Manchester United Banter Archive August 03 2012

03 Aug 2012 23:45:16
I think Van Persie would be a great signing. We all want a big name this summer and that would be a massive statement of intent. He would link well with Rooney and would have great supply from Kagawa, Valencia, Young. And we all know he can score and create goals. Take cost out of the equation and this deal would be great fo the team and the fans. Plus he is worth big money. (Banter please Eds). Gilly

03 Aug 2012 23:03:22
Just heard that united have made a deal to sign lewandowski for 2013/14 season this enables him to still play for dortmund this coming season, before joining us next summer, Carnt honestly see RVP signing for us now if fergie has pulled this one off! which would make sence why united seem to be more interested in making lucus this seasons big capture!

Very much doubt it. Why would we commit to a transfer fee which will no doubt have been inflated by the player having 1 good season? With Kagawa gone and on the chance that Gotze struggles with injuries again next season he'll struggle to get above fifteen goals.

There's also the fact that Welbeck and Chico will have another years worth of experience come next season (and I see them both getting a lot of game time if we're not bringing in another striker).

We may still bring in another striker - but it will not be Lewandowski (now or next year). The club has never expressed any firm interest in him and the only reason he's being linked with us is because he happened to have a good game when SAF was scouting Kagawa at the German Cup final and the Polish manager making a bunch of ridiculous statements (which were then taken out of context / poorly translated by the press).

T0MB0Z

03 Aug 2012 21:56:20
Just want to add something regarding the new Chevy deal. It turns out the deal is far bigger than what is being announced in the majority of the media. In fact Reuters were pretty accurate. United could end up receiving up to $559m by 2021. In the first year the club will receive $70m (£45m) and that will rise 2.1% every year. There is much more to this, but not all explained yet. I am sure it will become more public knowledge pretty soon.

Ed002, do you have any info on this deal? Or would you prefer not to share it right now as it's undisclosed? Thanks.

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - I shared Syd.}

Thanks Ed. Can I ask, if this deal is this high how big will the new Nike deal be worth? It's going to be huge surely?

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - I am not sure when the Nike deal is up for renewal and have no idea how much it will be for. One thought is that perhaps the Nike deal will be partnership based rather than sponsorship based - that is how they work with Barcelona. I would not want t be guessing at a figure.}

It's up for renewal in 2015, but I guess discussions will take place maybe next year? I think it's going to shatter France's deal. Then the extra TV money (max 34m extra) will be coming in in a couple years. Then there's the streaming money.

Surely we are perfect for a buyer? Someone like Richard Branson could benefit massively from buying a club like United?

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - If it is not up for three years then I would not get worked up over it just yet.}

But to be fair Ed the AON deal isn't up until 2014 and we have negotiated a deal Chevrolet. With Nike being the current sponsor it could be negotiated anytime between now and next year surely? The reason I am saying this is because the Glazers seem to be trying their best to expand the sponsorships now. Perhaps for a sale or a full IPO? Just a thought.

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - I cannot possibly say if Manchester United would want to start to negotiate something which does not need renewing for three years. I would think that they may wish to look at other options. Sale/full IPO just seems that you are clutching at straws Syd. Everyone here has managed to weave all of the financial matters in to a complete mess quite frankly - it is really embarrassing how bad most of it reads.}

Ed002, by no means do I think United are in financial trouble. I actually think the finances are very healthy. I just get the feeling the Glazers are very busy at the minute and I am wondering why.

Ed, can I ask your opinion on how you believe the Glazers will pay back the bonds by 2017? Thanks.

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - The bonds have an end date at which they mature and options are presented to cash in or to reinvest, perhaps in another bond scheme. If the owners wish to pay them back early provision will likely exist and I assume they will need to pay a bonus of some type. The plan has always been to sell part of the club via a floatation to do this. The total sale would likely be in the order of 35%. The bulk of buys will likely be institutional investors.}

Thanks Ed, I do appreciate your input. You say 35% will likely be floated, if they were to succeed with this current IPO, does that mean they are likely to float more in the future? Would it need to be at that price or could it be lower? Thanks again.

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - I am getting a feeling of deja vu Syd. The purpose of what they are looking to do know is to get a confirmed valuation such that when they go for the rest they have a target figure.}

Thanks Ed I get it now. The 10% is sort of them dipping their feet in the water to see what interest they can drum up. One more thing if you do not mind, the institutional investors will want dividends surely? So would the next IPO be of similar value, but would offer dividends?

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - Institutional investors will forego dividends for growth. I would imagine there would ne no dividends.}

That would be a massive accomplishment for the Glazers to raise perhaps £700m via IPO's and not have to pay dividends. Do you in your opinion believe it's achievable? Last question I promise ;)

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - The dividend issue is irrelevant. Regardless of how the money is apportioned in terms of dividends or simply in shares, it remains the case that 35% of the busienss will be owned by someone else. Personally I don't think they will raise that much if they try and do it over the next 9 months.}

Thank you for your time Ed.

Sydney!

03 Aug 2012 22:32:49
I'm sorry to be a BIG cynic here but we're not going to get anyone else.

All this speculation is merely to appease us as fans and take the sting out of this share flotation fiasco.

There is no way Van Persie is going to join as we won't pay the £20mil plus for him and his £220k wages, he'll end up at Man City like Nasri did last Summer when we were "favourites" to sign him and we've been priced out of Lucas Moura simple as.

Powell & Kagawa... I can guarantee it will be our only signings, shame on the board and shame on SAF for putting up with such bull sh*t.

At least have the decency to post a name, How do you know this?

