Hard times: adjusting to the new reality
- Thread starter Katy Cat
- Start date
-
Hello, Guest! We have a new competition (with tagline and award as prizes) starting.
A new Odds or Evens competition is starting now. Click here to enter to submit your predictions. Submissions will be open for the next 7 days, 20 hours, 56 minutes, 43 seconds, and will close on Sep 12, 2026 at 15:00.
It's possible to spend big money on the wrong players but its also impossible to win stuff without spending big money on great talent. Rio, Rooney, Keane, Yorke and Cole were top players at their respective clubs. They weren't bench players there.
I think we just have to suck it up.
The kid over the roads dad bought them grealish a few christmas ago, but he was out on the street 2yrs later.
Spot on.
Rooney and Rio aside, most (or maybe the rest?) of our last truly great side of August 06 - May 08 were well scouted and relatively cheaper signings from around Europe.
The likes of Vidic, Evra, Park etc were all bargains.
Our one signing of summer 2006 was the cheaper Michael Carrick who at the time "wasn't time to lace Roy Keane's boots" at a time when Chelsea were signing the likes of Michael Ballack.
Hell, even Ronaldo, whilst probably expensive at the time for a teenager was 12million when other sides were spending much more.
Even in the Treble season, the summer of big spending in 98 was a rarity in the 90s and we'd been notoriously low spenders during most summers.
I'm not jealous and envious of any of our rivals spending. We have been utterly embarrassing in every transfer window since winning the league. Overpaying fees and wages has costs us dearly and put us in the position we are in. Of course a left back and striker would have been ideal but it's not the end of the world.
We've gone about things very quietly. I feel city and especially spurs have had our scatter gun approach this summer and Chelsea continue with their high turn over of players. Changing teams drastically through recruitment hardly ends well and you saw that with Liverpool last season.
A left back, centre back (maybe 2) and striker next season remain the priority.
We've gone about things very quietly. I feel city and especially spurs have had our scatter gun approach this summer and Chelsea continue with their high turn over of players. Changing teams drastically through recruitment hardly ends well and you saw that with Liverpool last season.
A left back, centre back (maybe 2) and striker next season remain the priority.
Carrick was a regular first teamer at West Ham. He certainly wasn't being benched by a geriatric Milner. SAF utilized a mix of high rank signings with high potential, relatively unknown talent (Ole, Johnsen, Vidic, Evra etc) and he would occasionally strengthen the bench with short term signings like Owen, Larson and co. 12m for an 18 year old Ronaldo was huge at the time and was considered a madness by every Italian pundit at the time.
This season we seem to have adopted the idea that only EPL proven players would do which is crazy considering that prices in the EPL had always been inflated and we're on a limited budget. Which led to us signing two squad players at their respective former clubs and a 29 year old with more mileage then a Lada.
I think what fans really want is to believe there is a chance the club will compete for and win the title again. That simply isn’t a reality anymore.
No one can even pretend that is a possibility when the club has virtually no capability to raise funds in the transfer market and a relatively modest net spend capability.
The transfer business may have got better but it’s not been exceptional, not even one player could be described as that, and that’s what it needs to be to close the gap.
We probably add a starter or two next summer, then start talking about what we fix the next window. Rashford, Maguire, Shaw, Mount, maybe Bruno and others probably leave with no transfer fees being received over next couple of years, others leave for cut price fees. Cunha and Mbeumo turn 28 this season so those fixes aren’t even long term and recruitment is hit and miss so you always need more players than you think.
There simply aren’t the resources to address everything, we don’t sign enough players, don’t raise enough money and we aren’t finding or producing elite players so we are what we are now, which is a team that might finish in the Champions League places and maybe win a cup. To be more than that requires us massively pinching above our weight now by recruiting much better with a smaller budget. Not impossible but also very unlikely.
Yeah, the Glazers and Woodward have fecked our finances. We are in are Arsenal post Emirates era now, but with a lot more fecking debt. We can’t play with the big boys at all. It’s sad. We gotta do it, the underdog style, until the Glazers are gone.
More of annoyance for me, would be….apparently close to signing the kid from Leicester. But then it not quite being finalised
So, they have identified him. Relatively cheap investment for the future. Our valuations aren’t too far apart. DONT STOP NOW. Just because the window shuts doesn’t mean conversations stop. Get the deal done, wrapped up and ready to go for the next window.
