Unrealistic summer transfer wankfest III

Manchester United chat
User avatar
dozer
Legend
Posts: 5788
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

FuB wrote:
1 month ago
dozer wrote:
1 month ago
FuB wrote:
1 month ago
dozer wrote:
1 month ago
But these are internal matters. I only care about what's spent on transfers and wages.
United have outspent everyone bar City post Fergie. Perhaps Chelsea would have caught up this season.
Idk about other spends like upgrading club facilities but I don't recall hearing complaints about that either.
If the money was spent well and we were winning titles like City then I woudn't care about the dividends.
But since the lateral hires have been crap, I'm pissed at the club; again the dividends here don't matter. I"d still be pissed if nothing was taken out.
You just love to be contrary, don't you?

These are all "internal matters" that have been dumped on the club by parasites.

The original buyout of United was 790m... they've spent more on just the financing and still haven't actually finished properly BUYING the club... yet they're still taking a slice of something that still doesn't wholly belong to them.
Point is so far they haven't held back on throwing money at transfers, wages and perhaps other areas of improvement at the club. The other financial matters I don't understand enough. How is it impacting the club? Less money on transfers? Don't think so.
Once upon a time, we'd just go out and pay the money for a player we needed. In recent (-ish because it's become a thing of the past) memory, we paid a record transfer for Rio without quibbling, Ferguson went round to Keane's house on a saturday and signed him (another record) from under Blackburn and Dalglish's noses and when Newcastle put in a bid for Rooney, we just went and outbid them... immediately. When the players raved to Ferguson about how good Ronaldo was, they just bought him more or less then and there. No quibbling over prices. Not like stalling over dogshit like Fellaini and then paying MORE than they originally needed to, or trying to play hardball for Bruno and then having to stump up the same amount of cash 5 months later in a desperate bid to save the season.

Once upon a time, we'd not still be talking about Sancho because they'd have just paid the fucking money and he'd be in the starting line up on saturday.

You mentioned earlier about "improving club facilities"... Try this google search: https://www.google.com/search?q=old+tra ... +disrepair

In the end, mate, the graphic posted by Sid shows that, whilst other clubs are receiving a net cash injection, the Glazers are using the club as a cash cow. Not only are they STILL using it (15 years later) to fund their heavily leveraged purchase, they're all taking out a tidy sum for pocket money.
Once upon a time mate, we spent way less per season than what we've been doing post Fergie.
We've been spending shitloads of money on shit players.
Spending money hasn't been the issue, so try again.
User avatar
jason_uk
First Teamer
Posts: 413
Joined: 6 years ago

1 month ago

Dozer - "Spending money hasn't been the issue, so try again."

Ok, disregard that recently they have spent some money, and they are still not making any improvements to the squad, the structure of the management, or the stadium.
Woodward continues to fumble around on transfers, and it takes the club 2 months to get a single deal done (compared to other clubs who can work on, and complete multiple deals synchronously.

So its clear that the Glazers as the ones in charge are responsible for this. Its also clear that for the Glazers, 4th place CL is enough, and that is ultimately their end goal, if they knew Utd would come 4th for the next 20 years, they couldnt give a shit about winning trophies.

Now back to the money, they bought the club 14 years ago, for 800million debt. Earlier this year the debt sat at around 400million. Great, so maybe in another 14 years they have paid of the debt(and can pass the cash cow onto the next generation of Glazers to milk for another 40 years).

In the mean time, we continue to haemorrhage money to pay of debt that could be used to sort the stadium, improve carrington, and improve the squad.

Conservative estimates put the cost of the glazers on united at 1 billion, you are happy with how much money they have spent, then how happy would you be if we have spent another 100 million every season for the past 10 years on top of what they have been spending. ( 100 million 10 years ago is fuck off money, go out and buy the best player in the world every fucking season)

Move that spending to an ownership who had some kind of aspiration of winning titles, implemented a proper structure to efficiently run a team to win, and not to generate profits, and I think you would see a different story at United.

Also in the current climate, without the Glazers, United would be in one of the strongest positions to ride it out as cash rich debt free club, as it is, every game is losing the Glazers money, which will get in the way of their future debt repayments, and if going to the be reason we are unlikely to spend any more money this summer.

If you can't see how none of this adds up to the glazers not being bad for United, then I don't know, not much more can be said.
fat maradona
Star Man
Posts: 676
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

I could live with the Glazer ownership if they took the football side of the club more seriously. They bought a sporting powerhouse, one of the biggest names in world sport, recognised from here to Timbuktu. Destitute kids in Calcutta wear old United shirts ffs. What the Glazers have forgotten is that it'll be the footballing success which drives their bank balance, not the big sponsorship deals signed off the back of Fergie's success. Liverpool and City turned their shit around in less than 4 years. It'll take United 4 more years to realise that the fat banker isn't a football man.

Anyway, better get back on topic before FuB tells me off......apparently Ole has told Sancho not to worry because a deal is close to being done. I'm going to beat an old tune here but Sancho is NOT what we need right now. We need the Sancho money spending on Upamecano (or similar), a Rice/Thiago (or similar) and a RB/LB. My fear is that fans are delirious for Sancho but he isn't going to be the Messiah. He has looked pretty average in the England side and like Dozer has said over and over again, most Bundesliga players look over hyped. Sancho at £60m is worth risking but to put the house on him is a bit of madness. I hope I'm proved wrong but I remember thinking we would return to the top when we signed Di Maria, and again when we signed Pogba.
fat maradona
Star Man
Posts: 676
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

We can forget about Thiago, Romano is reporting that Liverpool have agreed to pay the €30m and personal terms to be agreed in the next few hours. Ok, he's injury prone and 29 and from the Bundesliga but he is a great player and makes Liverpool even stronger. Surely we should be looking at bargains like Thiago in this current financial climate.