-JakeW

03 Aug 2012 20:46:47
You know, I'm getting really sick of the likes of WYTHENSHAWE RED and other United fans on here or on Twitter calling each other Glazer supporters or 'fans'. Monk made a point that boycotting the club would do more harm than good, and quite frankly he's right in that respect. The Glazers are greedy b******s and we all would be better off if they f**ked off back to America, but at the moment all we're doing with our arguing is creating tension between the fans. Even Sir Alex Ferguson, who built Manchester United into the force we have become has been questioned.

We support Manchester United Football Club first and foremost, regardless of the Glazers. By all means, discuss the IPO, discuss the future of the club, discuss the finances, but remember that we are all United and we all want the same, and that is for this club to be as successful as it possibly can be.

G.A.G.U.S

Exactly mate. People would do well to remember that, at the end of the day, we are all on the same side.

TK-Red

Yeah but the way things are looking the debt isn't decreasing by much. And with the way the market is, we're just goin to be out priced for our targets to strengthen in certain areas. Can't rely on youth all the time.

And not saying boycott cause that's ridicules but the glazers need to made aware of what we think and what we want.

I'm going to bring back my green and gold

MUFC1990

MUFC1990, I think the Glazers are aware of what we think and what we want but i don't think they care what we think/want.

Boycotting would only harm the club. I just think we need to ignore them and move on as best as possible. Ultimately they need us to be successful inorder to make them as profitable as possible.
Some people think they would be happy as long as we stay in the top four. I disagree, a very large chunk of our revenue comes from sponsorship deals and it would prove much harder getting the best sponsorship deals if were not winning trophies. So ultimately the Glazers will have to spend money on transfers and wages(admittedly it will be money the club has made not their own money they put in) in order to win trophies. They have admitted as much and have arranged to set aside money for transfers which they have done to a certain extent. Is it enough to be competitive with the top end of the market? Probably not not as the top end is dominated by teams either backed by sugar daddies or Real Madrid who carry the spainish royal seal meaning the banks aren't allowed to refuse to lend them money. So we can't compete with these clubs as even if we were able to match the fees being paid no club with aims to be selfsuficent would be able to commit to paying those kind of wages. For example if Man City trebled their revenue they still would fall short of being able to pay the playing staff wage bill and that doesn't even take into account all the other running costs of the club. So we just couldn't afford to have a wage strutcher like that of City.

This is probably where Sir Alex struggles to find value in the market, as with modern agents the wages have just gone silly. Take Moura for example he is a 19yo kid coming from a whole different continent let alone country, he could struggle to adapt and he has proven nothing in the world of football yet if we were to sign him he'd still expect to earn at least 70k a week which isn't that far from what Valencia Vidic and Evra are on. All of which have given great service to the club and are proven world class players(Even though Evra has been poor recently he was considered one of the best LB's in the world). So what gives this kid the nerve to ask for such pay? That is where there is a lack of value in the market.

Shappy

MUFC1990

I disagree, the debt is going down steadily and is almost half of what is was 7 years ago. Also we do not get out priced there is a difference in being able to spend the money and being willing to spend the money which I think is Fergie's problem and not the Glazers as he is reluctant with Agent fees and paying youngsters silly wages when they haven't earned it.

George

George

If Ronaldo came on the market now at £80m do you think the Glazers would approve the spend?

Neymar may be available ths summer, do you think we will compete? I think you know the answer to those questions

The debt is going down steadily as you put it. At what cost? Basically not being able to compete with our nearest rivals at home or in Europe. There is no repayment structure and the latest IPO plus probably another in a couple of years if feasible seems the only realistic option.

You mention not spending on wages and agents but that is life , it is what our competitors do. We face being left behind this summer if we don't have a good transfer window.

As to Shappys comment on what gives someone the nerve to ask for certain wages well simple it is what he can get elsewhere if we turn our noses up at it. I would play for nothing but top players have a choice and we get real with that or accept being 3rd or lower and an occasional cup. I saw that in the 70s and 80s and it could happen if we don't invest properly in the team

The point is we have not invested as we should because interest and fee payments have weighed us down. Now we need to see it, the clock is ticking towards the season and the close of the window and we don't have the team to compete yet.

Red Man

You would have to be a complete goober to spend £80m on Ronaldo now. But even if a 23 year old Ronaldo became available I do not believe we would spend £80m on him. But then we wouldn't have had we remained a PLC. Without debt we could afford to, but I do not believe the Glazers or the manager for that matter would spend that amount on one player.

Sydney!

03 Aug 2012 17:27:35
Eds and the rest.
Do you think utd are actually genuinely interested in players to sign. Or just to "be seen" to be interested to appease fans. Seems the kagawa signing and Powell one was wrapped up quickly. But the big names, I.e Sneijder, Moura, RVP all seem to drag on for weeks with no end result. Just wonder if the interest has intent behind it.

Sambo

Big players = big fees - and SAF will not want to pay over the odds for a player.

We clearly need a signing or 2 - so declaring interest with no intention to buy just to appease the fans seems unlikely unless we want to finish 3rd this season.

T0MB0Z

TOMBOZ

I agree mate Fergie will hardly ever pay over the odds on agents fees etc which is why we struggle in the market for top talent as all agents expect millions on top of the transfer for their back pockets.

George

Most big name players take a lot of negotiating hense why it's taking a long time. We will see some more signings.

Red Joe

03 Aug 2012 17:07:37
Not so much a rumour as so much as a statement of annoyance.....


I have just read that Must want all fans to boycott sponsors products, give up season tickets, boycot games etc etc etc all in aid of geting rid of those evil wrong dooers the Glazers.

Are they for F**king real?


Right ok we all don't like the Glazers ownership and how they have riddled us with thier debt but are seriously expecting me to deliberatley try an hurt our team?

