It's been revealed since Ed left that the business model was / probably still is to keep renewing players' contracts - and giving them huge money - because it adds to the overall value of the club and the value of the player. So if you give shite like Jones 10m a year for 5 years, that adds 50m value to the club and himself. The Athletic and Guardian have both talked about it. Worth a read. Also Ed did a podcast with a financial expert that's worth a listen.
Unrealistic summer transfer wankfest III
-
- Legend
- Posts: 9900
- Joined: 10 years ago
- JoelfuckingGlazer
- Legend
- Posts: 4026
- Joined: 10 years ago
Which means more 'capital' for the Glazers to borrow against.Sid wrote: ↑1 year agoIt's been revealed since Ed left that the business model was / probably still is to keep renewing players' contracts - and giving them huge money - because it adds to the overall value of the club and the value of the player. So if you give shite like Jones 10m a year for 5 years, that adds 50m value to the club and himself. The Athletic and Guardian have both talked about it. Worth a read. Also Ed did a podcast with a financial expert that's worth a listen.
- JoelfuckingGlazer
- Legend
- Posts: 4026
- Joined: 10 years ago
We’re haggling over 10m. For our new Managers Priority number 1 signing. In our most depleted position. When we’re at our lower ebb for decades. In need of a massive squad overhaul. Days after our owners took a similar amount our in dividends.
Cancerous fucking leeches.
Cancerous fucking leeches.
That's ok. Your next complaint will be that we overpaid for him, which is a common issue for United anyway.JoelfuckingGlazer wrote: ↑1 year ago We’re haggling over 10m. For our new Managers Priority number 1 signing. In our most depleted position. When we’re at our lower ebb for decades. In need of a massive squad overhaul. Days after our owners took a similar amount our in dividends.
Cancerous fucking leeches.
The problem is we've not moved on to other targets.
We shouldn't pay anything above 50m.
- JoelfuckingGlazer
- Legend
- Posts: 4026
- Joined: 10 years ago
You're right. I mean he's good, but he's no Fellaini.dozer wrote: ↑1 year agoThat's ok. Your next complaint will be that we overpaid for him, which is a common issue for United anyway.JoelfuckingGlazer wrote: ↑1 year ago We’re haggling over 10m. For our new Managers Priority number 1 signing. In our most depleted position. When we’re at our lower ebb for decades. In need of a massive squad overhaul. Days after our owners took a similar amount our in dividends.
Cancerous fucking leeches.
The problem is we've not moved on to other targets.
We shouldn't pay anything above 50m.
I'm struggling a bit with this Joel - how does it fit with the earlier comment that having players, even crap ones, on the books "... means more 'capital' for the Glazers to borrow against." Seems to me they don't even understand their own business model, otherwise they would be happy to pay what it takes...??JoelfuckingGlazer wrote: ↑1 year ago We’re haggling over 10m. For our new Managers Priority number 1 signing. In our most depleted position. When we’re at our lower ebb for decades. In need of a massive squad overhaul. Days after our owners took a similar amount our in dividends.
Cancerous fucking leeches.
Maybe it’s the kind of accounting you do when you manage the club as an asset rather than as a business. If you ran it as a business, you would focus on having players that got results. But it sort of makes sense that Woodward and the Glazers just treat the players as assets. Of course eventually the gulf between United’s valuation of its players and the market’s valuation of them became too wide.