Is Jadon Sancho really worth the 100 plus million fee?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tallis

Full Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
732
80-90m is bonkers. This season or the next. Even United have lost €100m during the pandemic so far. I think you need to temper your expectations
Chelsea, PSG would pay I think. They just need one club to show up with 80-100m.
 

DSG

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2014
Messages
970
Location
A Whale’s Vagina
No-one is paying €80m in this market where all clubs are losing money, they just aren’t
You’re right, because that’s not how transfers work, it’s in installments, probably paid over 3 years, 40m -20m-20m, something like that. In addition, credit is very cheap these days, plus forecasts are showing major economic growth. There will be a club without liquidity issues and promising forecasts who will make that kind of offer.
 

DSG

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2014
Messages
970
Location
A Whale’s Vagina
If they don't let Sancho go this season for a decent fee I can see all of their future young talent demand release fees. They stood their ground for a couple of seasons now; 70 mil for a winger that is desperate to move is a good price.
This is absolutely correct. The top prospects are going to Dortmund for playing time and a chance to move to a bigger club. Being locked in is counter productive to one’s career. Dortmund will never be able to match the wages of Real, City, PSG, United, Barca, Chelsea.... It’s really all about money. If you could double your wages and move to a bigger, better company, wouldn’t you want to do so?
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
104,067
Location
Dublin, Ireland
You’re right, because that’s not how transfers work, it’s in installments, probably paid over 3 years, 40m -20m-20m, something like that. In addition, credit is very cheap these days, plus forecasts are showing major economic growth. There will be a club without liquidity issues and promising forecasts who will make that kind of offer.
Not always. Dortmund wanted it all last summer. As did Leicester when we bought maguire
I think you’re expecting too much
 

Hansi Fick

Full Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
2,586
Supports
FC Bayern
Not always. Dortmund wanted it all last summer. As did Leicester when we bought maguire
I think you’re expecting too much
You don't know that. I think you might be confusing installments with add-ons in this case?
 

DSG

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2014
Messages
970
Location
A Whale’s Vagina
Not always. Dortmund wanted it all last summer. As did Leicester when we bought maguire
I think you’re expecting too much
Maybe. But corporate level finance is very complex. Dortmund’s financial position is awful, and they have a lot of hefty financial commitments to older players that cannot be sold. I give them credit for sticking to their guns last window. But I expect them to sell either Sancho, Haaland, or both. If they don’t, they run the risk of either taking on more debt or entering some sort of Barca-like financial crisis where you have few options. The time to dig themselves out is at the next window.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
104,067
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Maybe. But corporate level finance is very complex. Dortmund’s financial position is awful, and they have a lot of hefty financial commitments to older players that cannot be sold. I give them credit for sticking to their guns last window. But I expect them to sell either Sancho, Haaland, or both. If they don’t, they run the risk of either taking on more debt or entering some sort of Barca-like financial crisis where you have few options. The time to dig themselves out is at the next window.
I know. My point is we are not going to shell out 80m or more on one player as some fans believe. Maybe 60 and a series of add-ons. This deal will only be done if it’s a sensible price or done in a sensible way. Hence why the scouts are checking other options in the market right now.
 

Bondi77

Full Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2019
Messages
2,721
If Lingard is preferred over Sancho in the England setup than that tells me all I need to know.
 

Redcy

Full Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
1,967
I've not seen this at all.
It keeps being repeated with no evidence for it, he has seemed his most effective of the right hand side starting outside the box. Whenever we play him near the centre he has no idea what his positioning is, the number of games where he has been tried in there and the ball comes to our creative players or wide and he is stood outside the box..
 

RkkMan

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
1,481
Every summer I've read many similar wish list everywhere, and every summer it ends up totally underwhelming.

I hope people learn.
A great example of wishful thinking.
Tell me what's unrealistic.
Bailly is likely leaving we'll sign a CB(not an expensive one)and his sale will boost funds. His current market value is £15m
If Dalot leaves which is likely we'll sign a back up RB(not an expensive one) his sale will boost funds and he's young enough to fetch back majority of what we paid for him
De Gea is likely leaving so we'll sign a back up to Henderson(not an expensive one)
Lingard is a very key player for West Ham on current form he gets us at least £25-30m especially if he goes to the Euros West Ham have paid higher fees for worse players like Benhrama and Haller
Pereira may be wishful thinking he probably leaves on loan again or we sell him for around £10m or cheaper
You genuinely mean to tell me with all those potential sales on top of a standard budget we'll have available to spend(we ain't City rich but we don't have £0)we cant have a decent summer even if we spend £60-70m on a top forward?