Do they not realise that if they get p[eople doing this the Glazer can and most likely will take money away from the first team to help cover debts then they could asset strip our club.

If they really wanted to destroy our club they would have done so - By rights they could sell the naming rights to OT to raise additional fund but i belive they have not done so as a gesture to the fans.

They are not the worst owners by far - Ok they ain no arab billionaires using the club like a toy but would you really want that?

What they have done is seen a massive opportunity to make a great investment. the debt are going down and one day they will either sell at a huge profit or will have an investment for many many years to come which will provide a steady source of profit.

PLC took dividends to a similar value so funds are no different.

I used to be a member until i woke up when they backed the red knights. These guys are also businessmen who would want a return on their investment so would be no better.

In fact as there would be more people to get permission from on transfer funds it would be awful!

I'm not and never been a fan of how they took over but you cannot dispute they are turning our club into a massive profit generating machine. Our brand is the biggest in the football world and at this rate always will be.

they know they need to invest in the team otherwise risk losing profits and ultimately the brand.

Leave them to it as an attack on them is in retrospect an attack on our club.

so long as they are paying of the debts and giving funds to the team leave them be. the only thing they have done wrong is buy our club on a levy.

i bought my car on finance, most businesses take out bank loans to start up?

sorry for the massive rant just get peeved with the personic narrow mindedness of MUST sometimes.

Seriously....please think about what you are suggesting when you ask people to boycot brands - sponsorship provides profits and ultimately funds for transfers.


Monk (NOT A GLAZER MEDIA MONKEY JUST A REALLY CONCERNED FAN)

Duncan Drasdo is against this and I agree. It will just lead to the Glazers selling Rooney or whatever. It's a ridiculous idea, one that would ruin the club.

Sydney!

I agree with a lot of this, well said. I'm annoyed that they're not using 100% of the IPO money to pay off debt but the important thing is that doesn't change how much we have in the bank, ready to spend. We DO need to spend this summer, there's no mistaking that. But so long as we do invest wisely during the next month I'm not going to get myself worked up over the owners; they are here to stay after all and as you say if/when the debt is cleared we will be in a great position due to the huge increases in revenue

Let's see what happens in the transfer market first though

Gav

The analogy would only make sense if you bought your car via loan, however, the car constituted a separate legal entity that you transferred the risk of the loan to. Meaning that if you were unable to make the payments on your car, your car would be in danger of being declared bankrupt.

The club was reinvesting a far higher percentage of its profits as a plc. The Glazers re-invest as little as they think get away with. They have lied directly to supporters during the course of the flotation. If they were committed to eliminating, rather than servicing the debt, for the good of the club then they wouldn't be pocketing the lion's share of the flotation. They have placed the club in a position where they value to such an extent that they only people able to afford to buy us if they do intend to sell are sugar daddies or another leech who will buy us with debt that is transferred back to the club.

I'm not comfortable with a boycott, but I'm not going to kid myself about what the Glazers have done to the concept of supporting the club. Instead of paying money back into the club, when I go to see a game or buy a shirt I know I am lining the Glazers pockets and proving that exploiting football supporters for personal gain is a lucrative business. The more we pay, the more successful their strategy becomes, the more likely it is that any new owners will follow the same strategy.

Danny Pughnited

Bang on, finally a sane person posts something that makes sense. I dont think any united fans like the Glazers but they own us and i do think they will stay with us a long time. We need to accept this, get behind our team and help them to more titles.

Brendan

Well if you were as concerned as you say then you would be totally against the glazers.

They have put our TEAM in massive debt and have restricted us to go out and find the bargains. Time and time again we here the "no value in the market"

This is because we have lost out on so many players due to transfer funds and wages being restricted due to the lack of money available.

The whole Rooney saga was just a cover up just so we could prove we can still keep the best players and pay the highest wages.

Rooney said the club lacked ambition in the transfer market and he himself said that the club promised certain things. I.e Players?

Where are these players, kagawa and Powell.

Let's face is them 2 arnt really world beaters are they. the whole moura thing is a bit stupid why can't we just pay the money I'f it's really there?

Why is this? Because there is no money so we have to haggle an try get the player less that the valuation.

It's a joke and when the likes of Chelsea are free spending and buying plyers left right and centre it's frustrating and a little insulting as a team like us MANCHESTER UNITED. The biggest team in world football can't simply pay 40 million to get a player.

Perthetic and unless the glazers sell we're not going to compete and just slip further behind.

Yeah we did okay finishing runners up but maybe that's the start of something bad? Maybe it's downhill from here?

MONEY TALKS. NOT HISTORY.

Nasri. Hazard. SNIDJER. MODRIC.MOURA

The list goes on so MR MONK your clearly a glazer fan that doesn't see what the majority of united fans have since develop over the last 3 seasons.

poor owners with no sense of football knowledge and only care about their own pocket.

And a manager who has had the same team virtually for the past 3 seasons which I'm football terms and one back a few steps.

We were suppost to be catching barca instead our noisy neighbours have played the best football. Fluid attacking and didn't moan paying over the odds as 35 million won them the title.

WYTHENSHAWE RED

Well said, we can't not support the team. The green and gold is the most that we can do.

RedDevil19

Exactly green and gold

MUFC1990

03 Aug 2012 16:26:06
I read the latest report on the BBC webiste and it mentions having £70million cash to spend on players... I know they will not be 100 percent but all i have heard this summer is we have 70million i havent heard any other figure so maybe we actually have this and it is Fergie who is the tight arse (no direspect to him)

Where does it state this can't find any of this info on the bbc


UNITEDFORLIFE75

Ur clubs chief operating officer has just said

"We are giving guidance at the moment that the current transfer period could result in net expenditure nearer £40million," he said at an investor roadshow ahead of the club's IPO.

