How bad is it, really? (Financial thread)

The clubs financial issues are very short term based on a wage bill pre SJR that is too high.

We have signed Cunha as first choice number 10, tried and tested premier league forward with massive goal involvement stats down to a 200k a week contract. Similar to what the old leadership offered Luke Shaw.

Once these inflated legacy contracts expire and the deadwood is shipped (Rashford, Eriksen, Shaw, Lindelöf, Casimero, Anthony etc...) United will be in an extremely healthy position and be able to spend again.
 
Powderfinger said:
I think this is right. I would also add that United was a leader among clubs in terms of monetizing and expanding commercial revenue and a lot of what has happened is just other clubs catching up in that regard while United has stagnated, partly due to middling performance on the pitch but also partly because there's only so much juice any PL club can squeeze from that lemon without shady deals like City.

In 2016, United had commercial revenues of €364m according to Deloitte. In 2024, they earned €360m.

During that same period:

-Liverpool went from €160m to €343m.
-Spurs went from €78m to €297m.
-Chelsea went from €163m to €262m.
-Arsenal went from €143m to €258m.
Click to expand...
The on field performance has been terrible and below standard so commercial contracts were rolled over rather than increased. Meanwhile others have increased their deals. United would be similar to Real if they had followed on from Fergie in a similar trajectory.

As soon as we start winning again we could easily see 50pc growth in 3 years.
 
UpWithRivers said:
That makes zero business sense. All it does is devalue your asset so while you are paying off debts, you are just losing money hand over fist.
Click to expand...
Well let's see they won't buy unless they sell, only 4 players so far that we are selling. Hopefully for 100milion if they only use that? The money that's been made in profit this year will be put through to service some sort of debt mainly the transfer debt that's owed to clubs so that leaves very little on transfers .. 3 players tops . And cut wage bill with players leaving that's what they will do imo..
 
Hughie77 said:
Well let's see they won't buy unless they sell, only 4 players so far that we are selling. Hopefully for 100milion if they only use that? The money that's been made in profit this year will be put through to service some sort of debt mainly the transfer debt that's owed to clubs so that leaves very little on transfers .. 3 players tops . And cut wage bill with players leaving that's what they will do imo..
Click to expand...
Well listening to Amorim it sounds like you are right. We will be lucky to spend 100-120. He didn't say that but he keeps saying PSR and there wont be a lot of changes. If that's our response to our worst ever season, then it's depressing. Im presuming Cunha, Delap and a cheap keeper of we're lucky
 
UpWithRivers said:
Well listening to Amorim it sounds like you are right. We will be lucky to spend 100-120. He didn't say that but he keeps saying PSR and there wont be a lot of changes. If that's our response to our worst ever season, then it's depressing. Im presuming Cunha, Delap and a cheap keeper of we're lucky
Click to expand...

The main Ipswich website, TWTD, seems to think he’s off to Chelsea. About 3 or 4 times a year they start a news article (the owner is a journo for the local paper) with “TWTD understands….” followed by the news. It’s literally never wrong when it starts that way; they only do it when they’ve been directly told by the player or agent. So, my guess is he goes to Chelsea.
Will be interesting to see if that’s what happens; it’s usually an incoming transfer not an outgoing one, so we’ll see.
 
I heard an interview recently where Simon Jordan basically said that Sir Jim is telling lies about the finances in order to make redundancies. I think if true it is genius. The best way to kill the ‘Utd tax’.
 
Steve 007 said:
I heard an interview recently where Simon Jordan basically said that Sir Jim is telling lies about the finances in order to make redundancies. I think if true it is genius. The best way to kill the ‘Utd tax’.
Click to expand...
What's there to lie about? Our finances are publicly reported.
 
It's likely bad but after all these months of cuts, I think perhaps they are being extra mean and ruthless to just get the books right again. They likely could be fine for years but if it's for the betterment of long term success then I understand it.
 