Especially this summer of all summers. How anyone can be going in with daft expectations I've no idea. It's just illogical, almost as if people want to be disappointed.
Bar last summer and 2018 we've not really had any "underwhelming" windows TBF(Moyes is a myth in my head 2013 doesn't count)
We've spent over £100m comfortably and in some cases made big January signings after high spending summers(Alexis and Bruno for some people Mata) and we've never had 2 back to back summers of underspending since Fergie retired it's not impossibly unrealistic this time we have a decent summer with a net spend of £60-80m max I'm not even talking over £100m net like most people here which to me makes it more surprising why people are completely blaise over my opinion

Whoever pays 15 mil for Eric and 30 for Lingard during covid is out of their fecking minds.

We'd be lucky to get 45 mil for all 4 of them.
A club in January paid close to £30m for Haller and he was an even bigger flop than Bailly that's not a ridiculously high fee it's literally his market value
Lingard's form since joining West Ham has been almost Bruno levels and it doesn't look like slowing down. West Ham paid £30m for Benhrama in January to free up a loan space for have Lingard even though that Championship winger has done feck all for them and we refused to have an option to buy for £15m as we were confident he'd generate a higher fee I'll be whole heatedly gobsmacked if he goes for less than £25m
 

McGrathsipan

Dawn’s less famous husband
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
18,244
Location
Dublin
Tell me what's unrealistic.
Bailly is likely leaving we'll sign a CB(not an expensive one)and his sale will boost funds. His current market value is £15m
If Dalot leaves which is likely we'll sign a back up RB(not an expensive one) his sale will boost funds and he's young enough to fetch back majority of what we paid for him
De Gea is likely leaving so we'll sign a back up to Henderson(not an expensive one)
Lingard is a very key player for West Ham on current form he gets us at least £25-30m especially if he goes to the Euros West Ham have paid higher fees for worse players like Benhrama and Haller
Pereira may be wishful thinking he probably leaves on loan again or we sell him for around £10m or cheaper
You genuinely mean to tell me with all those potential sales on top of a standard budget we'll have available to spend(we ain't City rich but we don't have £0)we cant have a decent summer even if we spend £60-70m on a top forward?


Bar last summer and 2018 we've not really had any "underwhelming" windows TBF(Moyes is a myth in my head 2013 doesn't count)
We've spent over £100m comfortably and in some cases made big January signings after high spending summers(Alexis and Bruno for some people Mata) and we've never had 2 back to back summers of underspending since Fergie retired it's not impossibly unrealistic this time we have a decent summer with a net spend of £60-80m max I'm not even talking over £100m net like most people here which to me makes it more surprising why people are completely blaise over my opinion


A club in January paid close to £30m for Haller and he was an even bigger flop than Bailly that's not a ridiculously high fee it's literally his market value
Lingard's form since joining West Ham has been almost Bruno levels and it doesn't look like slowing down. West Ham paid £30m for Benhrama in January to free up a loan space for have Lingard even though that Championship winger has done feck all for them and we refused to have an option to buy for £15m as we were confident he'd generate a higher fee I'll be whole heatedly gobsmacked if he goes for less than £25m
Do you have any idea of how corporate finance works and how financial risk is treated?

Players leaving will reduce the loss and slow down the rate of loss, not boost funds. A transfer out for say 20m rarely means 20m into the bank in one lump sum. Players costs are spread over years not single transactions.

Until the business can effectively rely on full stadiums again it can't forecast with any level of surity. Covid has decimated cash flow. For all clubs. United have have reserves but that doesn't and shouldn't mean that they go and spend 80m on a player.

This next window will be very interesting
 

Cman

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
121
Do you have any idea of how corporate finance works and how financial risk is treated?

Players leaving will reduce the loss and slow down the rate of loss, not boost funds. A transfer out for say 20m rarely means 20m into the bank in one lump sum. Players costs are spread over years not single transactions.

Until the business can effectively rely on full stadiums again it can't forecast with any level of surity. Covid has decimated cash flow. For all clubs. United have have reserves but that doesn't and shouldn't mean that they go and spend 80m on a player.

This next window will be very interesting
I have no idea how corporate finance works either tbh. But I do know that there will be more value to be had in this transfer window than any other. I also know that we are one of the few clubs who can raise enough funds to capitalise on other clubs than are less financially secure. Interest rates are at a record low as well.