So, they have identified him. Relatively cheap investment for the future. Our valuations aren’t too far apart. DONT STOP NOW. Just because the window shuts doesn’t mean conversations stop. Get the deal done, wrapped up and ready to go for the next window.
Exactly. There is some weird copium going on in this thread. I don't think that the expectation is for us to spend like City but rather be able to compete at the top like city which basically is very unlikely with the current level & method of spending. I sincerely believe that with us getting Cl this season and the way the top clubs are currently a good transfer window would have kind of put us in a great position to mount a challenge but at worst finish on the top 4 again. Instead what we have done will cap our ceiling at top 4 whilst leaving the possibility that we miss out on Cl altogether again. What happens next summer if we don't make the CL ? It becomes way harder to go again as a club .
I know finances aren't of interest to most fans, since its not really football, but I think many United fans missed how much it went wrong for United from 2020 onwards. The LBO debt from the Glazers has been a millstone round our neck, true, but the fact is that, pre-2020, we consistently made a profit each year, we had c£300M cash in bank and we didn't have any meaningful short term debt beyond the usual short term structured payments on transfers that all clubs have. So while our underlying business model was soft, and we were profligate, it was at least roughly functional.
Then covid hit us. Our reliance on stadium income and lack of a sugar daddy meant we were among the clubs worst hit. In 2019-20 and 2020-21, with the stadium closed, we made well over £100M in losses, and our cash position dropped significantly.
Then, as we rolled out of lockdown, our total expenses rose dramatically. We basically spent more on everything - wages, general operating costs, sacking Ole, and so on. Worst of all was the transfer splurges of summer 2022 & 2023, which were not only costly, but we brought a load of rubbish. Which means, instead of rowing back our finances to pre-covid spending, we motored ahead and racked up another £250M losses over 3 years, while also building a team that needed replacing almost immediately.
The simple fact is that no business like ours can afford to rack up nearly £400M in losses in 5 years with zero impact. For us, it was fairly straightforward. Instead of sitting on £300M cash, we were down to more like £70M; instead of zero short term credit use, we were using well over £100M of it; and by stretching out transfer payments to other clubs over a long period, it began to stack, meaning we were essentially eating into future years' transfer budget early.
This mess is what prompted the Glazer's to start their "strategic review". Basically, if they carried on as they were doing, there was a real risk of a debt spiral.
This is the nonsense that's led to the current lack of money. Ineos' approach so far has been to try and cut running costs via wages, both on and off the pitch, and spend less on player transfers and focus on canny purchases. Whether this is the right approach or not we'll find over time. However, other than a nation state or some form of uber-billionaire taking over (which brings its own issues) there was always going to be a time when we had to reign spending in. When transfers and wages are your biggest spends, you have little choice but to make savings there. Whether we did that last year, this year, next year is all open to debate, but doing nothing seems the highest risk.
That said, the financial picture is looking slightly better. The last financial year looks like it's going to be the best in a while in terms of profit and loss, and that was with no Europe and only 1 home game in the cup. We even managed to pay off a little short term debt, temporarily at least.
This year, with the CL and hopefully a couple more cup games, there's every reason to think that we'll post a solid profit. Our turnover will also increase pretty significantly. Not enough to both clear the short term credit use while also restoring the cash pile, but probably enough to chip away at both problems. Which means that, while we probably don't want to go back to the days of Woodward spending, we should at least be able to spend more than we did this summer.
Then covid hit us. Our reliance on stadium income and lack of a sugar daddy meant we were among the clubs worst hit. In 2019-20 and 2020-21, with the stadium closed, we made well over £100M in losses, and our cash position dropped significantly.
Then, as we rolled out of lockdown, our total expenses rose dramatically. We basically spent more on everything - wages, general operating costs, sacking Ole, and so on. Worst of all was the transfer splurges of summer 2022 & 2023, which were not only costly, but we brought a load of rubbish. Which means, instead of rowing back our finances to pre-covid spending, we motored ahead and racked up another £250M losses over 3 years, while also building a team that needed replacing almost immediately.
The simple fact is that no business like ours can afford to rack up nearly £400M in losses in 5 years with zero impact. For us, it was fairly straightforward. Instead of sitting on £300M cash, we were down to more like £70M; instead of zero short term credit use, we were using well over £100M of it; and by stretching out transfer payments to other clubs over a long period, it began to stack, meaning we were essentially eating into future years' transfer budget early.
