Bruno Fernandes Out?

Abhinav said:
100m is insane money in general, but is not that insane in the context of what it can buy in terms of elite football players.
Yes, it will help in the PSR calculations but that is not the only constraint we have in terms of buying players at the moment. PSR aside, we dont actually have that much amount of cash / borrowing capacity to spend in the market even if PSR allowed for it.

So, in terms of the football market, 100m will allow you to get at most a good striker, like a Gyokeres, and another squad player. It’s for sure not going to be transformative in terms of overall squad composition, especially considering what you are losing in return.
Click to expand...
I guess we'd need some brainiac to do the calculation but we don't pay fees all upfront (like we paid extra for Zirkzee to spread the payment over a longer period) whereas in this hypothetical Saudi just whack us £100m, so you could buy 4-5 players worth £30-40m and spread the payment terms from my understanding. Add that to getting CL football and another near £100m and you're getting close to 6-8 new players arriving in one summer.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
I guess we'd need some brainiac to do the calculation but we don't pay fees all upfront (like we paid extra for Zirkzee to spread the payment over a longer period) whereas in this hypothetical Saudi just whack us £100m, so you could buy 4-5 players worth £30-40m and spread the payment terms from my understanding. Add that to getting CL football and another near £100m and you're getting close to 6-8 new players arriving in one summer.
Click to expand...

It doesn't really work like that though because if that's the strategy you adopt every season (spend 2-3 times the money you have and spread the cost over the next years) you quickly end up with 2-3 times the money you have being zero.
 
Bright_Eyes said:
It doesn't really work like that though because if that's the strategy you adopt every season (spend 2-3 times the money you have and spread the cost over the next years) you quickly end up with 2-3 times the money you have being zero.
Click to expand...
We know we have some sales though this season + a large chunk of wages off the books + potential CL money. The club doesn't only spend!
 
Part of me wants to sell him just so we can see what the reality of life without him would be. I think it would be an absolutely massive and stupid gamble though. Its just my curiosity that likes the idea. Rational me says no.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
We know we have some sales though this season + a large chunk of wages off the books + potential CL money. The club doesn't only spend!
Click to expand...

Yeah, all I'm saying is that if you have a budget of what you can spend in a season based on what you have and what you're expected to earn, and keep spending more than that, delaying the costs to the seasons after, it's unsustainable. Say we have a budget of £100m this season, and sell players for £100m, then spend £400m spread over the next seasons, then do that again for the next couple of seasons, very quickly we're skint. So I think generally a sale for £100m doesn't mean we can then spend an extra £200m on players spread out. At least not sustainably, it affects how much we can spend in the following seasons. We've been so bad at selling players ourselves too that it must be hurting us a lot as we're not getting much of that spread out income from sales.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
We know we have some sales though this season + a large chunk of wages off the books + potential CL money. The club doesn't only spend!
Click to expand...

This theory doesn't really work right?

Say for instance we bought Sancho and his fee was paid over 5 years £72m... so you are paying £14.4m a year for him, so even if we sell him for £20m.. the profit is £6m.

So there is a massive limitation of what we can spend this summer as SJR mentioned, we are still paying for our other big name signings... We owe alot of clubs money.
 
Bright_Eyes said:
Yeah, all I'm saying is that if you have a budget of what you can spend in a season based on what you have and what you're expected to earn, and keep spending more than that, delaying the costs to the seasons after, it's unsustainable. Say we have a budget of £100m this season, and sell players for £100m, then spend £400m spread over the next seasons, then do that again for the next couple of seasons, very quickly we're skint. So I think generally a sale for £100m doesn't mean we can then spend an extra £200m on players spread out. At least not sustainably, it affects how much we can spend in the following seasons. We've been so bad at selling players ourselves too that it must be hurting us a lot as we're not getting much of that spread out income from sales.
Click to expand...
OK gotcha, yeah I guess I am relying somewhat on Ineos being competent. If we have a bad summer window now, it might genuinely ruin the club if we also miss out on CL football.
 
I can't see him agreeing on a move to Saudi Arabia, but if one of the big European clubs come calling he could be tempted.
 
romufc said:
This theory doesn't really work right?

Say for instance we bought Sancho and his fee was paid over 5 years £72m... so you are paying £14.4m a year for him, so even if we sell him for £20m.. the profit is £6m.

