Mason Mount | Confirmed

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ronaldinho's snakebite

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 28, 2023
Messages
105
To me, this has nothing to do with united being responsible in transfer dealings. Its because Chelsea has little to no leverage as Mount only has a year on his contract and might go for free next season.
This same board paid £90m for Antony ffs.
 

united_99

Takes pleasure in other people's pain
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
9,575
Because they don't have to - they can afford to wait until late august. The extra millions are just as much worth then. We are the ones wanting him so he can play the first 3-4 matches of the season.
We also don’t have to. He is not someone you can’t miss out on.
 

RedRonaldo

Wishes to be oppressed.
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
18,996
To be honest I think we should wrap this up quick now, and I don't even mind to pay an extra 5m if that's what it takes, as we are running out of other options. Rabiot isn't coming for free, we can't afford to sign Caicedo or Rice. So most likely other options left is Kudus from Ajax for 40m. I am not too sure.

Realistically, we either end up buying Kudus for 40m, or push harder to buy Mount for around 55m+ (still hope its under 60m).
 

mitchmouse

loves to hate United.
Joined
Oct 8, 2014
Messages
17,767
Again, how is this the clubs fault?
We've done exactly the right thing - told Chelsea its our last bid for him, we'll walk away if they refuse.

They refused.

We walk away, but leaving the door open if they lower their demands.

We start making moves on the alternatives identified (more than likely ETH knows who they are and have signed off on them).

Obviously ETH wants Mount but he'll know the situation and after a summer long pursuit of De Jong last year he'd be wise not to repeat that, because that's what makes the club look amateurish.
Again, i'm struggling to see how you think this is our fault or a bad look on the club.
If the manger wants a player, get him. Pretty simple, really. It's not as if we are a little club. Again I ask, if Arsenal can go out and get their targets, why can't we? It almost cost us last season
 

Lash

Full Member
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
12,703
Location
Buckinghamshire
Supports
Millwall, Saint-Etienne
What my post got to do with ugarte and Chelsea. Ugarte didn't say I wanted to play for Chelsea only. And PSG offered him more wages than us and player chose them over Chelsea. Lack of awareness on your part comparing ugarte and mount situation. :)

It's about manutd and how they could be perceived if they do not want to spend 5mn more and let the player in no man's land who clearly wanted to play for united and manager s first choice player.
It's about how much you want the player apparently, surely if you really wanted him you should have offered him more? Or did you have a limit you were willing to pay him and stuck to it?

I don't see why that's United's problem exclusively. Why are you holding out for only £5m more with a player that doesn't want to be there? Why wouldn't Chelsea be perceived as not a serious player in the market when they bought a player in a similar situation for 10m less? See how one sided your narrative is?
 

Zaphod2319

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
4,219
Supports
Chelsea
It's about how much you want the player apparently, surely if you really wanted him you should have offered him more? Or did you have a limit you were willing to pay him and stuck to it?

I don't see why that's United's problem exclusively. Why are you holding out for only £5m more with a player that doesn't want to be there? Why wouldn't Chelsea be perceived as not a serious player in the market when they bought a player in a similar situation for 10m less? See how one sided your narrative is?
It the English media is to be believed, Poch was consulted after PSG offered him their huge wage and Poch said don’t offer anything crazy, it effects the squad harmony offering one player massive wages coming in.

Who really knows? I take all these media stories with a grain of salt.
 

Ronaldinho's snakebite

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 28, 2023
Messages
105
Mount is contractually bound to Chelsea by free will.
Chelsea have the right to demand whatever fee they deem appropriate by free will.
Mount has the right to turn down any future Chelsea contracts by free will.
No one is holding anyone hostage beyond the terms of the existing contract.


Why is it always the club's fault in issues like these? Why disgraceful of the club?
This will be done next week. Disgraceful how they’ve treated Mount. Reminds me of how Woodward have treated our players in the past.
How have they treated him? In fact it's the other way around. He has been at Chelsea all his life, he got there at 4 years old. And now rejecting their contract offers, not only with this new ownership, but abramovic regime too. Hell bent on joining their rivals. If a united player behaves like that, I'd be pissed.
 

