We don't know how to sell players

Discussion in 'Manchester United Forum' started by Andycoleno9, Jan 11, 2019.

  1. Jan 11, 2019
    #41

    MikeUpNorth Wobbles like a massive pair of tits

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2007
    Messages:
    17,715
    I think we pay salaries above the market rate, which means clubs can't justify paying decent transfer fees for our players.
  2. Jan 11, 2019
    #42

    Gopher Brown Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2013
    Messages:
    3,266
    RVN was causing problems and we wanted him to leave, and he was 30. Ronaldo was by a long way a record, which only looks bad now because of inflation
  3. Jan 11, 2019
    #43

    crossy1686 Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,849
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    With that mentality O'Shea, Brown, Fletcher, Park and Nani would have been sold long before they actually were, maybe even Young and Valencia fall into this bracket. And they all won titles and played a part when they were asked to play. Sometimes they were utter trash but sometimes they delivered when needed.

    You're forgetting one thing. We aren't a selling club, we don't buy players with the thinking of 'we can sell this player on in a few years for more'. We sign players with the mentality of 'this player has reached the pinnacle of their career and will play with us until they decline massively or express a desire to leave'. We've only ever sold on our terms which is why the fees have always been low. Look at similar teams around Europe with our stature.

    Rojo can go for all I care, he's injury prone and has done very little to convince me he's good enough for United. Jones on the other hand has won titles, knows how to manage a run in and is happy to sit on the bench, what has Manolas won or done?
  4. Jan 11, 2019
    #44

    crossy1686 Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,849
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    This is also true. Did anyone actually want to leave us when we were guaranteeing at least one trophy a season? Hard to sell people who don't want to leave.
  5. Jan 11, 2019
    #45

    balaks Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2014
    Messages:
    6,013
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    Supports:
    Tottenham Hotspur
    It's the wages you pay I would imagine - nobody will be able to match them (assuming they are being sold to a smaller level club) and many players will refuse to move unless their salary is at least matched.
  6. Jan 11, 2019
    #46

    InLevyITrust Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    5,076
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    Supports:
    Tottenham
    I think your biggest problem with selling players ins the wages you play them. How much is Jones on for example?
  7. Jan 11, 2019
    #47

    ForestRGoinUp Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Supports:
    United and Forest
    Liverpool sold 3 world class (or close) players for more than all of our sales combined in the last 5 years. And they’ve built a better team because of it.

    We clearly can’t spend anything we want without selling so it stands to reason that player sales would play a big part in the rebuild that needs to take place.
  8. Jan 11, 2019
    #48

    RedDevil@84 Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    Messages:
    9,725
    I don't think Mourinho negotiates any sales. All credit for the sale price on Morgan or Memphis is on Woodward. Same with the Darmian price.

    I agree about Welbeck. I was shocked when we gave him away for just 16M to a direct rival. English players were getting premium prices, regardless of how good they were. And Welbeck still had the hype. In hindsight, ya 16M seems good enough.
  9. Jan 11, 2019
    #49

    In Rainbows Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    2,958
    It's the wages. Clubs that are in top 6 don't pay the wages that we do. So expecting a team outside of the top 6 to take our players when they're on massive wages is just not going to happen. I understand big wages for players that need convincing to sign. However, United seem to always have leverage and still hand out big wages. There are players in other top 6 sides who are deemed as being better than some of our players, and yet they're on smaller wages. It makes no sense when United are the bigger club and if wages were equal, they would choose United. But that isn't how we treat it.

    Jones needs to go. His contract runs out this summer, and seeing as we're trying to buy another CB, we can't extend him. I would have said the same about Rojo, but Mou gave him a new contract in March.

    If we can't sell the players, we need to let them leave on a free and replace them with a younger player who is on much smaller wages. Tuanzebe for example can replace Jones.
  10. Jan 11, 2019
    #50

    ForestRGoinUp Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Supports:
    United and Forest
    Liverpool have bought 3/4 much better players each for less than what Lingard would be sold for. Our problem is who we target, always looking for the most expensive players with years left on their contracts and maybe even at big clubs already. The right manager could upgrade Lingard and Mata with a couple of 30-40M type players, as Liverpool and others have proven possible.

    Our scouting is atrocious, and for all the things Ed does wrong, player sales/contracts should be at the very top. He's backed us into a corner that isn't easy to get out of.
  11. Jan 11, 2019
    #51

    Bola Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2018
    Messages:
    1,205
    Depends if you think a major rebuild is needed. We are probably 3 or 4 players off a world class team*. Which could achieved over two windows and within our current means, or at the very worse, having to offload some fringe players

    If we sell our best (martial, pogba, Rashford, De Gea), we move further away from our goal

    *there is the potential to fill two of those priorities internally given the amazing talent we have coming through
  12. Jan 11, 2019
    #52

    GBBQ Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2012
    Messages:
    3,459
    Location:
    Ireland
    Thought we did good in moving on Schnedierlin and Depay at the time. Clearly not first team prospects at the time but we good good money for them both and a first refusal on Depay looks to be at least sensible given that he has improved at Lyon.

