is not as strong as we need to be and we're the richest club, we inevitably have to pay more. It's not entirely Woodward or Judge's fault it's by the natural design of the situation. If we were winning Premier Leagues and negotiating I'm sure we would get a better deal.
 
Woodward's stupidly boasting about our spending power.

that very first transfer window post fergie where we ended up having to spend more than we really had to for fellaini, plus the herrera fiasco really exposed how flawed we had instantly become in transfer dealings.

giving players away for well under what they should have been valued at post fergie has showed a lack of care in true value of players.

We keep chasing the obvious flavour of the year players and we also have an air of desperation about us when chasing these players with us behaving reactive rather than proactive in the market.
 
Offside said:
Ed Woodward “There is no fixed budget. We can do things in the transfer market other clubs could only dream of. Watch this space.”
Click to expand...

Feck me sideways, it was at a shareholders meeting, the way some go on you'd think Ed had hijacked the SkySports studio and was waving wads of cash around Harry Enfield style. At the time were you as a United fan not reassured to hear that? We were in turmoil, your average Red was lapping up every single negative comment from the press who seemed to take great pleasure in our situation at the time after near two years domination, the club hasn't the finances to sign the players needed to halt the slide, the stadium is failing to pieces etc etc

In hindsight maybe Ed should have got the email addresses of the 659,000,000 Reds worldwide and got the message across than way, but ....
 
Woodward. It’s simple. We hardly got fleeced under Gill, Edwards and as far as I can remember, even Kenyon. Him and Judge are just shit at virtually everything.
 
Class of 63 said:
Feck me sideways, it was at a shareholders meeting, the way some go on you'd think Ed had hijacked the SkySports studio and was waving wads of cash around Harry Enfield style. At the time were you as a United fan not reassured to hear that? We were in turmoil, your average Red was lapping up every single negative comment from the press who seemed to take great pleasure in our situation at the time after near two years domination, the club hasn't the finances to sign the players needed to halt the slide, the stadium is failing to pieces etc etc

In hindsight maybe Ed should have got the email addresses of the 659,000,000 Reds worldwide and got the message across than way, but ....
Click to expand...
Was it feck a shareholders meeting. It was an MUTV interview on our pre-season tour where 90% of the conservation was how we can buy who the hell we want whenever we want. I remember the reaction on here was as though they’d brought Christmas forward 5 months. He’s an absolute moron for doing that interview.
 
clarkydaz said:
This is the one i remember. He has learned not to speak in public anymore thankfully
Click to expand...
he made famous this gem also:

“If I answer that just very simply and candidly, playing performance doesn’t really have a meaningful impact on what we can do on the commercial size of the business.” - Ed Woodward

Probably some truth to it sadly so.. for a while
 
Mercurial said:
he made famous this gem also:

“If I answer that just very simply and candidly, playing performance doesn’t really have a meaningful impact on what we can do on the commercial size of the business.” - Ed Woodward

Probably some truth to it sadly so.. for a while
Click to expand...

He HAS to make comments like that when he is addressing the shareholders. They care about the money and commercial aspect. As the CEO he has to ensure them that he is making money for them. And that even though football results were subpar, it wouldn't affect the commercial side.

You don't hear quotes like this from other teams, because Manchester United is the ONLY team in the Premier League that's on a publicly traded stock market. They have to make public statements about what effects their earning potential and thus the market price.

Every other club has the same discussions and statements, but in internal reports.
 
Most obvious - We have useless negotiating team who cant seal any kind of deals. We never seem to start from a position of strength. Our biggest negotiating tactic seems to be to target a 30-40M player and bid for 60M, thus blowing away all competition. This makes us a very costly team, but just above average on quality.

Our negotiation seems to be starting too late. Many clubs are just waiting for transfer window to open to have the final discussions and complete signing. But seems our negotiations seem to start in summer, which is too late. This drives up the overall price as we start looking desperate.

Media scrutiny - Being a big club means lot of media attention. Every media outlet reports our wages at highest possible level as well as report our signings only with all kinds of add-ons. In the long run, it creates a perception that we have a huge stash of money which we will throw at any deal.

And one more reason is recent form. When we are top dogs, we have players forcing their clubs to sell to come to us. Now, not so much. There are so many rich alternatives who seem to be getting similar results. So everyone is going to play hardball.
 
Falcow said:
We need to send out a signal or two that we will walk away if price is to high. That is a silver lining fron the Sancho saga.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, Sancho is the wrong player to walk away from and use as an example. It will come back to bite us for many years.

The “walk away” example should have been Alexis Sanchez.
 
Offside said:
Was it feck a shareholders meeting. It was an MUTV interview on our pre-season tour where 90% of the conservation was how we can buy who the hell we want whenever we want. I remember the reaction on here was as though they’d brought Christmas forward 5 months. He’s an absolute moron for doing that interview.
Click to expand...

The MUTV interview(didn't see it)might have been a follow up after the cat was already out of the bag, but the original was at a shareholders meeting reassuring current and potential investors that the club despite the rumours was in rude health, christ I can still see him stood on the stage saying it.
 
Matriac said:
He HAS to make comments like that when he is addressing the shareholders. They care about the money and commercial aspect. As the CEO he has to ensure them that he is making money for them. And that even though football results were subpar, it wouldn't affect the commercial side.

You don't hear quotes like this from other teams, because Manchester United is the ONLY team in the Premier League that's on a publicly traded stock market. They have to make public statements about what effects their earning potential and thus the market price.

Every other club has the same discussions and statements, but in internal reports.
Click to expand...
Completely understandable and pragmatic, but lacks long term viability in some ways making it a bit (a lot?) cynical. Sooner of later the tap will loose its power bit by bit. Or a more likely scenario the fantastic head start given by our long heritage and legacy will go to waste making competition more and more successful in closing the gap and competing for better players. Our position of superiority will erode even more, but what does a bunch of billionaire heirs care that are eyeing a pay day exit. Their dad didn't even once visit the club he acquired wich says some things about his ideas.
 
We're actively trying to tackle this issue this window, you can't get fleeced if you don't buy anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.