U have spent 21 million already, so u have 19 million or so left...not 70.

Whatever we had to spend, you have no idea how much we have spent. £12m on Kagawa up front. I bet that doesnt include the signing on fee. What about the agents fee. Same for Powell, £3m up front I think, I know that does not include angent fees or signing on fees. Plus we got money from the sale of Park, £2.5m I think. Plus we could yet sell Berbatov, probably for £6m. Gilly

No name, net expenditure means £40m plus sales. Kagawa and Powell initially cost around £14m so when you factor-in the sales of Berbatov, Park, Kiko, possible Nani etc it is far more than "just 19 million".

Sydney!

Bbc.co.uk/news/business-19100298

It is a report in the business section of the BBC

03 Aug 2012 15:05:30
A leading football finance expert claims Manchester United owners, the Glazer family, are readying a sale of the club.
David Bick, chairman of Square1 Consulting, believes the owners forthcoming IPO is simply the first stage in the sale of the club.
United’s owners, the Glazer family, will make 10% of shares available on the New York Stock Exchange next Friday and should raise at least $300 million, which would make the club’s total value over $3 billion.
Bick believes the club is overvalued, which he believes adds fuel to his assertion. (Copy and Pasted)

Personally don't see them selling for another season atleast but would love a big money owner at the club to allow is too compete at the top table in terms of transfers again.

fearny

Whoever buys us, we are a money making machine. They are bound to want money in dividends. All I want is for our club to be debt free. Then we can gain a massive profit, and spend decent money on transfers. Then we are fine because our wage bill is about 42% of turnover and our turnover is rising due to massive sponsorship deals. Gilly

Gilly

It is not the owners blocking us from going into the market... It is Fergie imo he refuses to spend on gigantic agent fees and over pay wages for youngsters that think they can demand mega money just because the club there moving to is huge when they have to earn it.

03 Aug 2012 14:46:04
Everton are in the market to sign a left back with David Moyes on his way to Denmark to watch Bryan Oviedo who we are also interested in and is only 22 favouring a move to Old Trafford......,We should also go all the way to sign him and take him away,let them remain with their old 27 year old Baines......

03 Aug 2012 14:13:50
Bryan Oviedo says he would be prepared to consider his options after admitting speculation linking him with a move to Manchester United has given him extra motivation. Any updates on this player Eds? May be a profile?

That would be scraping bottom of the barrel.

He is the next 'Hernandez' type player that we could pull out of the wood work and make a world beater. I've seen little bits of him and his attributes are the ones you need to be successful. Plus he wants to play for us which is good (not that we should sign everyone who wants to play for us).

RedDevil19

03 Aug 2012 14:10:10
Im still not over the disappointment of losing the title to City in the last minute of the season. But im really starting to get excited for next season now.

If we can keep Vidic, Cleverley, Anderson etc fit, Add Kagawa & Powell to the squad then i think we could be in for a great season.

Just wondering what people are thinking about next season? Who do you see going for the title? Champions league spots?

I think it will be 3 way battle between Chelsea, City and Ourselves for the title. Arsenal and Spurs will battle it out for fourth. Then i can see the usual lot going for the Europa spots. Newcastle, Everton, Stoke, Fulham & Liverpool. Maybe even put QPR and Aston Villa into the fighting for the Europa spots. I think Paul Lambert could be good for Villa.

Anyways, Next season is going to be very exciting. Cant wait

Dylan

Can't wait for the new season either! Looking forward to seeing some more attractive football through Kagawa/Cleverly in particular. Hoping for 1 or 2 more signings too. Fingers crossed for less injuries this season, they crippled us last year at times. I predict top 2 for us - too hard to call a winner right now

I agree with your predictions but I think Arsenal and Chelsea are both hard to predict at the moment. Chelsea have invested very heavily but almost all on the same area of the pitch!

Gav

03 Aug 2012 14:03:35
OUTS:
Matty James - 1m
Richie de Laet - 1m
Oliver Norwood - 400k
Park - 2.5m
Pogba and Fryers - 1.5m (compensation payments)
Berbatov - 5m
Nani - 25m (I would hope)

Total = 36.5m

INS:
Kagawa - 12.5m
Powell - 4m
Sean Goss - 100k
Lucas - 32m (guess)
RVP 20m (guess)

say total = 68m

NET SPEND = 31.5m

The remainder will probs go on a left back for between 8m-12m. Baines would be ideal. I, personally would like to see us sell another striker to make room for RVP if he comes and find some extra money for a true CM in the mould of Modric or perhaps a more defensively mined player like Witsel.

Dan

03 Aug 2012 13:46:23
man utd set to spend up to £40mill on transfers
therefore they would not be able to buy both van persie and moura

Unless we sell Nani?

Sydney!

03 Aug 2012 13:15:36
There's a rumour saying that the glazers are set to sell man utd comes as great news to me as they have done some pretty stupid decisions lately

Lately?

Kai

Who would you want them to sell it to? What would you expect better from a new owner?

We would either be bankrolled by a sugar daddy who chooses his own players, or have an owner with as much debt as the Glazers.

GDS

GDS
An owner who is willing to compete for the best players, who is passionate about football not ££££signs. They don't have to be a "sugar daddy" they just have to do there best to keep our great club at the top and able to compete with the best....
HERBIE {Ed002's Note - If the club is floated for a sale there will be multiple institutional owners.}

City and Chelsea not done too bad. A wealthy Arab owner will be great for united as they are passionate about football and will not put any debt on the club.