    Teams are going to low-ball us on players who aren't needed so its a case of deciding is it worth holding out for a better deal or should we move on a player we don't need and recoup some money and free up a squad position. Our financial status suggests its not that big of an issue either way.
  13. Jan 11, 2019
    #53

    cyril C Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    886
    Was it triggered by a journalist to give a good account on Liverpool and Chelsea that made a few bucks on fringe players. Well, I am more concern about the players that we have on pitch, or how good they are, than players that we let go. Also remember that Chelsea sold KDB, Lukaku and Salah. Morale of the story is, it is not about how much can you get from your fringe players, but who did you offload that come back to bite you.
  14. Jan 11, 2019
    #54

    Josep Dowling Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2014
    Messages:
    2,464
    This is truly shocking that Liverpool have sold Solanke for £19m would be 5th on our list! Fans say why does it matter if we can't get value for our players but honestly we would have more money in the pot to spend on players (in theory, it probably wouldn't work like that). Chelsea manage to sell all their duds for good money.

    We haven't played Darmian properly for 3 seasons now and he's still here, why? Send him out on loan to get games, add value to his potential transfer fee rather than leaving him to play 5 games a season. Now we are left in a situation where he will leave for nothing. The entire transfer strategy of the club is weak.
  15. Jan 11, 2019
    #55

    Sir Scott McToMinay Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2018
    Messages:
    757
    Must be said though, ED is miles better than Gill at selling players, as a matter of fact, he’s probably better than Gill at everything else too.
    The amount we got for Ronaldo and Beckham was an absolute joke.
  16. Jan 11, 2019
    #56

    ForestRGoinUp Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Supports:
    United and Forest
    Well, to that I repeat: Liverpool sold Suarez Sterling and Coutinho and built a better attack (for the cost of Suarez), and a better midfield and defense (for the cost of Sterling and Coutinho. Their squad is deep enough that Adam Lallana (a Lingard comp) can’t make the bench.

    Banking on internal talent is mostly a fools errand and puts us 3-4 more years from those players reaching the beginning of their peak years.
  17. Jan 11, 2019
    #57

    Bola Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2018
    Messages:
    1,205
    Liverpool's current team is currently stronger than the Rodgers era (just). But they had to take 2 steps back to walk 2 and a quarter steps forward. Whether it wins them anything remains to be seen - but selling star players is not a strategy for a bigger team like United, we are better off financial than Liverpool and dont have to take drastic measures

    Re your point on the 'fools errand' of youth, i'm glad Busby and Fergie didn't take that opinion as I doubt our trophy cabinet would be anywhere near it is now. We ain't a club of galacticos and instant gratification, therefore our transder policy should not resemble it
  18. Jan 11, 2019
    #58

    JK-27 Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2017
    Messages:
    717
    Woodward. Can't buy players at the right price. Can't sell players at the right price. And yet he's still in charge.
  19. Jan 11, 2019
    #59

    OnlyTwoDaSilvas Gullible

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Messages:
    16,679
    Location:
    The Mathews Bridge
    Mourinho likely didn't negotiate, but he did seem adamant that he'd only sell players from the squad if we got what we believed they were worth. That's certainly something that changed as soon as he came in, as opposed to LvG binning most of the squad for pennies. Whether that was Jose's impact or whether Woodward finally realised it's just bad business to buy high and sell low, I guess we won't know. Either way, we have gotten a bit better at selling since around that time.

    It was weird when Welbeck went to Arsenal. He seemed to be a bit of a laughing stock when he was here, always derided when he was in the England squad and whatnot, then as soon as he goes there, it's all about how United have lost a star, he's going to be England's #9, his reputation flipped on its head. Now its seems everyone has forgotten he even exists.
  20. Jan 11, 2019
    #60

    VeevaVee despite the protests, wears Ugg boots

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    28,725
    Our poor buying and crap management/mood at the club since Fergie left has meant the players we do have have had leverage. Their agents know we need a reasonably happy base to build from and buying better players that don't work out has only prolonged it and made it worse. It means they can ask for more money to stay and be happy, even if they're not good enough in the long run. Harder to ship off then.

    Not to mention we've hardly put up a good shop window.
  21. Jan 11, 2019
    #61

    JohnnyKills Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2016
    Messages:
    3,744
    Supports:
    United
    Agree, this is a problem. Hopefully DoF will help.