Steve 007 said:
I heard an interview recently where Simon Jordan basically said that Sir Jim is telling lies about the finances in order to make redundancies. I think if true it is genius. The best way to kill the ‘Utd tax’.
Click to expand...
I think Kieran Maguire said as much. He also said PSR not an issue as we sold home grown players and that he thinks we have 100 mill to spend which has been reported elsewhere. Question I have is that 100 million net? Because we haven't spent that much in years. Or is it 100 mill including sales? Because if 100mill + sales then that should be 200-250 at least
 
UpWithRivers said:
I think Kieran Maguire said as much. He also said PSR not an issue as we sold home grown players and that he thinks we have 100 mill to spend which has been reported elsewhere. Question I have is that 100 million net? Because we haven't spent that much in years. Or is it 100 mill including sales? Because if 100mill + sales then that should be 200-250 at least
Click to expand...
Its reported as net
 
Cassidy said:
Its reported as net
Click to expand...
So why is everyone bitching about no money. Amorim included? Our net spend has been more but our income should be a lot more this year plus 2 home grown talents in Rashford and Garnacho. What am I missing?
Edit - Just looking at these stats and they dont look right but transfermarket has 2024 net spend at 119 so point till counts. Around 100 should be a good window

SeasonMoney Spent (£)Money Brought In (£)Net Spend (£)
2024/2025138m60m-78m
2023/2024170m48m-122m
2022/2023204m20m-184m
2021/2022120m26m-94m
2020/202170m16m-56m
2019/2020199m68m-131m
2018/201970m26m-44m
2017/2018166m38m-128m
2016/2017155m40m-115m
2015/2016131m85m-46m
 
Big Ben Foster said:
What's there to lie about? Our finances are publicly reported.
Click to expand...
That the club would have been broke last December without SJR’s cash injection.

Why would INEOS sanction a £200 million transfer spree last summer if finances were that bad? Jordan was calling bullshit and I agree with him.
 
Steve 007 said:
Exactly Simon’s point,

Watch from 4:36

Click to expand...

Think Simon has been hoodwinked here wanting to be a sensationalist.

I agree and have said from the off the finances are fine, they are just trying to get rid of the idea of us having loads of cash. What better way to get better prices than clubs think you are poor.
However what Sir Jim said means there was at least one possible scenario where the cash reserves would have run out by Dec, that is probably quite easy to prove given they are low, what his response deliberately ignores given how he phrased the answer, is that those cash reserves have been bolstered hugely by ineos themselves. Also bear in mind the whole thing with Neville was given the green light from a PR perspective, so he's choosing what messages to put in/leave out.

Message this summer is; we are broke, we will stretch deals as long as selling clubs will allow, don't expect us to poverpay by a single pound.
Reality this summer is; we are going to go bonkers
 
UpWithRivers said:
So why is everyone bitching about no money. Amorim included? Our net spend has been more but our income should be a lot more this year plus 2 home grown talents in Rashford and Garnacho. What am I missing?
Edit - Just looking at these stats and they dont look right but transfermarket has 2024 net spend at 119 so point till counts. Around 100 should be a good window

SeasonMoney Spent (£)Money Brought In (£)Net Spend (£)
2024/2025138m60m-78m
2023/2024170m48m-122m
2022/2023204m20m-184m
2021/2022120m26m-94m
2020/202170m16m-56m
2019/2020199m68m-131m
2018/201970m26m-44m
2017/2018166m38m-128m
2016/2017155m40m-115m
2015/2016131m85m-46m
Click to expand...
We probably don’t want to tell the while world we are flush with cash. We said the same thing last summer too and the one before
 
UpWithRivers said:
Well listening to Amorim it sounds like you are right. We will be lucky to spend 100-120. He didn't say that but he keeps saying PSR and there wont be a lot of changes. If that's our response to our worst ever season, then it's depressing. Im presuming Cunha, Delap and a cheap keeper of we're lucky
Click to expand...
Delap looks not going to happen we see though. I'm hoping we don't just go with a lot of the youth ..
 
Garethw said:
That the club would have been broke last December without SJR’s cash injection.

Why would INEOS sanction a £200 million transfer spree last summer if finances were that bad? Jordan was calling bullshit and I agree with him.
Click to expand...
Me too.

SJR wouldn't buy into a club for billions that is on the road to broke within a year.