So there is a massive limitation of what we can spend this summer as SJR mentioned, we are still paying for our other big name signings... We owe alot of clubs money.
Click to expand...
There is a period where there's the overlap between shit recruitment and, hopefully, semi competent recruitment. It's true we owe many clubs but we are selling a bit better and it seems like we will sell/try to sell a number of players this summer. Let's see, Ineos might be awful, but most of our big mistakes are gone, on loan or nearing the end of deals.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
There is a period where there's the overlap between shit recruitment and, hopefully, semi competent recruitment. It's true we owe many clubs but we are selling a bit better and it seems like we will sell/try to sell a number of players this summer. Let's see, Ineos might be awful, but most of our big mistakes are gone, on loan or nearing the end of deals.
Click to expand...

Yes, we need to get the dark cloud over our head from previous.

I agree, INEOS are selling better, for first time in how many years, we got 100m in sales last summer.

If we can continue to do so, whilst reducing our wages, we will be more sustainable.

The issue we have at the moment is now... how much do we have this summer to spend because in an ideal world we need Gyokeres, Cunha (or similar), a CM who can pass and is athletic, RWB and a keeper.

Those imo are a minimum requirement for the summer, which will cost alot.

If we can somehow get lucky, like every other club and get a silly offer for Antony or Onana for 50m plus.
 
I reckon this will become a bigger and bigger story if we dont make the Champions League next season.
 
I'd sell him only for a bonkers 150m+ fee. Even 100m feels less as we would need atleast 2 established starters to replace him
 
Van Piorsing said:
He is indeed better and for a good price, but in this new system, replacing anyone so far looks difficult, as only Bruno looking to play his 100%. Dorgu and Zirkzee while being signed as fitting players also seems like in need of time to grasp this way of play.

Bissaka was also looking good when he arrived, so I'd like to see some longevity of quality from players like Maz, De Ligt or Ugarte, mainly because PL verifies every player's weakness after couple of seasons.
Click to expand...
Zirkzee was signed under EtH not Amorin so he wasn't bought to fit the current system
 
Ben Jacob’s reporting he’s been offered a wage of 1.25m a week. If that is true then Bruno will be seriously considering it- generations of his family set up for life
 
Rasmus_9 said:
Ben Jacob’s reporting he’s been offered a wage of 1.25m a week. If that is true then Bruno will be seriously considering it- generations of his family set up for life
Click to expand...
He's a Chelsea shill who knows nothing united related. Bruno is on 300k per week already, that's already generation wealth and then some. He also signed a new contract and accepted a very modest raise, so he's clearly not money driven. It's amazing how these ABU journalists are running this story a couple of days before our most important match of the season. To add to it, other sources are saying that Bruno is one of the few players that the club will not be selling this summer.
 
Bruno last year or the year before = easily sellable to fund a rebuild. Bruno this year after his resurgence as a genuine refined playmaker who holds his horses well = first piece of the rebuild.

Unfortunately for him he kinda wasted his prime so far here but with Amorim in charge he makes him definitely play the best we have seen and so far this year he only played with b-team players or academy pretty much in this system so he will be looking forward for a big uplift in teams performance which will come next season. And if we win the Europa league, hee will have won FA cup, EL, thats not nothing, some big wins on the road included, while being also very wasteful player himself for two seasons. He has also been very well paid and United Captain with good fans behind. This will not be easy to leave. And what for?

On the verge of 32-33, can't see REAL or PSG , City or Liverpool splashing 70-100m for him as our captain and 32 year old, they will reinvest elsewhere. Other teams will be a step down and never a guaranteed trophy anyway. SO I think he can as well just decide to stay beyond next season and become a true United legend while being a part of new ERA.
 
sullydnl said:
The idea that we couldn't buy an adequate replacement for Bruno for less than £100m is somewhat undermined by the fact that we brought Bruno himself for £47m plus add-ons.

Bruno is an excellent player, but the world is full of excellent and potentially excellent players. And while he has contributed a lot in terms of goals/assists this season, "a lot" in this context puts him 57th for goals and assists across Europe's Big 5 Leagues.

Within our own league this season players like Bowen, Kluivert, Cunha, Luis Diaz, Murphy, Mbeumo and Palmer have also produced as much or more goals & assist, all of whom also cost their own clubs significantly less than £100m.

The issue isn't replacing a player like Bruno with that kind of money, it's trusting our recruitment team to replace Bruno with that kind of money.
Click to expand...

