Ferguson denies financial restrictions

Sir Alex Ferguson has again denied the Glazer family is restricting his spending in the transfer market, despite running a £33.45 million negative transfer balance over the past two years. Ferguson, who has spent £10 million net this summer, says Manchester United will concentrate on younger players until the market changes.

The Scot brought Javier Hernández, Chris Smalling and Bebé to the club this summer while offloading Zoran Tosic and Ben Foster. But Ferguson has consistently denied United’s spending is limited despite the club’s £720 million debt.

“We have no financial restrictions,” claimed the United manager today.

“If I hadn’t been confident maybe we would have done something. But there was only one player I would have brought here and that move was sealed off quite early by the club he went to.

“The best thing we can do until the market becomes more sensible is produce or buy young players and develop them in the club.

“By doing that we are easily securing the next eight years at Manchester United.”

Ferguson’s comments echo those made previously in which the 69-year-old manager has claimed there is “no value in the market”. The Scot has also repeated the mantra that United is concentrating on youth and denied that supporters are keen for a marquee signing to join the club.

David Villa is presumably the player whom Ferguson was interested in bringing to Old Trafford, although the Spaniard joined Barcelona in a £34 million deal. Ferguson earlier claimed United’s interest in the striker.

“We are not at the point where we have to go overboard to get the best player in the world,” he added.

“There are enough really top players in the club at the moment.

“There may be a time in the next couple of years where we have to stretch ourselves, particularly when Ryan, Paul and Gary retire.

“Then, it is a possibility we would need to get really top players in to galvanise the younger ones coming through.

“But at the moment we have the experience. We have players who have been through the whole gamut of emotions at this club and know how to deal with it.”

Sharing is caring

Comments

  1. Aj says

    I saw that press conference earlier today on SSN. Sir Alez Ferguson is correct as there has been no signs of restrictions of any kind at the club, normal transfer spending does not mean restrictions either as we have rarely spent the big bucks on players. I beieve he was on about David Villa as he confirmed the other month we throught of bidding for him (unlike J.Cole, Sneijder, Van Der Vaart or Ozil who we had no interest in and didn’t need). we will see in the next financial report, alright Ed.

    • Neil Weston says

      Aj, I don’t know that it was Villa. I heard that there were two players that Fergie really wanted, Rodwell and a keeper but I don’t know which one.

      I agree that there’s no restriction on transfer fees and there have been a lot of pay rises recently, for instance Vidic, Fletcher and soon Rooney. I think this money thing is way overblown.

  2. Neil Weston says

    I think Fergie’s right. There’s no point in buying expensive players who would just be competing with the existing squad players. If you are going to spend £50m it must be on a player who will take us to the next level. Outside of Messi and Ronaldo, who else would do that? There’s no point in spending huge sums on marginally improving the squad and blocking a youngster’s path to the first team. So I think he’s absolutely right.

    Depending on when Scholes retires I think Fergie will have to spend big. Same with Edwin but we have cover for Neville and Giggs and Owen, so they can all retire when the want.

  3. Aj says

    I have heard rumours on keepers, but Fergie did confirm himself that he throught of buying Villa. the keeper issue I think is already solved with Kuszczak as he is a fantastic keeper who deserves an opportunity. Scholes and Giggs can nòt be replaced as they are that good, we can only put new faces in that area and I think Gibbo and Cleverley will do alright aswell some of the youth players like Tunnicliffe, Pogba, Norwood, Drinkwater, James, Corry, Gill and Ajose. we have some brilliant young players.

  4. says

    Ferguson called out Villa earlier in the season. Next financials will come in October but they’ll only show the year to 31 June so will not show how much has been removed by the Glazers after the year end. The key financials will be Q1 2010/11. For me, having looked at the books, there is no doubt spending is restricted in absolute terms.

    But AJ to say we’ve rarely spent big is just nonsense – Rio, Rooney, Veron, Berbatov – all around 30m. In fact he’s broken the British transfer record five times. United’s a big club that (once had) lots of money.. of course the club spent big.

  5. Aj says

    The possibilty of buying a big name or 2 in the coming years isn’t a bad idea, we have a host of big stars already and some great kids but another star in the future woul be good, me personally I would like us to sign Alexis Sanchez. Wazza, Chicharito, Kiko, Welbeck and Diouf are our forwards of the future and I like that frontline and Berba haves a good few years in him. the midfield and defence are in good shape and like I said, KK deserves his chance. we are good for the future.

  6. Aj says

    wè have spent big Ed you right, no one saying we hasnt but we have spent small aswell on a lot of players. we have signed most players on low normal fee’s and only a few on large fee’s, we have brokèn a few brìtish records, we have spent big a few times, but more often than not we have spent smaller fee’s. we do still have lots of money, we just operate in a different way nowadays and we aim to not pay over-inflated sums (like Barca, Madrid and the bitters) on players. we will see more in a months time

    • says

      Aj – and you don’t think all the other clubs saw United as inflating the market when we spent on Veron, Rio, Roo and so on? Of course they did. You’ve bought into the spin so much even when the figures are presented in black and white you deny it. Remember when I showed you the spending before and after Glazer last time out – even in black and white you can’t accept the facts. I really find this amazing. United was a rich club that used its financial muscle. Nothing wrong with that, don’t be embarrassed about it. Now we’re making excuses.

  7. Aj says

    you are aware Ed that I havè not disagreed with you feller, your post makes it out that I have disagreed with every word you come up with when all I have done is argue that we hasn’t just flat out spnt big. When we bought Wazza, Chelsea was a year into stupid russian billionaire spending as they over-inflated the market and Everton had demanded £50m. we bought Rio and Veron at such high prices probably because of the likes of R.Madrid inflating the market thus causing clubs to demand higher fee’s.