He wouldn't also spend millions on the training facility if finances were that bad.

SJR and the Glazers are two cheeks of the same arse.
 
RedSince82 said:
The clubs financial issues are very short term based on a wage bill pre SJR that is too high.

We have signed Cunha as first choice number 10, tried and tested premier league forward with massive goal involvement stats down to a 200k a week contract. Similar to what the old leadership offered Luke Shaw.

Once these inflated legacy contracts expire and the deadwood is shipped (Rashford, Eriksen, Shaw, Lindelöf, Casimero, Anthony etc...) United will be in an extremely healthy position and be able to spend again.
Click to expand...
Antony is actually on pretty moderate wages. Whereas new lad De Ligt is on Maguire money, above 10m. So might not be entirely a legacy isdue.
 
Nogho said:
Link

Sorry, since it’s behind a paywall I was unsure if it was allowed to post it.
But the main part was that we have spent more then 300£ million the last three years and the allowed is around 100.

Sorry about the confusion and language barrier, but we have spent 200£ million more the we are allowed. And even 100£ million is above what we have in income.
Click to expand...
Not all that counts against PSR.

Anyway they've already given Amorim a 100m transfer kitty, which they wouldn't if they thought we'd breach PSR.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/cx28nx9z06eo.amp

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-big-profits-and-huge-losses-at-the-same-time
 
Last edited:
Can anybody explain how Arsenal for example are still in a position to be bidding up to 80m for sesko or gyokeres despite having a net spend of over 300 million in players in the last 3 summers? Likewise Newcastle have spent massive and recouped only ok? How are these clubs so comfortably able to keep spending compared to us?
 
SER19 said:
Can anybody explain how Arsenal for example are still in a position to be bidding up to 80m for sesko or gyokeres despite having a net spend of over 300 million in players in the last 3 summers? Likewise Newcastle have spent massive and recouped only ok? How are these clubs so comfortably able to keep spending compared to us?
Click to expand...
Champions league and premier league prize money/success would be the obvious major differences. It's not like we aren't still spending huge either
 
chris123 said:
Champions league and premier league prize money/success would be the obvious major differences. It's not like we aren't still spending huge either
Click to expand...

This still doesnt add up. Weve had as much CL as Newcastle up to now and they were in the championship twice in the last 11 years! Arsenal have finished in the top 5 the same amount of times as us in the last 5 years. Yes we spend big, but my point is that so do they, and just because their players dont flop as hard, the money is still the same. It still counts as net spend.

My guess is that we are being done by the glazers even harder than ratcliffe has laid out.
 
SER19 said:
This still doesnt add up. Weve had as much CL as Newcastle up to now and they were in the championship twice in the last 11 years! Arsenal have finished in the top 5 the same amount of times as us in the last 5 years. Yes we spend big, but my point is that so do they, and just because their players dont flop as hard, the money is still the same. It still counts as net spend.

My guess is that we are being done by the glazers even harder than ratcliffe has laid out.
Click to expand...
A lot of their decent money sales have been homegrown academy players which in the PSR era probably gives a lot of flexibility; Emile-Smith Rowe for £34m, Eddie Nketiah for £25+5m last summer, Folarin Baloguin for £25m the year before. Whereas really to date the only reasonable money we've gotten for anyone from a pure profit perspective was the McTominay sale. Obviously if we get good cash for Rashford and Garnacho that might help our flexibility a fair bit.

Edit: forgot about he-who-shall-not-be-named being sold to Marseillle.
 
Red-Man-Walking said:
A lot of their decent money sales have been homegrown academy players which in the PSR era probably gives a lot of flexibility; Emile-Smith Rowe for £34m, Eddie Nketiah for £25+5m last summer, Folarin Baloguin for £25m the year before. Whereas really to date the only reasonable money we've gotten for anyone from a pure profit perspective was the McTominay sale. Obviously if we get good cash for Rashford and Garnacho that might help our flexibility a fair bit.

Edit: forgot about he-who-shall-not-be-named being sold to Marseillle.
Click to expand...

Ya fair point. Im still just really struggling to see why we're seemingly not able to cobble together a penny north of 100m without big sales, and Newcastle in particular are lining up another 150m plus this summer.
 
