Well that doesn’t really work as a stat. We weren’t spending thaat much back around when they took over and towards the end of SAF + transfer fees were a lot lower. Since SAF left we have spent A LOT net
#GlazersOut
- Thread starter Marcelinho87
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
See the irony of your post? You have claimed my stat doesn't work because 'transfer fees were a lot lower' and then gone on to say that we have 'spent A LOT' since SAF.....
I keep making this point over and over and over again until I get sick of making it.....so I thought I would try and make it in a different way....
The money that has been spent post-SAF is roughly par for the course for a big club, ASSUMING you have a good XI to start with. We didn't/don't thanks to years of Glazer penny-pinching....so no, I am not going to acknowledge that they have spent 'a LOT' post SAF
Have we though?
We made most of the money we spent on Di Maria and Lukaku back. Everyone kind of assumes Pogba will get a transfer next season (for a hefty profit). Even Depay, Schneiderlin and blind wound up costing us very little. We've spent a lot of money twice, and then we've gone back to value in the market.
United’s net spend (including this window, selling Lukaku and not buying anyone else) is ROUGHLY 630m GBP according to TransferMarkt’s numbers.
Works out just about a net spend of 90m each summer since Ferguson.
It’s been a disappointing window. Thought we’d bring in one more signing at least, and move on Darmian, Rojo and the like.
Herrera was not replaced, which is of grave concern.
I do hope we are saving our pennies for a big money move for Sancho.
Other than the knee jerk reactions of “Woodward is incompetent” and “Glazers won’t spend”, I think there is something far more fundamental at play.
While a net worth of £3.9b for the Glazers seems like a lot, when you dig into it, it’s not enough. When Malcom Glazer died, he presumably split his fortune among his children (6) and wife. Not sure if his wife is still alive, but, basically, the empire has been split at least 6 ways. That’s a lot of outside pressure to maximize profits from Man Utd and not necessarily investing in the squad.
When you look at other PL club owners, most of them have higher net worth. In order to stay in the top 4 and challenge for the title and book a place in the CL every year, net spend is going to hit £200 - 250m per year. I don’t think that amount can be spent because we are clearly funding transfers through profits with little, if any, transfer fees being paid through capital injections.
We probably will be sold at some point in the next 5 years.
Herrera was not replaced, which is of grave concern.
I do hope we are saving our pennies for a big money move for Sancho.
Other than the knee jerk reactions of “Woodward is incompetent” and “Glazers won’t spend”, I think there is something far more fundamental at play.
While a net worth of £3.9b for the Glazers seems like a lot, when you dig into it, it’s not enough. When Malcom Glazer died, he presumably split his fortune among his children (6) and wife. Not sure if his wife is still alive, but, basically, the empire has been split at least 6 ways. That’s a lot of outside pressure to maximize profits from Man Utd and not necessarily investing in the squad.
When you look at other PL club owners, most of them have higher net worth. In order to stay in the top 4 and challenge for the title and book a place in the CL every year, net spend is going to hit £200 - 250m per year. I don’t think that amount can be spent because we are clearly funding transfers through profits with little, if any, transfer fees being paid through capital injections.
We probably will be sold at some point in the next 5 years.
We finished 6th! last year 6th! Madrid finished 3rd and have net spent 190m so far Thats how you do it. We generate more money than any other club in the world and have been outspent by Wolves and Aston Villa. How can you still defend these clowns. Spending a world record fee on a player once in 13 years? Its the bare minimum for a club of our size.
is 90m that much?
No.
Have you compared that to other clubs net spend in the same period?
No.
Again, we've made attempts to sign a number of midfielders this summer. That we failed to secure any of them is hardly down to the Glazers. The club chairman controls transfer fees and contract negotiations, not the owners. You should redirect your anger at Ed Woodward.
I'm no fan of the Glazers, for what it's worth, it was solely their decision to appoint David Moyes as Fergie's successor. One of, if not the, worst managerial appointments in the history of the sport. We are where we are today because of that appointment. Everyone and their dog knew the only logical choice was Jose Mourinho, yet for reasons only known to themselves, they went with an absolute nobody. And now we, and they, are paying the price for it.
Is Ronaldo the best player ever?
I was expecting this kind of summer but still it is hilarious. If Lukaku goes then we are outspent by bloody Arsenal and fecking Spurs. And by City who had "quiet" summer.
Rebuilding....
Rebuilding....
Yes.
(City net spend was about 750m in the same period, but they had obviously spent even more money prior to that).
Most of those signings would be 5 year deals so amortising that would be approx 125m pa plus wages. Not huge amounts on 500m turnover. Although given our total wage bill of 250m we are effectively laying out 3/4 of all revenue on players wages and transfer fees. Probably about right to avoid running up debt.
Absolutely pathetic. Disgusts me so much.
You're not accounting for the fact that at the time of the Glazer's takeover, United were in possession of one of the best teams in Europe. There was no need for huge transfer market investment, just the occasional signing here and there to keep the current squad on its toes and competitive.
However, after Fergie retired and the fecking awful decision to replace him with David Moyes inevitablly blew up in their faces, they have invested heavily and consistently. That our managers wasted that investment is not on the shoulders of the Glazers.
And if he does not we have "outspent" all of those clubs. Excellent example of why "net spend" means nothing. We are better off without Lukaku.
95 percent of our fanbase has wanted to pay to get rid of Lukaku and if we manage to get 70m for him this is a bad thing somehow? And now he suddenly needs replacing?