    Successful clubs always seem to sell well - they get rid of the deadwood quickly and build lean, efficient squads.
  22. Jan 11, 2019
    #62

    ForestRGoinUp Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Supports:
    United and Forest
    1. Liverpool are not just barely better than the Rodger's iteration. Be real. They didn't have the squad depth, the midfield or certainly the defense then that they do now.
    2. Call us bigger if you want, but our approach to transfers is no bigger than theirs is. We hit a limit every year (and it's not some absurdly high limit) that could be offset by player sales. We aren't making the sales that would allow for more purchasing, for reasons put forth throughout the thread.
    3. I understand the history. It should be acknowledged that the sport has changed (just a tad) from the days of Busby and early Ferguson, no?
  23. Jan 11, 2019
    #63

    el3mel Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2016
    Messages:
    23,924
    Location:
    Egypt
    We give crap players huge salaries that they refuse a pay cut and no other club is going to offer them that salary so we fail to sell them. It's that simple.

    Has been a problem ever since Ed got the job. The man has no football brain.
  24. Jan 11, 2019
    #64

    Bola Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2018
    Messages:
    1,205
    1. Better 1st team. The squad depth is not much better.

    2. Look at our revenues, we have higher income for tranfers so we are bigger in that sense (amongst others). That's really a side point as I think we need 200 million max to fill the 3 or 4 key positions - we can do that by selling fringe players and our 'natural transfer budget over 2 windows

    3. Nothing has changed - talent and desire will always suceed. I a recall an expert writing Fergie off approx 40 years after the Busby Babes. Its been around 25 years since the 'Class of 92' emerged. I don't see what has changed recently (that is relevant) only a mindset at certain clubs


    I certainly won't disagree that Liverpool have done a far better job than United at selling 'fringe' players, something we can learn from. I still stand by my orinigal point that United should never have to rely on taking in big incomes from transfers - that should not happen to the biggest teams in the world
  25. Jan 11, 2019
    #65

    ForestRGoinUp Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Supports:
    United and Forest
    It does happen to the biggest clubs in the world though. It's not about having some sort of pride in not needing to sell players, or not wanting to be considered a selling club. It's about actively evolving and progressing and refreshing your team before certain players reach their expiration date (whether physically or financially in a contract sense).

    There is something insecure about the pride United fans have in "not being a selling club." Real Madrid have made over 100M in sales in 3 of the past 5 seasons. Barcelona have sold for 400M in the last 2 years. Juve over 100M in sales the last 3 years, with Dybala likely making it a 4th consecutive year.

    We seem to sell and remain loyal to players similar to Bayern, but we've not countered that by buying up the young domestic talent cheaply as they have. Obviously comparing us to them is foolish on that alone.

    Big as our revenues are, we are not a bigger fish in the transfer market than Liverpool are at the moment. Not sure how that can be argued, or how not being a selling club is working out for us.
  26. Jan 11, 2019
    #66

    kundalini Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    4,163
    It is very easy to sell players when you pay them less than their market value. It is very difficult to sell players when you pay them far more than they would get elsewhere.

    It isn't a United issue.
  27. Jan 11, 2019
    #67

    Buster15 Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2018
    Messages:
    1,244
    Location:
    Bristol
    Supports:
    Bristol Rovers
    That’s right. Because of the high wages and the draw of being a Manchester United player, underperforming players don't want to leave.

    Nevertheless, we don't seem anything like hard nosed enough to off load fringe players.

    SAF was pretty good at that. He instinctively knew when to get rid of certain players and we do seem to have lost that ability and it is costing us many many millions in inefficient wages.
  28. Jan 11, 2019
    #68

    AndyJ1985 Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2016
    Messages:
    8,718
    We pay crap players far too much. Clubs aren't going to throw money at them just because they play for United.
  29. Jan 11, 2019
    #69

    mancan92 Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2011
    Messages:
    6,846
    Location:
    Loughborough university
    This is ridiculous considering the calibre of players we have had
  30. Jan 11, 2019
    #70

    Reddy Rederson Full Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2018
    Messages:
    2,205
    The reason is Ed Woodward. Just like all roads led to jose for the dross we were watching, they also lead to Ed for the matters of buying, selling and contracts.
  31. Jan 11, 2019
    #71

    paulscholes18 Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2013
    Messages:
    12,401
    The only one of those we wanted to keep was Ronaldo, but he had his heart set on Madrid, had SAF not fallen out with Beckham, Stam & RVN they wouldn’t have been sold
  32. Jan 12, 2019
    #72

    ForestRGoinUp Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Supports:
    United and Forest
    That’s not the point, I’m fairly certain.
  33. Jan 12, 2019
    #73

    finneh Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,992
    Simply yes. Our squad players earn far more than even the best players at almost every other club in the world. Therefore to offload them we have to reduce the fee considerably to make the deal viable for the buying club. Lets say Dortmund were interested in Lingard. They approach United who say he's available at €40m, which in this market would be quite reasonable but at the top end of their budget. They just about get over the hurdle of his fee and then his agent tells them he's looking for €120k per week. For that kind of €70m package over a 5 year contract they'd be expecting a player that not only would instantly improve them, but would also have a much greater resale value in 3-4 years.