Lash

Full Member
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
12,703
Location
Buckinghamshire
Supports
Millwall, Saint-Etienne
It the English media is to be believed, Poch was consulted after PSG offered him their huge wage and Poch said don’t offer anything crazy, it effects the squad harmony offering one player massive wages coming in.

Who really knows? I take all these media stories with a grain of salt.
That's what I read as well, I'm just pointing out to this poster how you took a similar position with a player that we're taking with a transfer fee. They're both reasonable positions and don't make either of us "not serious".
 

Rajiztar

Full Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
2,117
Supports
Chelsea
It's about how much you want the player apparently, surely if you really wanted him you should have offered him more? Or did you have a limit you were willing to pay him and stuck to it?

I don't see why that's United's problem exclusively. Why are you holding out for only £5m more with a player that doesn't want to be there? Why wouldn't Chelsea be perceived as not a serious player in the market when they bought a player in a similar situation for 10m less? See how one sided your narrative is?
Because that's how I feel about chelsea if they failed to sign the player for 5 mn difference who openly said wanted to join us and also manager s first choice. Most players and agents too.
 
Last edited:

Lash

Full Member
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
12,703
Location
Buckinghamshire
Supports
Millwall, Saint-Etienne
Because that's how I feel about chelsea if they failed to sign the player who openly said wanted to join us and also manager s first choice. Most players and agents too.
Well if you feel that way, that settles it. Doubt it.

We haven't failed to sign him yet either, it's not even July.
 

OmarUnited4ever

Full Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
3,477
If the news are true, then I am pleased to see the club not budging on the last offer, this surely sends a message, United made 3 offers and the last one is quite good for a player like Mount at this moment, if we attempted to sign him right after the CL win where he was coming off a great season and had few years in his contract then it might have been reasonable for Chelsea to demand 80/100m, but he is coming off a shit season (to be fair the entire team was shit) and only have a year left in his contract, 55m is more than a fair amount, Chelsea either accept it or we move on.

If there is some sort of room for negotiations then it should be on the specifics of the 55m
 

Abraxas

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2021
Messages
6,136
If the news are true, then I am pleased to see the club not budging on the last offer, this surely sends a message, United made 3 offers and the last one is quite good for a player like Mount at this moment, if we attempted to sign him right after the CL win where he was coming off a great season and had few years in his contract then it might have been reasonable for Chelsea to demand 80/100m, but he is coming off a shit season (to be fair the entire team was shit) and only have a year left in his contract, 55m is more than a fair amount, Chelsea either accept it or we move on.

If there is some sort of room for negotiations then it should be on the specifics of the 55m
Completely agree.

This is the right way to play this out. We started with a bit of a lowball offer that was never going to work, but we've worked up to a deal that is respectful of the player's age, quality, contractual position, form. Eventually you do have to draw a line otherwise you are the mugs in negotiations every single time. Clubs have to know you have principles you'll stick to and you do what you say and say what you mean. If they know you cave in each and every time it's not a good look. Sometimes you can concede if its an absolutely crucial signing, and there is nothing else like it on the market because I think that situation will be understood, but too often we just pay whatever it takes to get a deal done and that's not good in the long run.

Leave it on the table for the time being, and start to work on other targets. It's Chelsea's gift to accept or not accept an offer for their player, there is no issue with what they're doing, it's just about our valuation and being a bit tougher.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
I saw this on Twitter. Rather odd Man Utd want to have a sit down during the busiest part of the transfer window to just cross their arms and say we will not budge.
It’s Chelsea who wants a sit down, not United.
 

VP89

Pogba's biggest fan
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
32,403
If the manger wants a player, get him. Pretty simple, really. It's not as if we are a little club. Again I ask, if Arsenal can go out and get their targets, why can't we? It almost cost us last season
Have you been following the news? We have FFP issues it's pretty simple really.
 