Say our normal net spend is £100mil, I think a strong case can be made to a bit extra this year when there is real value to be had and then spend a bit less in the coming 2/3 years.

This of course depends on weather or not our scouts and recruitment team are confident that the right players are available to go and get.
 

RkkMan

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
1,481
Do you have any idea of how corporate finance works and how financial risk is treated?

Players leaving will reduce the loss and slow down the rate of loss, not boost funds. A transfer out for say 20m rarely means 20m into the bank in one lump sum. Players costs are spread over years not single transactions.

Until the business can effectively rely on full stadiums again it can't forecast with any level of surity. Covid has decimated cash flow. For all clubs. United have have reserves but that doesn't and shouldn't mean that they go and spend 80m on a player.

This next window will be very interesting
Yes I know how corporate finance works and I also know that under such circumstances Utd as they usually do could take out a loan of X sum for a player whilst showing the bank cash inflows they expect over a certain period in future from a legitimate source of cash outside the organization(in this case the spread payments from X club) with bulletproof guarantee that full payment will eventually be made on top of having healthy cash reserves. I mean Inter didn't pay us our full money for Lukaku immediately yet we still spent over £100m up front for Bruno and Maguire in two back to back windows knowing we'd get all that money back over time. It's really not a fantasy opinion that a club that offered £80m up front last season can offer something almost similar this time whilst knowing fans are also about to come back to stadiums with more and more people getting vaccinated
 

McGrathsipan

Dawn’s less famous husband
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
18,244
Location
Dublin
Yes I know how corporate finance works and I also know that under such circumstances Utd as they usually do could take out a loan of X sum for a player whilst showing the bank cash inflows they expect over a certain period in future from a legitimate source of cash outside the organization(in this case the spread payments from X club) with bulletproof guarantee that full payment will eventually be made on top of having healthy cash reserves. I mean Inter didn't pay us our full money for Lukaku immediately yet we still spent over £100m up front for Bruno and Maguire in two back to back windows knowing we'd get all that money back over time. It's really not a fantasy opinion that a club that offered £80m up front last season can offer something almost similar this time whilst knowing fans are also about to come back to stadiums with more and more people getting vaccinated


I dont disagree that the reserves are there. I do however think there is zero chance of the club spunking them on one player. The impact to market value has been altered and we just dont know yet by how much.

The Covid situation is far from over and forecasts are going to be weighted by risk.

I dont expect Untied to go first in the market this summer, and if we do it wont be a megabucks deal
 

RkkMan

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
1,481
I dont disagree that the reserves are there. I do however think there is zero chance of the club spunking them on one player. The impact to market value has been altered and we just dont know yet by how much.

The Covid situation is far from over and forecasts are going to be weighted by risk.

I dont expect Untied to go first in the market this summer, and if we do it wont be a megabucks deal
Depends on what you mean by Megabucks. A transfer of say £100m+ is definitely out of the question even a net spend of over £80m is extremely unlikely but a marquee signing of say £60-70m ish up front and realistic add ons is hardly "Megabucks" for a club like Utd COVID or not.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
104,067
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I don’t agree that we will spend money like 60-70m up-front. IF we buy a marquee player there will be a deal done. United have to protect themselves as much as anyone in covid. Nothing has been decided yet on the return of fans, how many and how it’s going to work
 

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,941
Location
Copenhagen
I don’t agree that we will spend money like 60-70m up-front. IF we buy a marquee player there will be a deal done. United have to protect themselves as much as anyone in covid. Nothing has been decided yet on the return of fans, how many and how it’s going to work
True.

That being said, if you know you will have to invest several hundred millions the next five-ten years, why dont do it in this type of market with a lot of uncertainty (if you can). Especially if the club invest in players like Rice and Sancho who will be investments for the next ten years.

There is a bit of uncertainty in terms of fans coming back, but other revenue streams look likely to increase. And most likely, fans will be back next season. Certainly in UK.
 

wolvored

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
7,042
I can’t think of many players that are worth £100mill in current market. There are a very few and Sancho is definately not one of them. I think he would struggle to even get 10G 10A in a full Premier league season. It’s one thing to score tap ins against Hoffenheim and Mainz but Prem is a level up. Just look at the other Bundesliga ’stars’ in Prem this season.
I have said this before (not the figures though). Like you say look over the last few years German players who we and Chelsea have signed, and have been shadows of themselves in the Premier. This league is a lot harder than Germanys. You could take Munich and Dortmund and place them in the premier league and i would bet they wouldnt be at the top season after season. Bayern would be a lot worse as they wouldnt be able to pick the best players from the other teams like they do in the Bundesliga
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
104,067
Location
Dublin, Ireland
True.