This mess is what prompted the Glazer's to start their "strategic review". Basically, if they carried on as they were doing, there was a real risk of a debt spiral.
This is the nonsense that's led to the current lack of money. Ineos' approach so far has been to try and cut running costs via wages, both on and off the pitch, and spend less on player transfers and focus on canny purchases. Whether this is the right approach or not we'll find over time. However, other than a nation state or some form of uber-billionaire taking over (which brings its own issues) there was always going to be a time when we had to reign spending in. When transfers and wages are your biggest spends, you have little choice but to make savings there. Whether we did that last year, this year, next year is all open to debate, but doing nothing seems the highest risk.
That said, the financial picture is looking slightly better. The last financial year looks like it's going to be the best in a while in terms of profit and loss, and that was with no Europe and only 1 home game in the cup. We even managed to pay off a little short term debt, temporarily at least.
This year, with the CL and hopefully a couple more cup games, there's every reason to think that we'll post a solid profit. Our turnover will also increase pretty significantly. Not enough to both clear the short term credit use while also restoring the cash pile, but probably enough to chip away at both problems. Which means that, while we probably don't want to go back to the days of Woodward spending, we should at least be able to spend more than we did this summer.
In June 2019, the club had £300 million in cash. Since then we've lost over £400 million (and we will have lost some money last year as well but not as much with the context of no europe). It shouldn't be a surprise that we have no money and have been dependant on the credit facility ever since Covid. It means that doing more transfers means incurring more debt (via said credit facility). Doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't do the spending necessarily but then its the balance of risk if things don't work out as it could make the situation even worse if things go wrong but still need to do enough to at least get the Champions League revenue to recover financially. If we spent like Tottenham (including wages like Tonali) and it didn't work out, we would be absolutely f***ed.
Not being able to sell players only makes it harder but who were we going to sell anyway except for players that we don't want to particularly sell? Onana, Shaw, Ugarte, Mount are basically unsellable due to injuries/wages/Onana being crap, Rashford unlikely, no one wants to buy Zirkzee. Maybe Martinez but probably not getting a lot due to age, injuries and contract situation and he would still need to be replaced with De Lijt's injury.
I appreciate talk of ambition and the aim has to be the top for a club like United of course but I don't think many realise just how difficult it will be just to stay as a champions league level club, let along title challenging. To be frank we've barely been a champions league level performing club in 5 years. Since Carrick was manager the 1st time around, when we beat Villarreal, we have won precisely ONE champions league game since and even that was because of a last minute penalty save by Onana against the european heavyweight of FC Copenhagen. We were then basically a mid-table club at best from 2023 to 2025 with financial limitations.
There is also not going to be some benevolent multi-billionaire who is going to come along and solve all our problems overnight, nor some human-rights violating nation state coming to bail us out to the tune of 5-6 billion (plus brand new stadium?). That's the reality, I don't know what solution there is to the ownership structure as it is. The choice was either what we currently have, Hedge funds investing in the club or carry on as we were prior to INEOS.
In short the Glazers have completely screwed us over, at least from being a PL/CL winning club and we are in the tier below for now.
Not being able to sell players only makes it harder but who were we going to sell anyway except for players that we don't want to particularly sell? Onana, Shaw, Ugarte, Mount are basically unsellable due to injuries/wages/Onana being crap, Rashford unlikely, no one wants to buy Zirkzee. Maybe Martinez but probably not getting a lot due to age, injuries and contract situation and he would still need to be replaced with De Lijt's injury.
I appreciate talk of ambition and the aim has to be the top for a club like United of course but I don't think many realise just how difficult it will be just to stay as a champions league level club, let along title challenging. To be frank we've barely been a champions league level performing club in 5 years. Since Carrick was manager the 1st time around, when we beat Villarreal, we have won precisely ONE champions league game since and even that was because of a last minute penalty save by Onana against the european heavyweight of FC Copenhagen. We were then basically a mid-table club at best from 2023 to 2025 with financial limitations.
There is also not going to be some benevolent multi-billionaire who is going to come along and solve all our problems overnight, nor some human-rights violating nation state coming to bail us out to the tune of 5-6 billion (plus brand new stadium?). That's the reality, I don't know what solution there is to the ownership structure as it is. The choice was either what we currently have, Hedge funds investing in the club or carry on as we were prior to INEOS.