Klean

Full Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2017
Messages
206
Location
USA
People are mad when overpay for players. People are mad when we do not pay for players... People are just mad.

The only difference here is sentiment and since it's ETH that wants him, we want to overpay. If it's Ole asking for another 5-10 million for a player the whole place would meltdown.
 

7even

Resident moaner, hypocrite and moron
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
4,222
Location
Lifetime vacation
If the news are true, then I am pleased to see the club not budging on the last offer, this surely sends a message, United made 3 offers and the last one is quite good for a player like Mount at this moment, if we attempted to sign him right after the CL win where he was coming off a great season and had few years in his contract then it might have been reasonable for Chelsea to demand 80/100m, but he is coming off a shit season (to be fair the entire team was shit) and only have a year left in his contract, 55m is more than a fair amount, Chelsea either accept it or we move on.

If there is some sort of room for negotiations then it should be on the specifics of the 55m
This!

Finally the club is negotiating the right way and I’m pleased we finally changed our transfer strategy.
 

surf

Full Member
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
6,728
Location
In the wilderness
Get it done pronto so that he can start the pre-season here. He'll be a key player and should be integrated into the team asap.
 

redsunited

Full Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
838
Location
London
Because that's how I feel about chelsea if they failed to sign the player for 5 mn difference who openly said wanted to join us and also manager s first choice. Most players and agents too.
Nope, United will wait. Chelsea shenanigans are not going to work.
 

TheLord

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2018
Messages
1,719
Fully aware of that. It doesn’t make it right though. They are overvaluing an asset due to who the buying club is.
My only point is, that it is right of them.

Valuation is relative. Valuation depnds not just on the |absolute| market value of a player, but on so many other variables - selling pressure, need of the player in that team (buying/selling), club's financial status, contract condition, previous dealings between clubs, FFP situation, player's non-footballing attributes, players desires, age, player's attributes aligning with that of the manager's, resale value, squad size, home-grown, and so forth. There are so many variables that are not apparent on the outside.

You're assuming that it is wrong as Mount is overvalued, in part, because United is the buying club. There's always some element of bargaining, but if their demands seem unreasonable to us, we should move on. Like I said before, the general tendency in such transfers is to criticise the selling club, which in my opinion, is wrong. The selling club is absolutely right to value players the way they want. There's nothing wrong in it.


....and had few years in his contract then it might have been reasonable for Chelsea to demand 80/100m, but he ... only have a year left in his contract, 55m is more than a fair amount, Chelsea either accept it or we move on.
....
Because he has only one year left in his contract, it improves our bargaining power, but it does very little to his valuation. Those two entities sound similar, but are not. Valuation is complex. To add, what if Mount signs a contract extension tomorrow and is then offered to United? Suddenly, is it then reasonable for them to demand 80m?

We make too many inferences based on contract situations believing that clubs are obliged to sell us their players whose contract is about to run out on the cheap.

If Chelsea aren't under pressure to sell, they can demand the full fee, and it would be reasonable. If that valuation is reasonable to us, we say okay, else we move on.
 

bosskeano

Full Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2020
Messages
5,197
look at the deal they just completed with City for Kovacic....don't tell me for one second taht they aren't trying to fleece United for more money
 

Sultan

Gentleness adorns everything
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
48,569
Location
Redcafe
look at the deal they just completed with City for Kovacic....don't tell me for one second taht they aren't trying to fleece United for more money
Age is a massive factor.

Kovacic will have no sell-on value once his contract ends. Mount, should have a decent sell-on value if United decide to sell to the extent we could get the full transfer fee back.
 

1905

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
384
Supports
Chelsea
Come on guys, you have record revenues projected. What's another £5m?
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
22,313
If the manger wants a player, get him. Pretty simple, really. It's not as if we are a little club. Again I ask, if Arsenal can go out and get their targets, why can't we? It almost cost us last season
Lisandro Martinez and Mudryk have been great signings for Arsenal.
 

mu4c_20le

Full Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
44,893
Age is a massive factor.