    The statement that "we can get huge fees" for the likes of Smalling, Lingard, Shaw & Pereira. That simply isn't true. The foremost three players for example are all reportedly on salaries of £80k or more. You then look at the kind of club that might buy these players... The teams that could justify splashing out a huge fee either wouldn't want them (Real, Barca, Bayern, PSG etc) or couldn't afford their salaries (mid table Premier League or pretty much anyone else outside the top 10 clubs in Europe).

    You can look at our sales and see where the money has gone. If Blind were on £30k a week we'd have probably sold him for £30m... As he earned maybe £3m a year more than this figure this was deducted from the transfer fee (over 4-5 years) that Ajax paid. Likewise Januzaj was sold for £10m compared with Ibe selling for £15m... The difference was that Januzaj earned £1m per annum more than Ibe which was factored into a reduced fee paid.

    It's all about supply and demand so no team can be "good" at selling players and no team can be "bad". If we want to start receiving good fee's we need to completely rebuild our wage structure from the ground up. This Summer is a good opportunity as there are several players earning far higher salaries than their contributions would dictate which we can ship out whatever the fee... The likes of Jones, Valencia, Fellaini, Darmian & Young. Then there's the likes of Mata who would need to accept a lower salary to reflect his status.

    The following "unproven" players should be earning £40k max per week: Rojo, Bailly, Lindelof, Dalot, Romero, McTominay
    The following "squad" players should be earning £60k max per week: Young, Jones, Valencia, Fellaini, Smalling, Lingard, Darmian
    The following "first team" players should be earning £125k max per week: Matic, Herrera, Mata, Shaw, Fred, Lukaku, Martial, Rashford
    The following "key" players should be earning anything up to £300k: Sanchez, Pogba, De Gea

    If you read through that list you'll notice that we're paying our first team and key players roughly in line with what you'd expect (anomaly is Lukaku). However pretty much every single unproven or squad player is earning a far, far greater salary than their contributions would imply.

    Our wage structure was set up by Fergie as a socialist system of "it takes a 25 man squad to win a title". However it should be "what is the absolute maximum these players would earn at another club". Would Lingard, Fellaini, Young, Jones or Valencia earn as much as Erikson at Spurs? Of course not.
  34. Jan 12, 2019
    #74

    ForestRGoinUp Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    524
    Supports:
    United and Forest
    Bravo
  35. Jan 12, 2019
    #75

    MalcolmTucker New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2014
    Messages:
    426
    Good post - I agree
  36. Jan 12, 2019
    #76

    RedStarUnited Full Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,051
    Beckham and Stam were emotional sells that really should have been higher. Beckham especially, Such a high profile commercial player should have gone for a near record fee.
  37. Jan 12, 2019
    #77

    Flying_Heckfish Full Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    Messages:
    3,744
    Location:
    Hand in Glove
    No one else would retain the players we do, at the wages we do. Simple as that really.

    We saw when a marketable player was made available at a reasonable price, we had bites - Schneiderlin, Memphis - but otherwise, we get derogatory bids.

    We should not make this mistake this summer, those who have expiring contracts and are of no use should be left. Renewing causes more issues.
  38. Jan 12, 2019
    #78

    Subho611 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,548
    This. We aren't good at selling because we aren't a selling club.
  39. Jan 12, 2019
    #79

    Fosu-Mens Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2016
    Messages:
    1,371
    Location:
    Muppet station for next season.
    No. @finneh is right. We are not a selling club because the players does not want to leave since they will never get the same wages anywhere else in Europe. And for smaller clubs to afford to attract our players they can't afford to pay the "market price" for them.

    We should hope the likes of Sunderland and Stoke comes back into the Prem so that we can offload our deadwood to them for a stupid amount.
  40. Jan 12, 2019
    #80

    Gopher Brown Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2013
    Messages:
    3,266
    Yes, but we pay high wages because the club makes an enormous amount of money and the players are the reason (prize money, advertising etc). No business pays its employees over the odds for no reason, and if you worked for a company where your contribution resulted in their profits growing, you’d want a slice of the financial success.

    Having said that, I’d very hard to justify £110,000 per week for Ashley Young or £300,000 per week for Rooney back in the day.