Bruno Fernandes | Signed

Status
Not open for further replies.

Inter Yer Nan

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
6,380
Location
Los Angeles, CA (from UK)
If he's as good as reported then perhaps it's one to be excited about. Good getting him in January too so he'll bed in early instead of coming back late from the Euro's and barely getting a pre-season.
 

gr3yham3

Full Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
1,182
How often does he miss penalties? His run up looks like it'll give me stress.
I just checked this yesterday. He is 20 out of 22 from the spot, and 16 out of 17 since he joined Sporting.
 

Coops73

Full Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
3,340
Not long ago if a player wanted to renew the contract for more money they would use United as the “club interested” as a platform to get the new contract, I remember Ramos and Ronaldo on the news a few years ago. That’s over!
So is that a positive or a negative? Can’t quite work it out.
 

lysglimt

Full Member
Scout
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
15,317
So if this works out can we write: Fernandes rejected Barca to join United, like every other story would have been, if it had been the other way around (even if there is zero evidence that they were ever interested in him) ?
 

Red71

Full Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2013
Messages
478
So is that a positive or a negative? Can’t quite work it out.
That’s a positive for me....sick of United’s name getting dragged into the papers and used by others, mostly when we’ve got no interest. It just ends up whipping fans into a frenzy unnecessarily....

If anyone needs their eyes opening this Bruno fiasco tells you all you need to know about what kind of incompetent twats are running the club. Haggling over 5-10m euros for a month, news about Barcelona interest leaked today and here we go Arnold and his master Woodward cave in and pay up. Absolute fecking clowns.
99.9% of people on this forum (obviously me included) have no clue about the negotiation for Fernandes. It’s just another reason to post negativity about the club. If you’re going to believe everything you’ve read in the papers about this deal, I’ve got a deal on a bridge you might be interested in.....
 

RORY65

Full Member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
4,537
Not sure what to make of this deal to be honest. I'm really pleased that we're getting an upgrade at number 10, we desperately need one, and he does look like a good player so from that point of view this is a positive following lots of negative stories recently. Hopefully he does well for us, despite being a poor side it's still not inconceivable that we can make the top 4 if things go our way.

However at the same time the club seemed to think in the summer that he wasn't what they wanted (he gives the ball away too much apparently) and that this story was being driven by the Portuguese press. We knew he was available then and ever since for the right price so the fact that it's taken this long would indicate serious reservations within the club and also begs the question how effective this new scouting model is that we couldn't find anyone that we liked more when it was clearly an area that needed strengthening even going in to last summer.
 

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
28,699
Y

Obviously not, but do you not think that our initial offer consisted of similar hard-to-reach objectives?

So, now that you’ve got all the sarcastic responses out of the way, can you answer my question and explain where you got the 20% price reduction from? You really think the starting point was them wanting a guaranteed €80m and we tricked them into taking €60m?

We’re obviously not going to agree on this but I’d rather have had the player integrated into the squad by the time we got to the winnable games (Burnley/wolves) and increased our chances of winning those games than having the money go to the Glazers in dividends, for an extra €5-10m, in a situation where our squad is paper thin.

If we’d have been a poor club I would’ve taken your point but the club has the third highest profits in all of football. Not like that amount is going to make or break the club that is in dire need of quality players to push for a slot in the CL. Not to mention the fact that having this deal over the line with two weeks to spare might’ve allowed us to focus on another target as well.
So now you're taking it from the original offer me made, as opposed to the amount they originally asked for? Genuinely, this is getting a little ridiculous now.

From the original quoted prices, to the prices we have been quoted now. Roughly a 20% difference. It is quite mind boggling that people think our club should not negotiate.
 

Coops73

Full Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
3,340
That’s a positive for me....sick of United’s name getting dragged into the papers and used by others, mostly when we’ve got no interest. It just ends up whipping fans into a frenzy unnecessarily....



99.9% of people on this forum (obviously me included) have no clue about the negotiation for Fernandes. It’s just another reason to post negativity about the club. If you’re going to believe everything you’ve read in the papers about this deal, I’ve got a deal on a bridge you might be interested in.....
You know I’m taking the piss right?
 

matherto

ask me about our 50% off sale!
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
17,549
Location
St. Helens
I really hope he's good. £50-60m is no small amount of money.

For that we could've gotten Buendia and Allan Saint-Maxim from the PL for a little more, both whom I rate highly. Just never know with players from weaker leagues.
Christ on a bike, Saint Maximin is the definition of a player without a brain.

Buendia looks okay whilst playing for Norwich and will probably find a decent team next season when they're relegated but c'mon mate.
 

Anustart89

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
15,955
So now you're taking it from the original offer me made, as opposed to the amount they originally asked for? Genuinely, this is getting a little ridiculous now.

From the original quoted prices, to the prices we have been quoted now. Roughly a 20% difference. It is quite mind boggling that people think our club should not negotiate.
I'm not saying we shouldn't negotiate, but if we were willing to pay a guaranteed €65m for him (assuming we make it into the CL in the next 5 years), I'm fairly sure we could've got him on Jan 1st for a guaranteed €5-10m more (and a maximum of €15m more). Our mistake was initiating the negotiations with a derisory offer (considering their very public valuation of him) that extended the negotiations by a couple of weeks.