Agreed however I get we've been burnt so hard on spending but I have more trust in Wilcox and Christopher Vivell. They did good work at City, Southampton, Red Bull and Chelsea.

For 100mil plus, throw in a they gotta buy our other players on big wages or players we will struggle to sell like Onana and Casemiro. Cash upfront as well to help with our lack of cash in general after all that I would do that.
 
For the sort of money being talked about +£100M we need to sell. The guy will be 31 at the start of next season

I think it would be amazing for him to win us the Europa, go for a bonkers fee, and the crazy wages they talking about for him - £65M per season. Sounds like a good deal for all involved and a great note to end on considering some of his heroics

Contact has been active on the player side since the summer of 2024 about a move, and Fernandes has been sent a non-binding offer with a view to securing him on a three-year contract. He is yet to respond. It is believed his has been offered wages in excess of £65m per season.
Click to expand...
 
Devil_forever said:
He's a Chelsea shill who knows nothing united related. Bruno is on 300k per week already, that's already generation wealth and then some. He also signed a new contract and accepted a very modest raise, so he's clearly not money driven. It's amazing how these ABU journalists are running this story a couple of days before our most important match of the season. To add to it, other sources are saying that Bruno is one of the few players that the club will not be selling this summer.
Click to expand...
He's on 300k pre-tax, so about 160k after tax, this would be 1.25m tax free. Over 3 years that takes you from 24m to 195m, that's insane whoever you are
 
ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg said:
Two games away from winning the Europa League, with a 3-0 first leg advantage… hmmmmm.

We aren’t skint, and so what if we need to ‘rebuild’. More than happy to sell Bruno for someone we guarantee to contribute more and have his level of fitness. Answers to who that is, on a post card please.
Click to expand...

If winning the Europa League is the long term goal, than we really have fallen off. And this is a summer transfer that wouldn't affect that anyway.

We are absolutely cash strapped. We have owners that havent put a dime into the club and whos reckless spending has left us up against it in terms of PSR. We cant afford to fill all the gaps we currently have in the squad or even spend that big this summer unless we make some big sales. And Bruno and Mainoo are probably the only players in our squad that would command a decent fee and Bruno is nearly the wrong side of 30.

I dont want to sell him, but it that means freeing up 120 mil to spend on a few players to potentially replace him long term, I'm in for it. Sell him or not (and we won't), our scouting as to be dead on the next few windows or this fall is going to continue.
 
Rooney1987 said:
Wasn't he one of those who got in on the United scene from the takeover chat? Thought he was one of those with a Qatar source unless I'm thinking of someone else.
Click to expand...
Potentially. I'm not sure. He was certainly covering that topic, I recall in particular @Pexbo was a huge fan of his work.
 
Exiled_Red said:
If winning the Europa League is the long term goal, than we really have fallen off. And this is a summer transfer that wouldn't affect that anyway.

We are absolutely cash strapped. We have owners that havent put a dime into the club and whos reckless spending has left us up against it in terms of PSR. We cant afford to fill all the gaps we currently have in the squad or even spend that big this summer unless we make some big sales. And Bruno and Mainoo are probably the only players in our squad that would command a decent fee and Bruno is nearly the wrong side of 30.

I dont want to sell him, but it that means freeing up 120 mil to spend on a few players to potentially replace him long term, I'm in for it. Sell him or not (and we won't), our scouting as to be dead on the next few windows or this fall is going to continue.
Click to expand...
No one said winning the EL was a long term goal. We are however 2 games away from winning a trophy.
 
It would take 200m just to replace his impact. He will be missed massively. No other players come close to him. Unless Wirtz is possible which I highly doubt.
 
150 plus I'd considered it. That would give us the bones of 300m to build a team this summer. 300m could get us cunha Wharton Gyokeres plus over 100m to strengthen keeper plus one or two other positions. Love bruno though.
 
120-150 mil you’d really have to consider it.

He’s in a weird position in that he’s accommodated within the system, and he is generally probably not the profile of player for Amorin’s ideal system, however right now he is the heartbeat of this team and putting in heroic efforts. So he’d be a loss no matter what happens.

I also don’t think Bruno would want to leave for Saudi. Surely if he was to go it’s only for a champions league club.
 
Bruno’s irreplaceable in our current state. Not only would it make the team undoubtedly weaker, it would show a total lack of ambition from INEOS that wouldn’t go down well with the fans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.