Reguilon signed up for Spurs yesterday and Bale is very close.

Even Wolves have strengthened better than we have ffs.
User avatar
FuB
Legend
Posts: 6123
Joined: 4 years ago
Location: Littlewoods Data Entry Department

1 month ago

fat maradona wrote:
1 month ago
I could live with the Glazer ownership if they took the football side of the club more seriously. They bought a sporting powerhouse, one of the biggest names in world sport, recognised from here to Timbuktu. Destitute kids in Calcutta wear old United shirts ffs. What the Glazers have forgotten is that it'll be the footballing success which drives their bank balance, not the big sponsorship deals signed off the back of Fergie's success. Liverpool and City turned their shit around in less than 4 years. It'll take United 4 more years to realise that the fat banker isn't a football man.

Anyway, better get back on topic before FuB tells me off......apparently Ole has told Sancho not to worry because a deal is close to being done. I'm going to beat an old tune here but Sancho is NOT what we need right now. We need the Sancho money spending on Upamecano (or similar), a Rice/Thiago (or similar) and a RB/LB. My fear is that fans are delirious for Sancho but he isn't going to be the Messiah. He has looked pretty average in the England side and like Dozer has said over and over again, most Bundesliga players look over hyped. Sancho at £60m is worth risking but to put the house on him is a bit of madness. I hope I'm proved wrong but I remember thinking we would return to the top when we signed Di Maria, and again when we signed Pogba.
ah bless

Since talking about finances available for transfers is on topic it seems a good time to point out that those sponsorship deals you mention have brought in MORE money than has been spent over the duration of the deals. Just the Chevrolet deal itself was 450m over 7 years and we've spent about 550m over that term. The 750m Adidas contract covered the larger part of that period too.

The fact of the matter is that the Glazers appear more concerned to spend from a marketing point of view rather than a football point of view. As you point out, the marketing value is very much tied into success on the pitch.

I'm pretty sure a lot of the apparent freeze in spending right now is because they still haven't found a new mug for the shirt sponsorship deal
I may be able to fix a forum but I can't fix a fuckwit
User avatar
Edfuckingwoodward
Legend
Posts: 5593
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

fat maradona wrote:
1 month ago
We can forget about Thiago, Romano is reporting that Liverpool have agreed to pay the €30m and personal terms to be agreed in the next few hours. Ok, he's injury prone and 29 and from the Bundesliga but he is a great player and makes Liverpool even stronger. Surely we should be looking at bargains like Thiago in this current financial climate.

Reguilon signed up for Spurs yesterday and Bale is very close.

Even Wolves have strengthened better than we have ffs.
We're getting fuck all else, accept it. We're run by parasites who have little to no interest in winning football matches.
User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 24883
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

FuB wrote:
1 month ago
fat maradona wrote:
1 month ago
I could live with the Glazer ownership if they took the football side of the club more seriously. They bought a sporting powerhouse, one of the biggest names in world sport, recognised from here to Timbuktu. Destitute kids in Calcutta wear old United shirts ffs. What the Glazers have forgotten is that it'll be the footballing success which drives their bank balance, not the big sponsorship deals signed off the back of Fergie's success. Liverpool and City turned their shit around in less than 4 years. It'll take United 4 more years to realise that the fat banker isn't a football man.

Anyway, better get back on topic before FuB tells me off......apparently Ole has told Sancho not to worry because a deal is close to being done. I'm going to beat an old tune here but Sancho is NOT what we need right now. We need the Sancho money spending on Upamecano (or similar), a Rice/Thiago (or similar) and a RB/LB. My fear is that fans are delirious for Sancho but he isn't going to be the Messiah. He has looked pretty average in the England side and like Dozer has said over and over again, most Bundesliga players look over hyped. Sancho at £60m is worth risking but to put the house on him is a bit of madness. I hope I'm proved wrong but I remember thinking we would return to the top when we signed Di Maria, and again when we signed Pogba.
ah bless

Since talking about finances available for transfers is on topic it seems a good time to point out that those sponsorship deals you mention have brought in MORE money than has been spent over the duration of the deals. Just the Chevrolet deal itself was 450m over 7 years and we've spent about 550m over that term. The 750m Adidas contract covered the larger part of that period too.

The fact of the matter is that the Glazers appear more concerned to spend from a marketing point of view rather than a football point of view. As you point out, the marketing value is very much tied into success on the pitch.

I'm pretty sure a lot of the apparent freeze in spending right now is because they still haven't found a new mug for the shirt sponsorship deal
Yeah that wouldn't surprise me. Our 3 revenue streams are fucked. The gate is non existent, and the sponsors & broadcasters have lost billions. So that's going to impact how much money we can spend. There aren't many companies at the min willing to spend 450m or more on a shirt sponsor like Chevrolet did, not as europe is entering into lockdown again, and Johnson says britain could be 2 weeks from another national lockdown.
User avatar
dozer
Legend
Posts: 5788
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

Teden Mengi has been promoted to the first team. He looks really good (only YouTube, I know), and if we were shown a video compilation of him playing for an other club we'd probably be begging ole to sign him up.

If we're not getting a cb I'd rather we start him right away, partnering maguire rather than dealing with guaranteed failures in Bailly, Jones, Rojo, Smalling and guaranteed mediocrity in Lindelof.
User avatar
dozer
Legend
Posts: 5788
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 24883
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

Liverpool have met Bayern's asking price for Thiago according to the guardian

It was nice while it lasted
Post Reply