Having him integrated into a weak squad at this point could've made a big difference to our top 4 aspirations (and if it didn't we'd not have to pay the CL entry bonus anyway) considering the performances of the position's current occupants. And as I said above in another post, having him sorted by the 15th of January could've made it possible to go after another target in this window, seeing as we can seemingly only negotiate for one player at a time.

Plus it's not my money and seeing as the club's quite healthy financially, I as a supporter value the on-pitch performances and increased chances of CL participation far higher than a few million for one of the richest clubs in the world.
 
Last edited:

jderbyshire

Has anybody seen my fleshlight?
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
4,188
Has no one stopped to think about how this will affect Lingard's development??
 

theklr

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
2,659
Has no one stopped to think about how this will affect Lingard's development??
Bruno will watch and learn from Lingard, until he is ready to take the mantle (or at least try his very best) when Lingard goes to Barcelona this summer.
 

ShinjiNinja26

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
11,196
Location
Location, Location
Between last summer and what’s went on this window I’m still stopping myself getting too giddy until I see him holding up the shirt. Been burned by this to much already. :lol:
 

roseguy64

Full Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
12,258
Location
Jamaica
Let me take you back to Dec 29th, three days before the transfer window opened


The fact that our club is so dysfunctional has made people forget what a normally functioning club looks like.
This is the wrong transfer to use to make your point.
 

roseguy64

Full Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
12,258
Location
Jamaica
If we'd also managed to get Haaland this would have been a great window. Now need to get a striker/winger in on loan.
 

Anustart89

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
15,955
This is the wrong transfer to use to make your point.
Yeah, I admitted as much in another post as well after the release clause had been pointed out and said that Hargreaves/Anderson/Nani announcement in May was a better example. However, I still stand by the point that we could've wrapped this up much earlier if we'd started negotiations way before the transfer window opened.

They were trying to sell him last summer and had a fairly well-known debt, so why we waited to start negotiations until January and then dragged the negotiations out by severely low-balling them despite a known valuation for the sake of saving €5-10m is something I, as a supporter mostly concerned with our on-pitch performances and chances of CL qualification, disagree with. Like I said, having him available for Burnley/Wolves could've made a big difference in those two games. After all, we're spending big on him because we believe that he can make a difference.
 

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
28,699
I'm not saying we shouldn't negotiate, but if we were willing to pay a guaranteed €65m for him (assuming we make it into the CL in the next 5 years), I'm fairly sure we could've got him on Jan 1st for a guaranteed €5-10m more (and a maximum of €15m more). Our mistake was initiating the negotiations with a derisory offer (considering their very public valuation of him) that extended the negotiations by a couple of weeks.
That's literally how every negotiation works. You're making the mistake of thinking there's some magic number Sporting wanted. They wanted as much as they could get because they're financially fecked. Whatever number you offer, they'll counter it with a higher one.
 

roseguy64

Full Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
12,258
Location
Jamaica
Seems like the club have changed tact. I believe that Raiola was being a greedy cnut. On the other hand Dortmund was a great choice for his career.
Yeah I know why the Haaland deal didn't work out but would have backed us to be favourites for top 4 with both him and Bruno in.
 

roseguy64

Full Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
12,258
Location
Jamaica
Yeah, I admitted as much in another post as well after the release clause had been pointed out and said that Hargreaves/Anderson/Nani announcement in May was a better example. However, I still stand by the point that we could've wrapped this up much earlier if we'd started negotiations way before the transfer window opened.

They were trying to sell him last summer and had a fairly well-known debt, so why we waited to start negotiations until January and then dragged the negotiations out by severely low-balling them despite a known valuation for the sake of saving €5-10m is something I, as a supporter mostly concerned with our on-pitch performances and chances of CL qualification, disagree with. Like I said, having him available for Burnley/Wolves could've made a big difference in those two games. After all, we're spending big on him because we believe that he can make a difference.
This definitely feels like a transfer we didn't intend to make though until the injuries started piling up. He was on our radar but we had to pull the trigger once Rashford, McTominay and Pogba got injured.
 

Anustart89

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
15,955
That's literally how every negotiation works. You're making the mistake of thinking there's some magic number Sporting wanted. They wanted as much as they could get because they're financially fecked. Whatever number you offer, they'll counter it with a higher one.
It was quite widely reported that they wanted €80m during the entire negotiation process.

However, you'd think (and this is me making an assumption) that there's a difference between what you want and what you'd expect to get. My guess is they would've taken €80m (60+10+10) all along, but you're right that I don't know that. Just because their valuation was €80m I don't think they expected it all up front or in guaranteed sums without bonuses, so I think that the assumption that we've successfully managed to lower the price by €15m during January is a bit far-fetched, but it's all a matter of opinions and what assumptions we make.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.