In short the Glazers have completely screwed us over, at least from being a PL/CL winning club and we are in the tier below for now.
So where does the money come from?
I think Ineos have just proven that winning the league is not a priority at the moment, despite all the nonsense their PR team sprout.
They should just come out and say, we need another 3 or 4 years of stability before we can take the next step.
Our net spend was probably way higher in the previous summer transfer window and surely with Champions League this year and some of the high earners off the books we surely had much more money to spend ?
The fact we have spent way less is a glaring statement from Ineos.
Qualifying for the Champions League next year is not a given now and that would put us back even further, seems like a rinse and repeat situation again.
They should just come out and say, we need another 3 or 4 years of stability before we can take the next step.
Our net spend was probably way higher in the previous summer transfer window and surely with Champions League this year and some of the high earners off the books we surely had much more money to spend ?
The fact we have spent way less is a glaring statement from Ineos.
Qualifying for the Champions League next year is not a given now and that would put us back even further, seems like a rinse and repeat situation again.
There are many ways to look at transfer spending, and it's a basic pitfall to stare yourself blind at a single window and big acquisitions and to put too much weight on that. But try as I might, I can't find a way to look at this one that doesn't tell me there are presently four clubs in England that shows real ambition and intent to compete for the top, and a fifth who is making a serious effort to get there. The four are Arsenal, City, Liverpool and Chelsea, the fifth one is Spurs.
Arsenal already has a title-winning squad, and are outspending us to improve it further. City, just like us, are reconstructing their midfield - they've done this, again like us, by signing three new players. The cheapest of those players is more expensive than the most expensive of ours, and the overall spend on them is about twice ours. Spurs are radically overhauling their squad.
It's one thing to spend a whole window's budget on the midfield. But if you're rebuilding that part of the team, that should mean putting it into the shape it needs to be as a contender. Have you really done that when your biggest investment is the seventh most expensive central midfielder sold to one the so-called big 6 clubs in England in that window?
It is of course possible that we have spent money much more smartly than the opposition, and will be getting more than our buck's worth of bang while City and Spurs and Arsenal will have disappointing returns on their much bigger investment. But why would we assume that. Chances are they are pulling away from us.
Not that it's always the right strategy to go for a few big, expensive signings. Sometimes you need to focus on plugging gaps and raising the floor - and then you can always incrementally take those final steps later. Arsenal did that a few years back, and for a while it looked to me like that's what we were doing too, and that made sense to me. But it's not what we ended up doing. If it was, we'd have filled that gap at LB and moved out Zirkzee and possibly Rashford too, at the very least.
So, what's the plan? Obviously none of us know, but it's possible and meaningful to at least figure out is what sort of plan would be consistent with what we're seeing. And I'm really, really struggling with that.
One is that we're simply doing what is possible within existing financial constraints. If so, that is not a plan. No club ever makes it to the top of the PL by passively adapting to its current financial situation. Financial constraints is not a set entity carved in stone.
Another is that we're not actually making a serious effort to win the PL, but just to be competitive enough to stay meaningful, at least until a new stadium is in place. Which would be to eventually squander the unique global position United has built over the past four decades, and which is the backbone of our commercial position too. It's hard to believe that anyone could choose that, but who knows.
Either option shows a serious lack of strategic imagination, to say the very least.
This is hindsight accounting and untruth dressed up as transfer analysis. Yes, Vidić, Evra and Park became extraordinary bargains. Nobody disputes that. But that doesn’t make the side itself cheaply assembled. Carrick wasn’t “the cheaper Michael Carrick.” He cost £18.6m making him United’s fifth most expensive signing ever at the time. And the comparison with Ballack is stange as Chelsea signed Ballack on a free transfer. His wages were substantial, but his transfer fee was literally £0.
Ronaldo wasn’t merely “probably expensive for a teenager.” At £12.24m, he was the most expensive teenager in British football history. United paid a record price for potential after 25 league appearances.
All those transfers around those years were high ticket priced additions. Hargreaves for £17m, Nani for £17m and Anderson for £20m. Tevez on a two-year loan for £10m, with a £25.5m permanent option. These were premium fees when established Premier League midfielders generally cost £5 to 10m and £15m represented the top end of the market.