Herbie,

Do you seriously think we would could get a passionate owner who would have enough money to buy the club that doesn't just care about money??

Do you think anyone with that much money doesn't care about £££ signs?

GDS

03 Aug 2012 12:52:27
Hi Ed,
I know u'v often said that you've stated your opinion on the whole moura debate.Missed it, However I don't wanna have to draw you back so please a link on what it is would be highly appreciated, Couldn't find it on the M.U Editor thread.
Thanks.

GGMU
Jay(Nigeria). {Ed002's Note - If you search on "Moura" within the Manchester United that will give you a long list that you can (within Explorer or whatever browser) search on "Ed002" - and then you will have lots to digest. I hope that helps as there is no single link I could provide.}

03 Aug 2012 13:01:36
Lindegaard has signed a new 4 year contract with us, good news to see him keen to compete with De Gea!

-JakeW

03 Aug 2012 12:12:58
Lucas Moura's parents have said to Sao Paulo that moura's only destination is man united and have refused any other destination.

03 Aug 2012 12:56:16
Moura will definatey come to united. Fergie never admits to any transfer targets unless we have a good possibility to sign them. RVP will go to Juventus, he will want to remain the Gunners fans good books alas Henry . Other signing will be Wanyama!

03 Aug 2012 11:54:41
Suarez was the best player in the PL mate. He's off to Juve so will be no longer.

Apologies mate. I keep forgetting to 'dumb' it down, when I'm talking to Mancs. Won't happen again.

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96
---------------------
Suarez was never the best player in the Premier League. Aguero, Silva, Rooney, Toure, Drogba, Van Persie and Cisse are all better.

G.A.G.U.S

Tied for 14th on the top scorer list doesn't make you the best in the EPL. Apologies that statistics shows how mentally challenged you are.

Aguero is twice the player Suarez is and thats from a red.

1redarmy

How many goals did he score,think he spent most of his time banned.some role model he is.average player for a below average team.Liverpool fans are deluded.Everton are the best in mersyside,bring back queen kenny,he done a great job.lol.

03 Aug 2012 11:36:19
the vice president of Sao Paolo, Joao Paulo de Jesus Lopes tells a brazilian newspaper that, "I do not know this information. I was with [president] Juvenal Juvencio yesterday [Wednesday] and today [Thursday]. Just to sit down to negotiate with Manchester, but the valuation was not met." so it looks like we are still the favourites, I know he's my favourite out of our targets, let's hope we can agree a deal and not let another one slip through our fingers!

Jake F

03 Aug 2012 11:02:42
All the stuff about Inter is rubbish. If you really want to worry look at PSG. They have the $$$ power right now!

I believe we will land him, but imo we dont need another winger. And in the case we do, why not go for Bale! The boy can cover up at left-back and his british and prove in the EPL.

JLBER84

Perhaps Bale is not available? Perhaps he is over valued? Perhaps he is not what the manager is looking for?

Sydney!

Bale just signed a new contract with Spurs so we'd have to pay big and we know how Levy likes to play hardball

Tommy

As devastating Bale can be at times i do wonder if he lost his pace would he be anywhere near as effective.

Take it easy sydney. you dont know better than anyone. I know Bale is not on the market, i just made opinion!

JLBER84

03 Aug 2012 10:47:29
Does anyone know if this £40 million NET spend is accurate and does it include the transfers that we have already made? We got around £5-£7 million combined for Park, De Laet and James and we can still get probably £5 million + for Berbatov as well as perhaps cash for someone like Macheda or King. Assuming we can raise £10 million, that leaves us with £50 million, £21 of which has already been spent. That leaves us with around £30 million left to spend this summer, some of which is likely to go on Moura, that is probably why we are trying to negotiate the price as down as possible as we still want to get a full back in. If we do have this budget, then its not going to be Baines. But I am pleased to see us linked with Neil Taylor, someone who impressed for Swansea last year and is also very versatile as he can play right or left. I don't want to sound like I am jumping from target to target, but he is someone that I have great respect for and I think he could excell here, much like John O'Shea did for us as a utility player.

RedDevil19

The 40m is reportedley on top of the Kagawa and Powell deals.

Red Joe

That would be good then as we could get Moura and a quality left back like Baines instead of going for a budget left back. Neil Taylor would be my pick of the 'budget' players, but I expect Swansea would get every penny they could.

RedDevil19

If Moura comes expect Nani to move on,that would release another £20million or so.
Raffa

Ir Alex Ferguson could be about to spend up to a further £40million in the transfer market this summer, according to Manchester United's chief operating officer. Speaking in a 36-minute video presentation that is being shown to investors on the club's global marketing roadshow ahead of a proposed flotation on the New York Stock Exchange, Michael Bolingbroke has given the firmest indication yet that there will be more significant spending at Old Trafford before the close of the transfer window at the end of this month. Bolingbroke told investors that while United believe their average net spend of between £20m and £25m per year over the last 10 to 15 years was "sufficient going forward as a guide", the club was "giving guidance at the moment that the current transfer period could result in net expenditure nearer £40m".Although United have already paid down about £15m to sign Shinji Kagawa and Nick Powell from Borussia Dortmund and Crewe Alexandra respectively, the club are on course to largely offset that sum through sales, meaning more big-money arrivals are anticipated.

from the united wesite.

so in short while trying to sell shares in the club our operating office has said we coud spend 40 mill in the transfer market since summer

people need to remember and it is a point andy green has made in the past , when united results are published net spend means TOTAL spend not (players bought-players sold) .
jred

Raffa, Nani would raise anything between £25m-£35m. Somewhere in the middle would be my guestimate.