That being said, if you know you will have to invest several hundred millions the next five-ten years, why dont do it in this type of market with a lot of uncertainty (if you can). Especially if the club invest in players like Rice and Sancho who will be investments for the next ten years.

There is a bit of uncertainty in terms of fans coming back, but other revenue streams look likely to increase. And most likely, fans will be back next season. Certainly in UK.
Unless one of the more deadlier strains takes over.

it’s really still up in the air. But yes there will be fans back, we just don’t know how many yet.

I agree with your point about value in the market but that only exists if clubs refuse to pay big money upfront otherwise it’s going back to how it was. We need to break that
 

wolvored

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
7,042
I know. My point is we are not going to shell out 80m or more on one player as some fans believe. Maybe 60 and a series of add-ons. This deal will only be done if it’s a sensible price or done in a sensible way. Hence why the scouts are checking other options in the market right now.
I agree. I cant see our whole transfer budget being any higher than £50-60 mill plus outgoing fees.
 

Figgins

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
713
Location
Araʻura
Unless one of the more deadlier strains takes over.

it’s really still up in the air. But yes there will be fans back, we just don’t know how many yet.

I agree with your point about value in the market but that only exists if clubs refuse to pay big money upfront otherwise it’s going back to how it was. We need to break that
The Profs keep saying there is likely to be another wave, there remains financial uncertainty, so i cannot see big numbers being spent. Another year of this I'd be concerned about sponsors leaving the game. As for fans going back, I'm not convinced stadiums will be packed until next year.

Valuing JS when finances are tight, i wouldnt pay more than 50m and i'd continue to get rid of high wages players.
 
Last edited:

pcaming

Full Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
2,000
Location
Trinidad & Tobago
I think many on here will be surprised at how much money is spent this summer. I get the sense that the market will be quite busy.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
104,067
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I think many on here will be surprised at how much money is spent this summer. I get the sense that the market will be quite busy.
This is what I don’t get - we have facts that there is limited money due to COVID across the board. Im just curious why fans like yourself think that there will be a lot of spending?

there seems to be almost a 50/50 split
 

Figgins

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
713
Location
Araʻura
This is what I don’t get - we have facts that there is limited money due to COVID across the board. Im just curious why fans like yourself think that there will be a lot of spending?

there seems to be almost a 50/50 split
I wonder whether there is an assumption that normal finances will resume or is it credit card football. Surely it's buying on the basis of future inflows.
 

McGrathsipan

Dawn’s less famous husband
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
18,244
Location
Dublin
Depends on what you mean by Megabucks. A transfer of say £100m+ is definitely out of the question even a net spend of over £80m is extremely unlikely but a marquee signing of say £60-70m ish up front and realistic add ons is hardly "Megabucks" for a club like Utd COVID or not.
I disagree . It's a business mate not a club.
Any outlay will be evaluated against current cash position and assessed with what ever forecasting techniques they use. Be it discount factoring or whatever.

The business has to remain liquid and be capable of covering all future costs and while fans are locked out there is just no way that any degree of forecasting is reliable unless match day revenue is ignored.

Yeah the brand is strong and they could borrow. I'm not disputing that if the will is there the cash could be found, what I'm saying is that the board will make cold decisions based on ££ numbers. Id be very surprised if net transfer spends are very high and I think we'll sell before we buy. Then what level of fee we are willing to pay is any guess.

The market will naturally see decrease in fees but relatively you can't compare to last year. Its a different financial landscape.
 

pcaming

Full Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
2,000
Location
Trinidad & Tobago
This is what I don’t get - we have facts that there is limited money due to COVID across the board. Im just curious why fans like yourself think that there will be a lot of spending?

there seems to be almost a 50/50 split
For me football has always operated in a bubble of sorts. I don't deny the fact that COVID has affected finances, some significantly, I just get the sense from all the murmurings and utterings that clubs wanna do business. They're just trying to set a tone for the selling clubs to be more reasonable with their pricing. So many clubs are clearly in need of reinforcing and they will wanna take advantage of COVID discounts as much as possible.

I'd be very surprised if the market was quiet, but it's just a hunch on my part and nothing else really.
 

Ryan_

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
6
Except Rashford hasn’t looked good up front really ever. Greenwood has looked better up front. I think it’s more Sancho’s ability to play LW that is useful in as much as we have ample cover pretty much across the front line. Apart from us still needing a bloody striker if/when Cavani leaves this summer.

