12 May 2020 01:15:15
Been reading this site ever since it was just the one football rumours page, though I've not posted for years. I read recently (I believe on BBC Sport) that United have by far the largest cash reserves of any Premier League club. Given that many clubs both in England and in Europe will be much worse off financially this summer that they would have been, and transfers fees are therefore expected to be much lower this summer than they would have been, could United use this as an opportunity to invest more heavily in the squad than original planned? After all, an investor with large cash reserves would possibly see this as a very opportune moment to invest, would a football club not see the same opportunity, only buying players rather than shares.

For example, if Dortmund wanted a transfer fee of €100m this summer, and United refused, but tried again next summer, and Dortmund wanted €150m, the club would look pretty stupid if they agreed a deal at that amount.

I appreciate there is a lot more to any transfer than just the transfer fee of course, but surely there would some logic to a club like United to increasing their budget this summer and simply decreasing it next summer to balance the books. We could make one or two extra signings now, which would allow us to catch up to our rivals more quickly than if we only signed two players this summer and waited until next summer to invest further, at which point those new signings could have already had a year at the club to settle in.

This is perhaps wishful thinking, or maybe the club aren't quite so stable financially as we think, but any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

{Ed002's Note - You need to look at the cash reserves offset by the increased debt.}

1.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 08:46:14
Gilly, this is a regime that let a release clause in Fellaini's contract at Everton pass. Only to eventually pay an extra (estimated) 8 million more on deadline day than they could have gotten him for a couple of weeks earlier.

Jose wanted Maguire a year before we purchased him. Probably could have gotten him for half what we eventually paid.

Sporting said X is the amount we want for Bruno. We offered peanuts. Had our head turned by Dybala and eventually "ran out of time" only for Bruno to sign a new deal. We come back in January with our tail between our legs and pay exactly what Sporting want for the player.

We rejected a deal for Darmain to leave last year, only for him to play 2 games and eventually be sold for under 2 million pounds.

We blocked a move for Rojo to move to Everton I think, because we moved the goal posts at the last minute and wanted more money. Rojo will eventually leave for relatively nothing too when we could have gotten decent money for him.

We did the same thing with Smalling. We upped the price at the last minute maybe pricing him out of a move, even though he is surplus to requirements.

Instead of letting Jones leave at the end of his contract, we gave him a new one to "protect his value". He's reportedly on roughly 120 thousand pounds a week. So instead of cutting our loses, we are now paying a player over £5 million a year to effectively do nothing. Any money we receive for him will easily be offset by our loss in wages.

Now the details in these could be wrong but even if some of them are true, if that is how we deal with incoming and outgoing transfers, then we really are amateurs.

We will not use this as an opportunity to gain on our competitors. We will use this as an opportunity to tie some average players to longer contracts and not spend what needs to be spent to challenge at the top again.

2.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 04:53:30
Thanks Ed, my mistake, I thought the debts had decreased in the last few years. Does that mean the clubs debts have increased in the same period that the club’s cash reserves have increased, and if so, why doesn’t the club use the cash reserves to reduce the debt? Tax reasons?

{Ed002's Note - The club wants to have money available.}

3.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 09:20:56
Would sancho be in the last year of his contract next summer.

{Ed002's Note - It would depend where he is playing and if he renews.}

4.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 10:57:18
so if sancho doesn't move this summer and in the current climate I'm not sure he will and he doesn't sign a new contract with BD next summer he will only have 12 month on his contract.
Mumbles
On the transfer page you say sancho is to expensive and we shouldn't go near him . above you say we won't spend what needs to be spent to challenge at the top?

5.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 12:52:15
I'd do our best to get Sancho whatever the terms may be. But it might play into our favour if he doesn't extend his contract.

Very good player.

6.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 14:50:16
great summary mumbles although you left out giving de gea £350k a week when he is on the decline and we have two top class alternatives, not to mention Sanchez (£450k per week? please correct me if I'm wrong? )

7.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 19:41:00
Jerd, if you are referring to what Mumbles said on the discussions page, he did not say any of that at all.

He said the money for Sancho is 'obscene', which it is, like most money in football and if we could do a good deal for chiesa, we should pull the trigger.