Dismissing Rooney and Ferdinand with “aside” is downplaying reality. They were two of the most expensive players in British football history and absolutely central to that side. So we added to two of the most expensive players in British football with multiple elite level priced signings.
At best, the line highlighted is a crazy recollection from 20 years ago, disingenuously applied to the current situation.
Not to mention that these signings were brought into a team that was already an established top side, not one that hadn't challenged for the title in 13 years and trying to get there.
Yeah I think most can agree we have rightly avoided paying the ludicrous fees we have seen but we are doing isn’t progress it’s just trying to stand still.
How are we raising the money or finding ways to bridge that gap. We don’t have an elite manager, we have one elite player who is in the twilight of his career and we haven’t demonstrated any ability to unearth top class players for reasonable fees.
Liverpool bridged that gap by hiring an elite manager, raising a lot of money by selling Coutinho and some exceptional recruitment so it is possible but there is nothing to suggest we are heading in that direction or have a plan to do so.
The part that concerns me is our approach to the LB problem.
- Do we have to replace Shaw next season? If yes, then why did we not do it in this window rather than waiting a whole year?
- Is Amass good enough to rotate with Shaw? He obviously wasn't till last day of transfer window, when he suddenly became acceptable due to lack of other choices
- Were the links with Seys and Salinas real? Did we pull out because we thought they were over priced at 16m...and if they were, were they even worth considering? Granted all of this may be media winding up but how did we not find a suitable backup to Shaw at 20m in any of the top 6 leagues?
- A random inquiry for a Man City LB because, why not?
Our decision making in this line is very tactical, reacting the market conditions and not strategic. Maybe the idea was to sell Zirkzee, Rashford and Ugarte and raise 60-70m to use on another striker and LB, which would have been an ideal window, but they are unsalable and hence we left it at that?
Based on what? We have been making sensible moves in the transfer window for a few seasons now and have a solid squad with a few glaring issues in there still. It wasn't going to be fixed in a window or two. Arsenal took years to get where they are now and they didn't do it by buying for the sake of buying. United have had well over a decade of shit now because we did precisely what a bunch of you seem to want. Spending for the sake of spending. Getting someone instead of getting the right ones.
You've watched Liverpool piss money up the wall to great success since Klopp left. City are pissing money up the wall and IMO won't see anything for that. Tottenham just bought the midfield a bunch of people on here were getting stiffies over and hows that going?
When was the last "exceptional" transfer for any team in the top 6 in your opinion by the way? Genuinely intrigued.
Our recruitment has been very solid over the past few seasons. 28 isn't old. Next summer we fix the defence and look to see if we need another striker. Thats literally it. We have loads of forwards even if we don't have many actual strikers. We have all the midfielders we need now. Defence is the only area we need to look at and by then we should have a better idea of whether Heaven, Yoro, De Ligt, Martinez are up to it and we can look at LB and RB.
What is this based on? Smart recruitment wins you trophies. Building a good team wins you trophies. Arsenal have spent a lot of money but they have done it to build a team. They haven't gone out every window and spent £100m on overpriced "superstars". We don't need to punch above our weight, we need to not panic and do what people like you think we need to do and turn over half our team if a season doesn't go well and try and buy everything in one window.
We've got a budget like most other teams. You can spend that budget however you want but overpaying for players who don't move the needle along with buying players who aren't good enough just so that fans have a new player in a position that we need one in despite a lack of quality is stupid.
Because you want to replace him with a better player.... Because you can't just pick any LB and say they are an upgrade... Because maybe the players who you think you might be able to get are being priced ridiculously by the selling club and offer little value for money. We've panic bought for years and its bit us hard. We've bought average players for too much money and its bit us hard. Its not as simple as saying "get a left back" and magically a top class one appears for a reasonable amount out of thin air.
The club will have been trying to buy upgrades on Shaw. They didn't/couldn't. Perhaps the options that were available weren't considered much if any better than Amass.
I'm sure we could have bought loads of LBs for £20m. Why would we do that if they weren't going to be better than just keeping Amass.
Totally agree. I like what we've bought, I like that we're off the carousel. A left back wouldn't have killed us but otherwise, leave the rest of them off. A lasting rebuild happens over 4 or 5 windows, we all know that. It feels like 2 good ones in a row. Let's see how we get on with what we've got.
We were trying to sell Amass for 3m...