Rashford/Sancho/Martial/James/Elanga(?) - Greenwood/Martial - Sancho/Amad/Greenwood/James
Fair point - I'd agree Greenwood seems a natural ST. Sancho of course remains a danger out on RW, but when you have a player with such natural ability to beat a man and create chances, I fear we wouldn't be maximising Sancho's potential out on the right (think about how productive Ronaldo became on the left after most of his career as RW for United).

I suppose if Diallo were to fulfil his promise the ideal front 3 might be Sancho - Greenwood - Diallo but I might be in dreamland now!
 

Rolaholic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
4,684
Dortmund's present form, winning once in the last 7 matches, since he's been out with injury reflects quite strongly on his impact...
 

Mr Smith

Full Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2015
Messages
3,461
Location
Australia
Dortmund's present form, winning once in the last 7 matches, since he's been out with injury reflects quite strongly on his impact...
Agreed. It's also potentially put Dortmund in a much weaker negotiating position as their hopes of making top four at this stage are slim at best. I think we can negotiate a substantially lower fee in instalments than what was quoted last year.
 

Bobcat

Full Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
5,911
Location
Behind the curtains, leering at the neighbors
Going to go full muppet mode here.

Henderson starting vs Spurs might be a sign that Ole wants to hand the no 1 to him. Considering De Geas family is still in Spain and he just became a father, is it likely that hes getting moved on this summer? Even though hes not what he used to be, he should still easily be worth 30-40 million

Martial i dont know about. Hes been given an endless amount of opportunities to play himself into form this season, but it has never happened. Maybe some French club is willing to part with 25 million or so for him?

Lindgard has gotten a rennisance at WHU and considering hes ridicolously productive these days, i think we could demand around 40 million for him

Unless we feck it up, that should easily be 100 million + in the bank right there, which means we can buy Sancho and have money to spare
 

Escobar

Poster originally known as Michel04
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
25,336
Location
La-La-Land
Our problem is to sell players first. If we're lucky, we manage to get a decent fee for Lingard and some others, but in the past we struggled to sell them for good money. Without that, there is no chance we buy an expensive player imo
 

Leftback99

Full Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
7,505
Going to go full muppet mode here.

Henderson starting vs Spurs might be a sign that Ole wants to hand the no 1 to him. Considering De Geas family is still in Spain and he just became a father, is it likely that hes getting moved on this summer? Even though hes not what he used to be, he should still easily be worth 30-40 million

Martial i dont know about. Hes been given an endless amount of opportunities to play himself into form this season, but it has never happened. Maybe some French club is willing to part with 25 million or so for him?

Lindgard has gotten a rennisance at WHU and considering hes ridicolously productive these days, i think we could demand around 40 million for him

Unless we feck it up, that should easily be 100 million + in the bank right there, which means we can buy Sancho and have money to spare
I can't see anybody paying a big fee for De Gea and taking on his ridiculous wages. We'd have to subsidise any move like Sanchez. Also no big clubs are in need of a keeper enough to spend big money.

Martial is worth more than £25m, he's just had a season to forget that's all.

Lingard is the bonus. Wouldn't have expected any more than £10m before his loan.
 

Zehner

Full Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2018
Messages
4,567
Location
Germany
Supports
Bayer 04 Leverkusen
Dortmund's present form, winning once in the last 7 matches, since he's been out with injury reflects quite strongly on his impact...
Personally I always thought Sancho is more important to Dortmund than Haaland and the recent results support my view. Haaland is no player who can initiate something on his own, he's reliant on service to a large extent. Sancho though is the one who can change a game singlehandedly (or at least as singlehandedly as is possible in a 11v11 sport) through a dribble, one two, skill move, through ball, etc.

I think Raiola's demands are totally over the top. Haaland is no Messi, Cristiano or Neymar. When considering investing so much money, you should look past goal stats.
 

Bobcat

Full Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
5,911
Location
Behind the curtains, leering at the neighbors
I can't see anybody paying a big fee for De Gea and taking on his ridiculous wages. We'd have to subsidise any move like Sanchez. Also no big clubs are in need of a keeper enough to spend big money.

Martial is worth more than £25m, he's just had a season to forget that's all.

Lingard is the bonus. Wouldn't have expected any more than £10m before his loan.
Maybe i have been living under a rock, but is it compltetely unheard of that a player takes a cut in wages to move to another club?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.