Sydney!

'Net transfers spend' is players bought minus players sold.

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - Taking account of all related costs or not is the question Syd. Keep in mind that football finances and football fans mix no better than Creme de Menthe and Tomato Juice.}

Too true Ed and couldn't agree more, for example on the "Transfer League" website which is a simple way of looking at transfer fees, it says our net spend is £38m, but the United accounts show £47m. This extra £9m is obviously the "extra" costs that you keep referring to which many on this page keep ignoring?

Sydney!

Syd
As I have explained before net spen in the media is not the same as net spend in business
Net spend is TOTAL spend not including sales

How do you think he comes to the number of 25 mill over the last 10/15 year
Jred

September 2011 the figure was down to £65m. A big chunk of this fall (£47m) is down to the signings of Jones, De Gea and Young .
Andy green (as you have pointed out )
Have a look at the spread sheet , net spend 47 mill
Work out the reported cost of each player

Also ag answers a question about the 47 net spend in the comments section on one of his blogg
Swiss ramble explaines it as net/ spend when talking about united spend on one of his blogs
I will post the up later pal , am at work at the mo
Jred

Because we HAVE spent between £20m-£25m on average over the 10-15 years if we spend £40m (net) this summer.

Sydney!

Transfer league website say united gross spend on players since epl is 501 mill which works out as 26 mill per season , Bolingbroke said our net spend over last 25 years was 25 mill so that also ties in

Our net spend players bought - sales over same period is 9 mill
Jred

Jred you use the same Andy Green quote as myself, but conveniently leave the rest of the sentence out which proves you are talking bobbins:

"(less the cash received from the sales to our Wearside retirement home)"

IE John O'Shea & Brown etc.

Sydney!

Syd your getting mixed up again

Bolingbroke told investors that while United believe their average net spend of between £20m and £25m per year over the last 10 to 15 years
Now we both know our net spend (players bought-sold ) is not 25 mill it about 9
But our average spend ( just players bought ) is 25 mill a year over the last 25 year
Jred

Jred you are wrong again, under the Glazers our net spend has been £16m per a season. Here's another quote from Andy Green:

Since the takeover, Fergie's genius has allowed United to consistently win trophies (with a couple of rebuilding dips on the way) whilst keeping the club's wage spending to turnover ratio very low (45.7% so far in 2011/12 for example) and whilst spending very little on transfers (average net spend of £16m per season).

Is he lying Jred? In the past 10-15 years we have net spent between £20m-£25m.

Sydney!

This is our net spends from 2000-2010, again courtesy of Andy Green. This is the same figures Bolingbroke would have been using. They are the figures from the club's accounts.

/docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Amk6HQD
5WemzdDN1NlhqS1VndD
FUNUt2Q1FnaVc1UFE&hl=en_US#gid=0

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - You need to delete the sapces - Syd - use TinyUrl.com as we cannot handle long strings of characters.. Thanks.}

03 Aug 2012 17:32:27
Sorry Ed002,

http://tinyurl.com/cujam2z

Sydney!

03 Aug 2012 10:39:04
Manchester United expect to spend £40 million in the summer transfer window, according to the club's chief operating officer, Michael Bolingbroke.
Sir Alex Ferguson has already brought in Japanese midfielder Shinji Kagawa for £17 million from Borussia Dortmund and Crewe teenager Nick Powell for £4 million.
United have also bid for Sao Paulo and Brazil youngster Lucas Moura - and Bolingbroke said more money has been put aside to strengthen the squad, suggesting Ferguson has at least £20 million more at his disposal.
They have a projected net spend of £40 million, and money has already been raised by selling Ji-sung Park to QPR and letting Ritchie de Laet and Matty James go to Leicester. Ferguson's transfer budget could be increased further if Dimitar Berbatov leaves the club.

Expect more transfers to come!

THE SHINING KNIGHT

Lets just say for banter reasons only we take this as fact. But in truth we all know it's far more complicated than this.

£40m plus:

De Laet, Norwood, Pogba & James - £3.3m
Park - £2.5m
Berbatov - £5m?
Nani - £25m-£30m?
Bebe - £1m?
Kiko - £1m?
Anderson - £8m?
Fryers - £1m?
King - £500k?

That's like £90m not including money saved on salaries. I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Sydney!

Net spend means total spend on players look at uniteds accounts , its not money spent after sales deducted

Did you forget to sign off Jred mate?

A quote by Andy Green:

Since last summer the cash balance has fallen very sharply, by September 2011 the figure was down to £65m. A big chunk of this fall (£47m) is down to the signings of Jones, De Gea and Young (less the cash received from the sales to our Wearside retirement home).

Net transfer spend is players signed minus players sold.

Sydney!

I did Syd

Have a look on the revenue spread sheet pal it has "net spend" as 47 mill
In the comments on his blog when questioned about our 47 mill net spend andy explains that net spend in finance is meant as ( gross spend) with out player sales deducted
Jred

LOL, that is what a net spend is Jred, players signed minus players sold.

Jones, Young & DDG minus O'Shea, Brown etc = £47m

£47m is the net transfer spend.

Sydney!

Its not andy green explains it on his blog I will post it later

Syd
A big chunk of this fall (£47m) is down to the signings of Jones, De Gea and Young (less the cash received from the sales to our Wearside retirement home

Any clearly says 47 mill on jones de he's young that's how much we spent on the players
He then says less brown etc

So in short 47 spent on players which is shown on the revenue spread sheet but like I say ag gives a full explanation of it which I will post later to get u up to speed
Jred

Another quote from Andy Green regarding our net spend:

"There was substantial transfer spending in Q1 2011/12. The club spent a net £47.1m buying De Gea, Young and Jones (netting off receipts for the players sold)."

So players bought is (gross spend), minus players sold = net transfer spend.

Sydney!

Both quotes contradict themselves , but like I said I will post an expiation from andy and Swiss when I get home.
Before I do out of interest how sure are you that you are right and that bolingbrook was talked about net spend after players sales.

And that on the revenue sheet net spend is not total or gross spend

Your quote below says it all:

"Syd
A big chunk of this fall (£47m) is down to the signings of Jones, De Gea and Young (less the cash received from the sales to our Wearside retirement home"

Less the cash received from the sales of our Wearside retirement home MEANS - Minus the cash received from the sales of JOS, Brown etc.

Come on Jred keep up lad.

Sydney!

You two do love a debate don't you! ; ) Love reading them

Anyway, surely Syd is right on this one, Ed? Net spend is money spent on players bought (including agents fees/VAT if you look at it accurately) LESS cash for player's sold

Gross spend would be what we spent overall as Syd said, then you take away money for players sold to get NET spend

Surely!?

Gav

03 Aug 2012 10:27:11
Fellaini 20 mil - age 24
Modric 30 mil - turns 27 during the season

we will get more from Fellaini defensively and a few goals where as Modric is just an attacker, id prefer Modric but look at value and age Fellaini is a smarter choice.

Modric will cost closer to 40 million, nevermind 30million

fearny

03 Aug 2012 10:21:01
So newcastle have had a bid rejected for debuchy! If the newcastle scouts have watched him he must be a decent prospect like cabaye was, i say sign him up to challenge evra and gives us a bit pulling power to get cabaye aswell, i think 25 mill would get the pair!

I thin he plays rb mate, although he can cover at lb


parks.

03 Aug 2012 10:09:50
Here's a question guys come opening game who is your preferred choice to be in goal lindegaard or de gea?

Personally I think lindegaard when he's played Hea looked solid and more comfortable commanding the back four.

Banter please edd :).


Dwright

We have to play DDG as he will be better than Lindegaard, but Lindegaard will get many games next season unlike Liverpool's and Chelsea's number two's. The longer we can keep Lindegaard the better.

Sydney!

Good comment syd always got a valid point, we do have two top quality goal keepers.

Had lindegaard not got injured las season do you think de gea would of got the number 1 spot back?

I rate lindegaard very highly but also think that de gea has the potential to be up there with the best.


Dwright

You have to give the first game to DDG next season... it would be unfair on the kid after the terrific second half to the season he had. At times he kept us in games, and at the time he gave us crucial points (Even though it came to nothing).

fearny

Dwright, I doubt he would have got his place back. But I have to say I am glad Lindegaard got injured. Sounds horrible, but we may have had an unhappy 21 year old keeper this summer with serious confidence issues otherwise.

Sydney!

De Gea must be first choice. Lindegaard is really good, but he should move on. He doesn't deserve to be a number 2. He could be a number 1 for Milan.

G.A.G.U.S

We will give Lindegaard a new contract and keep him for a couple more years hopefully. United number 2's always get plenty of games and he will be happy here. However if he was to be sold next summer or the summer after he would sell for a decent sum one would think. By then Amos or Johnstone will be ready to compete with DDG for the number one spot.

Sydney!

WOW, I knew we were giving Anders a new contract, but I didn't expect it to be whilst we are discussing him. Spooky.

Sydney!

Cheer guys all very valid points, let just hope we don't get a repeat of last season against everton aye looking forwar to seeing vidic back and also Rooney and kagawa


Dwright

03 Aug 2012 10:00:52
syd
you seem to put a lot of trust in Miguel Delaney twitter, what do make of the fact that when asked this morning why SP would accept such a low bid from inter but turn down united's he reply was united never bid as high inter.

also when asked if moves for lucas and RVP break down is it plan B? he replied there is no plan B

so how reliable is Miguel Delaney.

(also cue plan B jokes)

jred

I do not take any of what Delaney, Cass etc say as gospel, but Cass does have a direct relationship with the manager. Much of what they say is in line with what Ed002 says.

Also he said we never offered as much as £37m, not that we never offered as much as Inter. There will always be a plan B, but that is not necessarily information he would know about. The manager will keep things under wraps I'm sure.

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - I would take all statements from Sao Paulo and from his agent with a pinch of salt right now.}

Ed, I think nowadays you have to take whatever any club, agent, manager and sometimes even player says with a pinch of salt these days when regarding transfers. But thanks for the advice. Sao Paulo deny an Inter bid, but there was a bid. Ed can I ask whether powers to be at RM, United and Anzhi would be aware of Inter's bid? Will they know the truth?

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - You have missed Chelsea off the list Syd but they will all be broadly aware of what the situation is. Apparently Coutinho has refused to be offered as part of a deal this morning. It'll drag on a little longer I am sure.}

So Chelsea are watching with a curious eye from a distance? Is that due to the Hulk talks halting? If United did agree a deal for Lucas would you expect Chelsea and RM to try to hijack the move? RM tried it with Hazard and with Kagawa so I wouldn't be surprised to see them do it with Lucas.

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - Chelsea have aways maintained an interest in Moura but realised very early on that they had already bid more than the player was worth to them. I don't really wish to drag this out or go there now but perhaps someone should have delved further in to the Colorado discussions. I also said that I would not rule out any interested party, although it is unlikely that Chelsea will concern themselves with the player any further right now.}

Thanks for your reply Ed, I have taken the Colorado discussions pretty seriously which is what prompts be to believe that Inter is the way Lucas' agent wants to go due to the third party ownership. I guess this is why he is being difficult in his dealing with United. Thanks again Ed.