That's for the people running the club to figure out. What exactly are we doing right now to change that ? My thoughts are that to increase the revenue we need to be a regular CL club and for that you do need to spend. I understand our finances aren't great and we have wasted loads of money but I am not sure cutting down severely on spending is the way to go moving forward. More and more clubs have money now and the fact now is that we are losing the pull of Manchester United. Kids growing up these days aren't like dying to play for Manchester United. If you are going to run the club like a business then cutting spending is not the only way to run this business.
Most of the defenders are being gaslighted. We had a great chance to add one or two more additions to challenge for the league but the owners don't care. How we couldn't even find a LB around the £30m mark is beyond me. Unless, of course, we already acquired a LB from Brighton...
Sensible doesn’t get you back to the top from where we are. The Arsenal comparison is also flawed they did buy a lot of cheap players that didn’t work out. But they also found a lot of players cheap though which is even harder now given the way prices have inflated. Recruitment is hit and miss and we simply aren’t signing enough players.
We clearly do have to punch above our weight as we are trying to catch up to teams who can outspend us. Finding exceptional or top class players on the cheap isn’t easy, Liverpool did it to consistently qualify for the UCL and win the title, Arsenal have done the same. They can now spend big, we have to do what they did which is extremely difficult and at a time when it’s even harder.
We all get the don’t buy for the sake of it argument but you also don’t move the needle by not addressing problems. If we don’t have the money to spend big on a LB and can’t find an alternative then you don’t improve. The club have to demonstrate they can do one or the other and a combination of both in general.
You are trying to present the only alternatives as panic buying or signing no one but that’s clearly nonsense. You also seem be taking this as criticism which it isn’t really it’s just the reality of where we are and where we’d like to be. Recruitment has been better but it’s not been good enough to make strides towqars winning the league, both can be true.
Last edited:
I mean Liverpool spunked a mountain of cash last season and made themselves 10x worse.
If that taught us anything it should be to wait and see how all these teams/players settle.
A midfield group of Bruno, Mainoo, Baleba, Tielemans, Santos…behind an attack of Sesko, Mbeumo, Cunha and Amad.
It’s not all bad.
United need to secure that CL pot of cash consistently and keep improving the squad over a 3-4 year period. Much like Arsenal have done.
But more than that we just need to enjoy the improvements United have shown in the last 9-12 months.
Try to enjoy the ride
If that taught us anything it should be to wait and see how all these teams/players settle.
A midfield group of Bruno, Mainoo, Baleba, Tielemans, Santos…behind an attack of Sesko, Mbeumo, Cunha and Amad.
It’s not all bad.
United need to secure that CL pot of cash consistently and keep improving the squad over a 3-4 year period. Much like Arsenal have done.
But more than that we just need to enjoy the improvements United have shown in the last 9-12 months.
Try to enjoy the ride
My hot take. That loss to AC Milan/Amorim saved this window (barely).
Baleba doesn’t happen if we didn’t get ripped apart.
They panicked and reached for something shiny and long coveted by the fans.
Baleba doesn’t happen if we didn’t get ripped apart.
They panicked and reached for something shiny and long coveted by the fans.
The club just bought a ton of land for the new stadium, which would have cost around 50-100m by estimates (we will see when the accounts comes out). That outlet took a hit to our transfer kitty as we didn’t do any equity injection. Still INEOS has put £240m into the club, which without it we would have been in a far worse position. So while he didn’t fully clear our debt, he has helped out.
Sadly, the market turned against INEOS in the last few years meaning that there are no dividends paid out to Ratcliffe that he can invest into United at the moment. So without selling other assets we will struggle to get any large capital injections from him until that improves.
Back to United, I think we made some good investments, Baleba is the only highly risky one as we are not sure what version we will get. But we have strengthen the team with 5 new players vs last year (3CM, Rashford and Lacey) so we have good squad depth outside LB.
I also think we as a club needed a low spend summer as we had £200m in transfer debt that we needed to pay within 12 months before the Summer even started. With the low net spend hopefully that will help strengthen our balance sheet.
If we have a successful season and therefore we will next season have record revenues and profitability that could set us up for a bigger transfer going forward with Revenues ~800m and EBITDA of 220-250m
All in all, INEOS is not perfect, and an owner that just cleared all debt would be great, but that’s not the reality we are in. And given where we are, I see as a business that we are making smart choices. Our debt was getting into a better position before COVID but then we splashed tons of money rubbish that we needed a cash injection to survive and now we seem to make better decisions, similar to Arsenal 7-8 years ago.