Unless I'm missing another post from Mumbles, how did you get 'you say sancho is to expensive and we shouldn't go near him' from the word 'obscene' and if we can get a good deal on Chiesa we should pull the trigger?

Looks as though you are just picking something and turning it into something else for the sake of an argument. Strange.

8.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 19:44:11
By the way, my choice would be Sancho but what I got from Mumbles was sensible, if he is too expensive for the club, why not look at an alternative?

9.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 20:54:54
Jred. Search for the thread that ed002 explained some of the finances potentially involved with Sancho. The fee Dortmund would require is over €100 million. His agent wants a huge fee too, I think it was €50 million. The wages the lad would want would be really high too. That would set a precedent to our other younger players and could potentially ruin our already out of control wage structure.

There's a difference between the club spending an incredible sum of money on Sancho, when there's a quality footballer like Chiesa available for a lot less. That's good business.

The club spends money. Sometimes naively. But the original post was about United taking advantage in the transfer market with our cash reserves. In my opinion we will not do nearly enough to bridge the gap to City and Liverpool.

As Angelred pointed out. I'd like to see our money spent on a CB, CM, RW and ST. I don't think the marquee signing of Sancho is enough and could have a dangerous knock on effect.

10.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 23:15:50
Mumbles
But its not up to you, so if the club want and can afford sancho what's your issue?
You said in your op " the club won't  spend what needs to be spent to challenge at the top again. "
And then complain about the price of sancho?
Why is chiesa good business? Because you think he is a good player?

11.) 12 May 2020
12 May 2020 23:30:24
angle
1 yes you have missed a post
2 obviously if sancho or anyone else cost more than what the club want to pay they won't buy him . Why are people struggling with that? Honest question because that just seems obvious to me
3 if thd club want sancho, and can do a deal what's people problems, people complain we won't spend and then complain if we do.

12.) 13 May 2020
13 May 2020 01:29:45
I agree with jred that if the club can't afford to buy him they won't.
My only issue with that is if buying sancho at a very high cost could mean that other issues and positions have to be put on long finger.

13.) 13 May 2020
13 May 2020 03:49:11
Jred, you have a point when you put what I said in a few separate threads without any context.

I will 100% stand behind my point that we are a reactive club in the transfer market, we are not proactive. The club has shown itself to have no ambition to be champions when they failed to back a manager that finished 2nd.

My point about the club's failure and desire to bridge the gap at the top and me being against the signing of Sancho are not mutually exclusive.

Up until last year we had the highest wage bill in football. Our squad that was struggling to finish 6th was the highest paid squad in football. We consistently get tunnel vision in regards to players and end up paying over the odds.

We have started to trim the squad and try to get rid of some high earners. They have done well recruiting (although Maguire fee was in My opinion way too much) with Maguire, Bruno, James and AWB.

We need to change our perception of a team that can have their pants pulled down in terms of transfer fees.

Liverpool's recruitment, mixed with a top manager and the worst deal in football history with coutinho, helped them fund a squad that is winning major honours.

The club can afford Mbappe but we shouldn't sign him. Nor should we spend under €200 million on a package for Sancho when that money could be spent getting 2 or 3 players.

Making a 20 year old one of your highest earners as well is not something I think the team needs. We have a talented young squad who would eventually want to be on par with him.

I get your point, if the club has the money and are willing to spend it, it's better than it being in a bank account. But as Ken said, not if it takes away from the other areas of the team that needs players too.

14.) 13 May 2020
13 May 2020 09:01:56
Mumbles
But its not up to you, maybe the club feel that me only need 2 or 3 players.
We don't need a gk
I think back 4 is sorted . I would personally like another cb but to be honest its probably not a priority.
Midfield, it looks like grealish is on the cards . Again sorted
It looks like the club would want an attacking player . If that's sancho great imo .
If the club can't afford a player they won't buy him .
If a club want 5 players they won't spend all there money on 1 .
Also if we can sign mbappe ( which we won't) the club should buy him he is the outstanding talent of his generation imo.

15.) 14 May 2020
14 May 2020 18:16:55
I would want united to sign mbappe no doubt about it.
I think like jred says he is one of the few that look like they will possibly be one of the players of his generation.