Kovacic will have no sell-on value once his contract ends. Mount, should have a decent sell-on value if United decide to sell to the extent we could get the full transfer fee back.
If no clubs are paying it now, why would they pay it when we decide to sell him? He would need to be amazing for us to command 60m+ in a few years. We don't sell to domestic rivals either so I can't see us getting this money back. Like Antony this is a big show of faith to ETH and really gotta hope it works out.
 

Mainoldo

New Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2004
Messages
22,965
How have they treated him? In fact it's the other way around. He has been at Chelsea all his life, he got there at 4 years old. And now rejecting their contract offers, not only with this new ownership, but abramovic regime too. Hell bent on joining their rivals. If a united player behaves like that, I'd be pissed.
DDG did this but a load of people are now hurt we don’t want to give him big wages.

Suppose it’s all swings and roundabouts.

4 years old too!!! He must of been able to rabona top bins.
 

Rajiztar

Full Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
2,117
Supports
Chelsea
Boehly will probably sign caicedo in coming days and extend Mount s contract. United will sign some other midfielder like Maddison and lavia. That's how it will end in my opinion.
 

bosskeano

Full Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2020
Messages
5,197
Age is a massive factor.

Kovacic will have no sell-on value once his contract ends. Mount, should have a decent sell-on value if United decide to sell to the extent we could get the full transfer fee back.
Age shouldn't be an extra 30m factor for a guy who can leave on a free next season
 

Sultan

Gentleness adorns everything
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
48,569
Location
Redcafe
If no clubs are paying it now, why would they pay it when we decide to sell him? He would need to be amazing for us to command 60m+ in a few years. We don't sell to domestic rivals either so I can't see us getting this money back. Like Antony this is a big show of faith to ETH and really gotta hope it works out.
You have a good point.

Mason Mount has chosen United as his next destination which means other clubs have left the field. If he performs at a maximum level he would have suitors and would be in his prime age-wise.
 

Sultan

Gentleness adorns everything
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
48,569
Location
Redcafe
Age shouldn't be an extra 30m factor for a guy who can leave on a free next season
If Chelsea are willing to gamble losing him for free that is their prerogative. He is their asset and can demand what they want regardless of how we feel about the valuation as fans.
 

Rajiztar

Full Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
2,117
Supports
Chelsea
If I am a united negotiator I will add all the money they feel extra into add ons like minimum ten goals ten assists he need to achieve to activate 5mn clause need to win trophy to activate another 5mn clause and minimum number of appearance to activate another 2mn clause.

If united and mount achieved the clauses they won't feel overpaid. Chelsea also feel their valuation are met.
 

ThierryHenry14

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
4,360
Supports
Arsenal
They also got Caicedo in January.
Edu didn't get his A targets, but Zinchenko, Jorginho and Trossard did quite well. Mudryk and Caicedo of course are much younger and would probably be better buy down the road, but it is what it is.

Ten Hag seems prefers players he worked with before, like Martinez, Antony, De Jong, and now Mason Mount.
 
Last edited:

Kirisatha96

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 28, 2021
Messages
5
If the manger wants a player, get him. Pretty simple, really. It's not as if we are a little club. Again I ask, if Arsenal can go out and get their targets, why can't we? It almost cost us last season
In cricket, there's a thing called cowboy cricket. It's considered a gentleman's game but then you face teams who rock up thinking they know how to play and can coach and do tactics and just go with vibes. No real technical knowledge or experience but think they're the bees knees. This is your advice in a nutshell.

Go out and get him is such poor mindset. The reason we have no appeal or get what we want is because we make awful financial decisions.

We got fleeced for Anthony when we walked away as we should have. We got fleeced for 100m. We got fleeced with Sancho. Now look where those players are in our squad. Not really setting the world alight?

If it's Mbappe or world's greatest wonderkid and they want to play for us, then yeah I get it.

But for the first time United are showing some dog attitude in the market and we still criticise.

They can't win with you lot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.