Sadly, the market turned against INEOS in the last few years meaning that there are no dividends paid out to Ratcliffe that he can invest into United at the moment. So without selling other assets we will struggle to get any large capital injections from him until that improves.
Back to United, I think we made some good investments, Baleba is the only highly risky one as we are not sure what version we will get. But we have strengthen the team with 5 new players vs last year (3CM, Rashford and Lacey) so we have good squad depth outside LB.
I also think we as a club needed a low spend summer as we had £200m in transfer debt that we needed to pay within 12 months before the Summer even started. With the low net spend hopefully that will help strengthen our balance sheet.
If we have a successful season and therefore we will next season have record revenues and profitability that could set us up for a bigger transfer going forward with Revenues ~800m and EBITDA of 220-250m
All in all, INEOS is not perfect, and an owner that just cleared all debt would be great, but that’s not the reality we are in. And given where we are, I see as a business that we are making smart choices. Our debt was getting into a better position before COVID but then we splashed tons of money rubbish that we needed a cash injection to survive and now we seem to make better decisions, similar to Arsenal 7-8 years ago.
Tremendous post, absolutely bang on. This should be pinned at the top of so many threads all over the internet.
I agree with @simonhch's take. I actually really like the business we have done and it is pointless comparing it to City's, as there is no way we are going back to paying stupid fees and wages for players after only just nearing the end of the cleaning up process the last time we did that.
What is frustrating however, is that we were so close to a near-perfect window and to get there wouldn't have even cost that much. If we had got Welbeck at the £5m price Chelsea paid and if we had managed to get someone like Joaquin Seys at around £25-30m in early enough for his Club Brugge to replace him, then the mood round here would be quite different.
What is frustrating however, is that we were so close to a near-perfect window and to get there wouldn't have even cost that much. If we had got Welbeck at the £5m price Chelsea paid and if we had managed to get someone like Joaquin Seys at around £25-30m in early enough for his Club Brugge to replace him, then the mood round here would be quite different.
I honestly dont have a problem with the amount spent. Yes its less than our rivals, but I predicted we'd spend less last year. My reasoning might be off but I suspected most of the Sesko money came from this year's budget, as we had seemed quiet until Sesko looked likely to move and then suddenly we had more money than for Cunha or Mbeumo to make sure we got him. So no problem with the amount spent.
I have a big problem with how the money was spent though. After signing Tielemans and Santos, with Mainoo still here, to me midfield is no longer the priority. We needed to do something about our defence which let in too many goals. And now Shaw has started the season making several mistakes leading to goals so a new leftback might be more important than a new CB especially as we only have Shaw as a left footed option for the position. For me the Baleba transfer felt like transfer forum posters were in charge of our transfers and thats a scary thought. I think its a real waste of money because Mainoo and Tielemans/Santos are going to be better so we bought a squad player for our largest transfer of the summer. Incredibly backwards thinking and usually a manager and the staff above him, their fate is decided by how well their big transfers do.
Would I have preferred to have stopped at Tielemans, Santos, Darlow and Thompson for spend of around £90 million and not have had another signing? Yes. I would have preferred that over also signing Baleba. We'll see what happens. I've been wrong before, I might be wrong about Baleba. But it reminds me of when Fellaini ended up our "marquee signing" in Moyes' first season. That was the last time our big signing clearly didnt fit the bill and it was also a physical midfielder.
I have a big problem with how the money was spent though. After signing Tielemans and Santos, with Mainoo still here, to me midfield is no longer the priority. We needed to do something about our defence which let in too many goals. And now Shaw has started the season making several mistakes leading to goals so a new leftback might be more important than a new CB especially as we only have Shaw as a left footed option for the position. For me the Baleba transfer felt like transfer forum posters were in charge of our transfers and thats a scary thought. I think its a real waste of money because Mainoo and Tielemans/Santos are going to be better so we bought a squad player for our largest transfer of the summer. Incredibly backwards thinking and usually a manager and the staff above him, their fate is decided by how well their big transfers do.
Would I have preferred to have stopped at Tielemans, Santos, Darlow and Thompson for spend of around £90 million and not have had another signing? Yes. I would have preferred that over also signing Baleba. We'll see what happens. I've been wrong before, I might be wrong about Baleba. But it reminds me of when Fellaini ended up our "marquee signing" in Moyes' first season. That was the last time our big signing clearly didnt fit the bill and it was also a physical midfielder.