  8. Aj says

    Fergie’s spending total is around £450m in 24 yrs. our highest priced player is Berbatov at £30.75m in 2008, our highest sold is Ronaldo at a world record £80m in 2009. we have broken the british transfer record a couple times on the likes of Pally, Cole and Rio. BUT we have only spent over 20m on 4 times (Veron28.1m, Rio 29.1m, Rooney27m, Berba 30.75m), Fergie has only spent large chunks of cash in only a few markets. we have had Liverpool, Blackurn, Newcastle, Leeds, Chelsea and City out spend us.

  9. Aj says

    my calculations of every season spending since Fergie came in 1986. 0, 1.9m, 3.35m, 7.75m, 650k, 3.2m, 2.3m, 3.75m, 7.2m, 750k, 7.8, 10.5m, 27.75m, 10m, 7.8m, 60.1m, 30.6m, 37.7m, 34.4m, 19.5m, 18.6m, 68.16m* includes apparent 5.2m for Da Sillva’s aldo I am unsure when we paid for them, 39m, 20m, 23.4m…give or take. Chelsea and City has spent a fortune inthe last decade alone of over £500m, City has spent 400m in last 3 yrs. Liverpool has outspent us including Fergie’s era (cant remember figure).

    • says

      AJ – you seem to take it as some personal slight when I simply state the facts that United has spent large sums of money on players over the years. Stop being tribal and start being a bit smarter about what United has spent in the past. You’re listing a bunch of numbers with no context.

      United’s spending is undeniable and it’s the economics of football – there’s no way round it. The teams that spend on players – and more importantly on wages – win trophies. It’s been that way since the abolition of the maximum wage.

      Now Sir Alex’ brilliance is a massive contributory factor of course, but the facts are indisputable, Ferguson has been given large sums of money in the past and been happy to spend it. Now, the policy has changed to a focus on ‘youth’ – read cheap. You seem to disagree with this bit but since you can’t accept it I’m going to print it out again for you.

      05/06 – £1,000,000 net spend
      06/07 – £4,100,000 net spend
      07/08 – £26,550,000 net spend (inc Tevez loan fee)
      08/09 – £33,750,000 net spend
      09/10 – (-) £64,500,000 net spend
      10/11 – £10,350,000 net spend

      TOTAL – £11,250,000 net spend
      Average = £1,875,000 per season net spend

      And during the corresponding period under the PLC board pre-Glazer:

      04/05 – £21,350,000 net spend
      03/04 – £13,350,000 net spend
      02/03 – £27,050,000 net spend
      01/02 – £29,300,000 net spend
      00/01 – (-) £8,300,000 net spend
      99/00 – £16,050,000 net spend

      TOTAL – £98,800,000 net spend
      Average = £16,466,666 per season net spend

      That’s generous on the spending side because the Berbatov transfer fee was wrapped up in the refinancing that summer – effectively additional debt. This isn’t about City, Liverpool, Chelsea or whomever else comes along. It’s about United’s changing transfer policy which is born of the £720m debt cloud that hangs over the club.

  10. Sidsidney says

    “But there was only one player I would have brought here and that move was sealed off quite early by the club he went to.”

    Don’t tell me that player is Ozil because the cunt was chatting about a move to Chelsea or United long before Madrid got involved

    • says

      I believe he’s talking about Villa who he already mentioned at a press conference earlier this summer. It’s a smokescreen of course, like when United ‘bid’ for Benzema last season.

  11. Aj says

    that’s fair Ed, aldo we all know the thing you did and the thing I did are basically along the same line’s as you put together a net spend list while’s I listed the actual amount’s Fergie spent over his 24yr spell as our manager. you claim I cant handle something but I have no idea how you come up with that as I am fully aware of our spending amounts and the net spending aswell and I am fully aware of the money Fergie has spent. Sir Alex Ferguson has earned success through hard work and determination.

  12. says

    Unregistered User said:
    that’s fair Ed, aldo we all know the thing you did and the thing I did are basically along the same line’s as you put together a net spend list while’s I listed the actual amount’s Fergie spent over his 24yr spell as our manager. you claim I cant handle something but I have no idea how you come up with that as I am fully aware of our spending amounts and the net spending aswell and I am fully aware of the money Fergie has spent. Sir Alex Ferguson has earned success through hard work and determination.

    And being able to buy players regardless of cost when needed.

  13. danniitronix says

    sidney said:
    “But there was only one player I would have brought here and that move was sealed off quite early by the club he went to.”

    Don’t tell me that player is Ozil because the cunt was chatting about a move to Chelsea or United long before Madrid got involved

    difference is that when RM and Chavs started talking about Bebe, we bought another striker rather than going all guns for Ozil. fergus is mad, he’s collecting strikers.

    personally I don’t think there is a restriction on cash in the way Ed makes it sound. it’s yet another thread along the same lines as before. there is an LBO, so less freee cash. yes, agreed – deal with it.

    the restriction is caused BY Fergus (as he doesn’t want to spend) and the fact that there is less free cash.

    the bottom line is that would Fergus stay if he had no cash to spend. fuck off would he. he has cash maybe not as much as he would like but he has cash to spend on his select targets which he admitted he could not get

    fair enought I don’t think fergus shld be criticised for taking a stance on what he sees as value but Taggard shld be criticised for perpetuating this myth that youth is the way forward when he simply not using the youth at his disposal

Leave a Reply

Login with your Social ID

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *