Manchester United Rumours Member Posts

• Login
• Register

Dave29's Profile

Dave29's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To Dave29's Posts

To Dave29's last 5 banter posts

Dave29 has no Rumours Posts

Dave29's banter posts with other poster's replies to Dave29's banter posts

06 Sep 2013 17:55:05
Hey eds/everybody,
Just a quick question for ed044, Sydney or anybody else who might know, is there a possibility we could move for Herrera again in January? the reason I'm asking is he wouldn't be cup tied, gave an interview the other day in which he praised united I dunno how many times and also andy mitten of united we stand magazine said that moyes is very interested in Herrera and could move for him again?

1.) Dave, I do not believe we will mate. Bilbao will not budge on their asking price and if we were not prepared to pay £30.5m in the summer, then it's highly unlikely we will do in January. I do expect us to bring Coentrao in on loan though.

2.) Lets be honest I dnt think any1 knows Woodwards next move, not even him.

3.) I think we will move for Gundogan next summer and Coentrao in January.

4.) Sydney

It is the £30m glass ceiling that doesn't exist or we just stop bidding when we get to £30m. We won't even go slightly over it for Herrera from your post.

If Moyes identifies a player then Woodward should go and get him after all the "money is there" isn't it? We may not like a player or not think he is good enough but surely if Moyes wants Herrera that's what Woodward should do?

You never did answer the simple question on dividends yesterday or you tried to make it complex when a simple answer was needed

If we didn't spend big in the transfer market and profits went up notably and the Glazers decided to take dividends would the lack of spending increase or decrease the amount of dividend they could take? Increase or decrease which do you think?

5.) I'm not sure we need to mad on signings, unless the right player becomes available. I expect Coentrao to sign permanently in Jan. This would leave us significantly stronger. Fellaini is a great addition, and I recall getting abuse at start of last season on here when I made the 'sign him up' call, it didn't stop me and I returned with more admiration only to thrown to the wolves again after he butted Shawcross. But I do admit my favour drifted to Vidal and Veratti over the course of the season after watching them both on numerous occasions. Vidal being the EXACT missing cog IMO. But I now am more than happy to have the fro, and hope he does bully our opponents a bit. As I am a massive fan of the Robson and Keanes I witnessed growing up.
I honestly believe we have a very capable squad as it is, Coentrao is a more than capable alternative to Baines.

6.) Red Man, it's pretty simple really. MU valued Herrera at €30m hence the €30m bid. Athletic Bilbao wanted €36m and would not enter negotiations unless the €36m was met. It's not about not going above £30m for a player, it's about not paying over the odds for a particular player.

I answered your question regarding dividends yesterday. It was you who didn't reply.

7.) Red Man, for now the Glazers are not taking dividends. So like I said yesterday our summer spend had no bearing on future dividends. When our revenues rise allowing the cash flow to increase, the Glazers will no doubt start to take dividends. According to Andy Green, by 2016 our revenue will rise to above £500m. Surplus cash will rise to around £115m per a year. Now you can almost guarantee that dividends will be taken when there is that much cash available.

8.) Sydney

Up to now they haven't taken dividends but it could happen this financial year depending on results, looks like you don't want to answer the question do you? All hypothetically, so one word answer, increase or decrease?

On the £30m, you are telling me that our new manager has identified a prime target but we won't go to or over £30m to get him and yet there the money is there? Or is it?

9.) Or you could argue that we better have some of the best players in the world in our squad and be in line to win everything every year.

10.) Red Man, if there is a car that you really like and it retails at £29, 999. if there was only one left would you buy it for £35,000? MU value Herrera at €30m, Not €36m. I had hoped we would pay over the odds for a creative midfielder this summer so I am as disappointed as you are, but MU decided that £30.5m was too much for that particular player.

I cannot answer your question any clearer unless you want me to draw you a picture? The Glazers will take dividends IMO, but only when there is enough cash to do so.

11.) "On the £30m, you are telling me that our new manager has identified a prime target but we won't go to or over £30m to get him and yet there the money is there? Or is it?"

Red Man, well we know the €30m was there, hence the €30m bid.

Our manager identified Baines as our number one left back target, shall we have gone to £30m for him too?

12.) Sydney

It is a very straightforward question, so why draw a picture when one word is enough, but you obviously will not answer even hypothetically.

On Herrera, if the last remaining car is £35k and I want it, then supply and demand dictates the price, so if I want it enough I pay the price, did you do economics at school at all?

If Moyes wants him enough then the owners should support him and if that is the price and he is Moyes No1 choice then we should pay it, however the owners are not going to easily release that amount are they?

Dont believe me? read what the Mail said today, "Moyes, like Ferguson before him, maintains that the Glazers place no restrictions on United's budget. It is becoming an increasingly suspect soundbite"

Your defence, albeit subtle, of them is wearing thin, they have no excuses this last window and I have to doubt after this window whether we will see any big statement transfers in future until they are gone.