AFCON is next summer, but point taken
What's really funny is if you read all the leaks now it's some masterplan of doing attack one summer, midfield the next and then defence as if everything is so linear in football. Ignoring the defence completely in these windows is just not good enough after we conceded 50 & 54 goals in the last two premier league seasons and started with 4 against the two promoted teams this season.
If you want those threads to be "how did Manchester United end up missing out on Champions League football this season" then it definitely should be.
It is a post riddled with hypocrisy and falsehoods. It's practically INEOS and Glazerite propaganda.
It slates City signing Bouaddi because he's "all potential yet to be realised" but then praises INEOS for signing a Chelsea reject in Santos purely because he has potential.
It states: "Cherki for 30! Why can’t we do these sorts of deals?” - Then we do do those sorts of deals, and the criticism pivots to 'shopping at Poundland'" - but we haven't done any of those deals. We haven't signed Cherki for 30m, City have.
It states: "But we are getting much more right now than we are getting wrong" without any proof of this whatsoever. The only thing they are doing is spending less money. There is no evidence to the contrary. They got incredibly lucky that Carrick got Champs League football and have rewarded him by making him play the same back four as the opening day of the 2022 season, and Rashford who they desperately tried to get rid of, couldn't and pathetically tried to reframe as 'a new signing'.
"What most fans want, and what they won’t admit, is for United to enter - and win - the dick swinging contest that is the transfer window" - One of the most patronising and stupid sentences I've read on here in long time.
"Instead we are getting on with executing a sustainable long term strategy. I actually find it amusing how outraged and conspiratorial some of you get about it."
- at this point, anyone who supports INEOS, or thinks we've had an excellent window, or thinks they have some kind of strategy, is simply not a United supporter. There is no strategy. They do not have a clue what they are doing, in any department. The Glazers and Ineos have systematically destroyed an institution over 15 years, with the help of corrupt money hungry idiots like ETH, and we will now suffer the consequences for many years to come, unless a full buyout miracle occurs.
A reminder that it isn't that the club is broke. Or that Glazers or INEOS don't have the funds. Either party could get rid of the debt, tomorrow, in one swoop.
Yeah. I think the same people that keep repeating thats the strategy talk about how we fixed the attack last summer. But I cant be the only one that remembers the predictions thread and the vast majority of people expecting more goals out of Mbeumo, Cunha and Sesko than we got. We paid for me than we got last season. I think its fair to say we greatly improved on the previous season for goals as we did, but we didnt get all we paid for and theres certainly room for improvement from them, we might need to sign some more players there too. So the idea "We fixed our attack last summer" like its a fact, I dont quite agree with it and certainly dont see why we're using that as an example of what we're doing in midfield this season. That would suggest we'll also pay for more than we get from the midfielders and might still need to buy more to improve on them.
The tunnel vision doesnt sound good and no, our record doing it with attack last season isnt perfect either. It was much better but still some way to go.
I am in favour of our more frugal approach. It's definitely better than throwing cash at every big name willing to come. At the same time, the goal isn't to be frugal, it is to win big trophies. So steady eddie signings are well and good but we need to start making some moves for more gifted players to ensure we don't just settle for being a decent / good team after having spent loads.
Accepting our spending limits is tough, but it isn't a dead end. Liverpool hit gold with Alonso and Torres, and later with Salah and Mane, all while rival clubs were spending heavily.
If we can't buy finished products, we need to find high-potential talent and turn them into superstars. Lower expectations this season could actually work to our advantage and take the pressure off the squad.
We still have a team capable of pushing for top five. We know we can perform against the big clubs—if we can just stop dropping points to bottom-half teams, we’ll stay near the top while rebuilding our core over the next few windows. Smart recruitment beats blind spending every time, and winning that way feels so much better.
If we can't buy finished products, we need to find high-potential talent and turn them into superstars. Lower expectations this season could actually work to our advantage and take the pressure off the squad.
We still have a team capable of pushing for top five. We know we can perform against the big clubs—if we can just stop dropping points to bottom-half teams, we’ll stay near the top while rebuilding our core over the next few windows. Smart recruitment beats blind spending every time, and winning that way feels so much better.
Excellent post!