Sydney!

03 Aug 2012 08:26:35
i need your opinion on this one ED?
if we succed in securing the signature of moura then how is SAF gonna use him because he can play both on the wings as well as the central attacking position
for central attacking role we already have kagawa
and if we use him on the wing we will have 4 wingers ........
could this be the end of nani?? {Ed002's Note - I have no interest in tactics but you must remember that Manchester United is a squad of players - not just 11.}

03 Aug 2012 01:03:30
I can't stop crying. Please shed some light into the lucas moura situation ed? Seems like im going through the Hazard crisis all over again. I can remember how upset i was back then. RED TILL I DIE.

LUKE {Ed002's Note - Read the posts Luke.}

May the posts be with you!

REDP

Luke,

If you are crying you need to step back and look at your life I think.

If we do not get Moura its not the end of the world, if we do get him then great. Football is about enjoyment, it is a hobby at the end of the day, support your team and enjoy it.

Imagine a Portsmouth fan reading that post, he would think you are a spoilt brat.

GDS

The "Hazard crisis"? I remember the Dukes of Hazard having a few crisis situations, but they always managed to get out of them with fancy drivin'. I don't think missing out on an over-priced Belgian footballer classes as a crisis, though.

DarkLard08

03 Aug 2012 00:40:52
Sydney, you honestly need to think a bit more before you post here. It's really low to make light of depression and suicide as a means to score personal points in an argument. I'm sure a lot of people here actually know friends and family who suffer from depression, so have a little bit of common sense before you make offensive posts making light of it. You're displaying an increasing tendency to overreact when people bring up your problems with conceding points. I wasn't angry that you tried to argue that we had an offer accepted for Hazard. If anything I thought it was a bit funny that you tried to argue on a point that the manager had explicitly refuted rather than admit you were wrong.

I have been positive about the two signings this summer, I rate both players. But it's obviously not enough and as I have continually stated I would be happy with a quality midfield player and a left back this summer. I'm not that concerned about the perspective RVP and Moura transfers (if there's anything in them other than the old "we tried" chestnut), they are not areas of the pitch that we are desperately lacking in. Remember that we lack a single central midfield player who is a regular international and for a club who claim to be competing at the top level, that's a worrying sign.

What I have been angry about this summer, and I think I've made my position very clear on this count, is the way the Glazers go about their business and the lies they tell, the way Fergie has been patronising and insulting supporters who question the Glazers' ownership, and the way in which fans of this club continue to defend owners who have in factual terms never given the club anything but economic risks and burdens. There is not a lot to be positive about this summer. Chelsea have closed the gap on us substantially, if City are looking at 5 new signings they are going to pull further ahead, and even Arsenal and Spurs have started to add a few quality players to their rosters. Scholes, Giggs and Rio all a year older, Vidic coming back from major injury, Evra long past his best and lacking cover. Plus a midfield that lacks any depth whatsoever. Doesn't exactly fill me with confidence for the new season.

Danny Pughnited

You need to lighten up pal we all know the dangers of depression but as soon as someone makes a joke about it all of a sudden people care banter site remember its not like he posted to the depression website an further more teams that are together longer tend to succeed more often so there is method in the madness we will sign at least one more player an I can see us run away wit it this year .... Have faith

CAIN

Danny

In my opinion, your views are considerably more entrenched than Sydney's. Sydney manages to apply some balance to most of his arguments, whilst you, and a lot of others on here, are so set on attacking the Glazers that you twist everything to fit your agenda.

What if SAF does enjoy working with them? And his lack of activity in the transfer market is down to his own unwillingness to pay exorbitant fees for players and agents? That isn't him patronising the fans, is it?

Chelsea have closed the gap? Have we seen them play with their new re-shaped team yet? Just having names on a sheet of paper means nothing. City haven't signed anyone yet - do we know they'll improve their team? Arsenal have added quality players? When was this? Their squad is no better than it was.

I don't like large elements of the way the Glazers run the club. I'd call them overly-secretive rather than accuse them of lying. I'd also certainly say they have their own interests ahead of United's. But that doesn't make them significantly different from many other club owners. And the grass isn't always greener - if we end up re-floated, for example, we'll still have to consider major dividends to shareholders every year, and have to conduct all our transfer dealings in public. And if anybody else buys us, they will saddle the club with considerable debt.

And, finally, if you'd listen to what Fergie said about Hazard, he said we had been in for him, but didn't think he was worth the money we'd have had to pay. At no point has Fergie said we didn't bid for him or that we didn't have an offer accepted.

It's pretty clear we have around £30m - £40m plus proceeds from sales still to spend this summer. If we "try" and fail within these limits, it's either because we won't be held to ransom over price / wages / agent fees or because the manager doesn't think the player is worth the fee or because the player doesn't want to come to us.

If clubs like United, Barcelona, RM, Inter and Milan stand their ground on fees (and there are signs that they are) it will slow the ridiculous inflation in player prices caused by City and PSG.

DarkLard08

I'm not trying to score points DP, just miss the productive posts you used to send that's all.

Sydney!

Darklord how is pretty clear we have 30-40 mill to spend
jred

03 Aug 2012 00:28:01
Blair said he was going to watch highlights of lfc's tremendous win in Belarus made me laugh, Liverpool were completely outplayed and were out of their depth!

Caolán.

Thanks for ruining it for me, Coolade mate. They are in mid season, we've played 3 pre-season games and traveled thousands of miles, in 2 weeks.

I see you took the time to watch the mighty reds in action. Good on you buddy.

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Your playing a team from Belarus... it doesn't matter, teams from the Premier League should cruise through games like that.

fearny