13.) Red Man, of course there are restrictions. All self sufficient clubs have restrictions. But that isn't the point. The club will do their own valuations on a player and they will bid that amount or less. When negotiations begin both clubs find a middle ground and a deal is usually agreed. Bilbao wouldn't negotiate. It was pay the clause or nothing. MU didn't believe Herrera was worth €36m so didn't pay it. However they offered €30m and wanted to sit down and negotiate. Bilbao refused. For the last time, I add hoped we would have paid the amount Bilbao wanted and I am disappointed we never, but the club clearly didn't value him at €36m.

I do not defend the Glazers at all. Not even subtly. I just prefer to stay impartial like Andy Green. Is he a defender of the Glazers?

14.) Sydney

It was an easy hypothetical question on dividends to answer but you refused and deflected a few times. Then you deflect again by talking about a third party. Impartial, seriously, it is obvious from every post where your leanings are, after all "the money is there" isn't it.

I am with what the Mail said, are you impartial on their comment as well?

15.) Red Man, the difference between you and I, is you let your judgement get clouded by your hatred of the Glazers. I don't, I can separate the two and look at things fairly.

You can be with the Daily Mail, I will be with SAF and Moyes and the FACT that we bid €30m for Herrera, therefore proves there is money and at the right price a player would have been signed.

I have said the Glazers are penny pinchers, this isn't anything new. We knew this before they bought the club. But there is money there. They just have a problem paying over the odds for some players.

You keep saying I am deflecting, but can I ask you how much in dividends the Glazers have taken in nine years? Like I said I expect them to take dividends 'WHEN' the cash flow increases. 'When' being the operative word.

16.) Thank you Sydney

Everything is very clear from your response

I judge based on actions, not hatred.

17.) For what's it worth, the glazers/woodward valuations are always much less than the selling clubs. So it is easy for them to justify not buying players. £28m for Fabregas? Why would barca sell him for that? If bilbao value their player at €36m then why would they sell. Him for €30m?
Time for people to see what glazers are doing. And time for them to realise that they can't go around shafting other clubs. Their tactics are clearly not working. And in the process, they are dragging the name of our club thru the mud. {Ed044's Note - The Glazers don't put values on players mate.}

18.) One comment I wish to add on the above posts is that Sydney is right that dividends have not been taken by glazers but they have taken cash out of the club (shares sold and not all cash going to club being one case and others openly known) {Ed044's Note - Rubbish mate. As the owners of the club, the shares are theirs to sell. If they sold all of the shares in the club then all of the money would go to them and none to the club.}

19.) Ed044 I concur you are correct as owners that is their right. My view was bore solely out of my belief that the money raised should have all gone to paying off the debt saddled on the club when the glazers took over and reduce interest/refinancing costs. Totally appreciate that from a business sense this is a no go for a whole host of reasons but had my red coloured blinkers on. {Ed044's Note - I am not really the right Ed to discuss this with but I do know that the debt is being managed, and there is no benefit to the owners to sell shares to pay off the debt.}

20.) Nomidfield, our second bid for Cesc was £34m. There is rumour that there was a third even higher bid (don't know if Ed044 can help with that?) So not sure where you got the £28m from? Secondly, it's the CEO's job to decide whether or not to pay what a selling club wants. That is his job.

Bookedredmole, As much as it pains me to say, whatever the Glazers raise when floating the club is their money, not the club's money. They are selling part of their asset. If they sold the other 90% of MU for say £1.8bn, then that would be their cash. Just like it was their cash when selling 10% of the club. {Ed044's Note - I can't help Sydney! you would need to ask another Ed.}

21.) Books, also £10m in dividends have been taken by the Glazers. The loans they took years ago of £1.66m each (total £10m) that was due to be paid back last year was taken as dividends.

22.) Ed044, thanks anyway, but 002 no longer communicates with the MU fans. Certainly not on the MU page where he would only answer MU related questions.

23.) Sydney last I had heard they hadn't paid the loans back so thanks for the info about how they cleared it, much appreciated.

24.) Sydney

You asked me above about when (when being the operative word as you put it) the Glazers had taken dividends and you didn't feel they would take them yet, until the cash flow increases. Then in a post further down you confirm they took £10m in dividends last year so not to pay back the loans.

25.) Book, I guess a Glazer defender would have kept that quiet, but like I have said to Red Man, I just like to remain fair.

26.) Red Man, the Glazers took £10m in loans six years ago, this isn't new news. Last year they were due to pay it back and instead put them down as dividends. So the money left the club six years ago, not last year. When I say start taking dividends, I mean taking them every year without fail. I see that happening a couple years from now.

Dave29 has no Rumour Replies

Dave29 has no Banter Replies