That said I am pissed that we havent gotten in a more experienced CM because Herrera needed replacing even if he left for 0m. Another example of why "net spend" is totally irrelevant.
I will put our reluctance to go for a CM on OGS though.
Exactly that.
feck em.
Net spend means nothing??
seriously? and If Lukaku goes?? he hasn't trained with us for a single minute. He is exiled in Holland. Of course the Glazers new we were going to sell Lukaku and they had set a minimum price for obvious reasons they knew exaclty what their net spend was going to be this summer. Net spend isnt irrelevant its everything to Woodward. He is a banker ffs.Why do people keep saying this? No way in hell Sancho will want to come here. We are in huge decline and he has the world at his feet. Complete different directions.
Hope the happy clappers might finally see some sense.
GTF out of MUFC.
Its nothing to him you mean. That he comes from and accounting background exactly why he does not and not should not care about "net spend". Because he is a finance guy and understands that term is irrelevant and made up by fans that has spent to much time on FM.Net spend means nothing??
You cant be serious. Would you prefer the word Balance maybe? Income Expenditures?
Ferguson did that from a position of power. He also had a settled team of winners to introduce them slowly into the team. People thought it was an odd thing to do do but i don't recollect a clamour to get him sacked in any way at all.
Are you daft? Here is an example for you:
Zlatan 0m
Sanchez 20m (which we gave to the Arse just to use him for like 3 months)
Lets get Messi and Neymar when their contracts expires as well: 0 m.
A nice little "net spend" of 20m.
Or we could do this:
Sancho 120m
Nathan Ake 75m
Callum Hudson Oboi 100m
Julian Weigl 75m
A nice little "net spend" of around 375m.
Which of those scenarios do you think is more expensive for the club? Newsflash: It sure as feck is not the second one.
Transfer fees does not matter if they are not paid for players over the age of 28. Wages do.
50mins away from this page exploding
Yeah pure delusion to think Sancho would even think about joining us. Way he is developing he will have his pick of which club to join next summer. It still hasn’t set in with some people how far we have fallen and that we are still on the way down.
When you look at Spurs now they might not be a bigger club but there a better one, they have more chance of getting Sancho than us.
There is more money for the Glazers to milk yet, they will sell at some point but only when their greed has been satisfied. Given value of club it will probably be sold off in chunks, don’t know who would pay the billions required to buy is outright.
Yeah I think they will stay for another 3-4 years yet, at minimum. They will only go when we are not very profitable, something that is already starting to happen.
Do you have any idea about how much dividends the Glazers have taken out from the 4bn company that is Manchester United since they took over the club in 2005? I will give you a hint: its less than what they invested in Pogba. In total. Over fifteen years.
Ah ok, so they are in it for the love of football I guess
No, they are absolutely in it for the mighty dollar; but by raising the asset value of the club, not by bleeding it dry by dividends. Which actually aligns their interest with the fans, not the other way around.Ah ok, so they are in it for the love of football I guess
So where do we go from here?
We lose a few games, #GlazersOut starts trending.
We win a few games #OlesAtTheWheel
We lose a few more and don’t sign anyone in January #GlazersOut
We finish 8th in the League but beat City in the Cup Final to stop them winning the Quadruple. #OlesAtTheWheel
We lose to Wolves on penalties in the Europa League final a few days later. Rashford, Martial and Lingard all fail to hit the target. #GlazersOut
We lose a few games, #GlazersOut starts trending.
We win a few games #OlesAtTheWheel
We lose a few more and don’t sign anyone in January #GlazersOut
We finish 8th in the League but beat City in the Cup Final to stop them winning the Quadruple. #OlesAtTheWheel
We lose to Wolves on penalties in the Europa League final a few days later. Rashford, Martial and Lingard all fail to hit the target. #GlazersOut
Nothing will happen. OT fans have watched us drop to this without a whimper, so why expect that to change?
The club has tried throwing money at the problem repeatedly over the past five years, buying players who don't really care about where they play so long as they get paid. And where has it gotten them? It's clear that more signings could have been made this summer, but the players involved ultimately didn't seem that interested in coming to Manchester United, and would have done so solely for the money. The absolute last thing the club needs is another millstone like Sanchez hanging around its neck. Instead, the focus has been on players who were desperate to come and will give their all for the shirt. And whilst nobody's saying that just hard work is enough, the thing that the squad has been sorely lacking in the past few years is players willing to put a shift in. Whose heads don't go down at the first sign of adversity. Who don't just give up when things don't go their way, because ultimately they get paid either way.
I feel like I'm the only person who's reasonably happy with the transfer dealings this summer. Sure, another signing or two would have been nice if the right players were available and interested, but I don't see that they were. A lack of Champions League football is massively off-putting to the very best players in the world. The signings made are a great start to rebuilding the squad, and it's never something that was going to be done in one transfer window. It's going to take multiple years to put together a squad that's capable of challenging at the very highest level again. Three hungry young players who want to play for the club is a good start.
Glazer defenders at this point remind me of chemical Ali, the Iraqi information minister. Telling the media that American tanks were not in Baghdad as they were rolling behind him on camera.
That's not true though.
The Glazers have taken out a substantial amount in dividends every year - to the tune of £15m a year, along with the rest of the shareholders,
Yes there need to be demonstrations around the city and outside the FA headquarters.