Feels like Ratciffe is the sort of owner who would want to reuse teabags for a week even if the club was doing ok so its much more mixed than he lets on.

Cut in tv money will hurt but even when we had Europa League money he was talking utter tripe about going bankrupt if he didn't sack the tea lady
 
astracrazy said:
SJR and the Glazers are two cheeks of the same arse.
Click to expand...
One Glazer brother is the left arse cheek, his sibling is the right arse cheeky.
Ratcliffe is in the middle, alternatively being squeezed or spouting out what they don’t want to dirty themselves with.
 
If the USD keeps it's value, we will register profit on the bases of the debt going down due currency exchange. Our finances are better than what the club's cry about but they are doing that to lower expectations. They want us to get used to mediocrity and finishing 15th.
 
SER19 said:
Ya fair point. Im still just really struggling to see why we're seemingly not able to cobble together a penny north of 100m without big sales, and Newcastle in particular are lining up another 150m plus this summer.
Click to expand...

Newcastle made £78m from selling players in 2024/25. And only spent £28m. In the same season we made £75m from sales and spent £155m on new players.

They’re benefiting from a season of frugality. Our chickens have come home to roost after years of reckless spending. In 2022/23 we spent £200m+ and recouped just £20m!
 
Last edited:
Reading between the lines, actually not so much, the club has had a massive workforce compared to any other club in the EPL. That was probably ok 10/15 years ago, but relatively small increases in outside revenues has seen that been it become handbrake on overall expenditure.

The crazy decision to retain ETH and expend over £200 million on bascially Eredevise dross is inexcusable. Tighten the belt with unfortunate redundancies is something most of us have experienced. Need to accept that it’s part of life and no business is expempt. Do it now, and reinvest as money and income improves relative to expenditure, simple business practice.Follow it for success, keep the status quo as it was and watch It get worse.
 
oz insomniac said:
Reading between the lines, actually not so much, the club has had a massive workforce compared to any other club in the EPL. That was probably ok 10/15 years ago, but relatively small increases in outside revenues has seen that been it become handbrake on overall expenditure.

The crazy decision to retain ETH and expend over £200 million on bascially Eredevise dross is inexcusable. Tighten the belt with unfortunate redundancies is something most of us have experienced. Need to accept that it’s part of life and no business is expempt. Do it now, and reinvest as money and income improves relative to expenditure, simple business practice.Follow it for success, keep the status quo as it was and watch It get worse.
Click to expand...

It's not about saving money from the redundancies (although it might be in a wanker like Ratcliffe's mind), it's probably more about changing the culture. How can you have the biggest staff in the league and have a consistently poor hygiene rating in your kitchens for example? The whole structure and motivation of the staff needs to be refocused. Whether it is being or it will just end up as classic "cuts because I'm a Tory bastard" is up for debate mind.
 
Do we know when our financial obligations will be completed for the players that ETH brought and we are still paying their transfer fees for?
 
dinostar77 said:
Do we know when our financial obligations will be completed for the players that ETH brought and we are still paying their transfer fees for?
Click to expand...
Most transfers are paid over 3-5 years. Sometimes clubs demand the entire fee up front. We’ll never know for sure though.
 
RonB said:
One Glazer brother is the left arse cheek, his sibling is the right arse cheeky.
Ratcliffe is in the middle, alternatively being squeezed or spouting out what they don’t want to dirty themselves with.
Click to expand...
Pity the poor bugger who has the job of wiping it.
 
Most other clubs sell decent.

Our net profit in player sales is horrendous, to say the least. Our last decent sale (i.e. net profit) was Ronaldo and that was ages ago. The biggest, excluding Ronaldo, was Beckham, believe it or not, 20+ years back. We are that bad at selling.
 
TheLord said:
Most other clubs sell decent.

Our net profit in player sales is horrendous, to say the least. Our last decent sale (i.e. net profit) was Ronaldo and that was ages ago. The biggest, excluding Ronaldo, was Beckham, believe it or not, 20+ years back. We are that bad at selling.
Click to expand...
Mctominay ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.