We don't know how to sell players

[MikeUpNorth]

I think we pay salaries above the market rate, which means clubs can't justify paying decent transfer fees for our players.

 

[Gopher Brown]

We also got completely fleeced on RVN, Beckham and Ronaldo.

I cant think of us really getting a great deal. Maybe Di Maria.

RVN was causing problems and we wanted him to leave, and he was 30. Ronaldo was by a long way a record, which only looks bad now because of inflation

 

[crossy1686]

No, things should be much different. When players come into that age(25-27) you must decide.
1) is xy player good for first 11 or we need to buy another? If our plan is to buy another( better) player on that position then...
2) can i get a good fee for that player? And does he have too big salary for backup player?
3) if yes, then you sell him and you buy new (better) player for that money.

Look at it like this. For Jones and Rojo you can get 50 mil easily. Would you rather have those two or Manolas who is 35 mil?

With that mentality O'Shea, Brown, Fletcher, Park and Nani would have been sold long before they actually were, maybe even Young and Valencia fall into this bracket. And they all won titles and played a part when they were asked to play. Sometimes they were utter trash but sometimes they delivered when needed.

You're forgetting one thing. We aren't a selling club, we don't buy players with the thinking of 'we can sell this player on in a few years for more'. We sign players with the mentality of 'this player has reached the pinnacle of their career and will play with us until they decline massively or express a desire to leave'. We've only ever sold on our terms which is why the fees have always been low. Look at similar teams around Europe with our stature.

Rojo can go for all I care, he's injury prone and has done very little to convince me he's good enough for United. Jones on the other hand has won titles, knows how to manage a run in and is happy to sit on the bench, what has Manolas won or done?

 

[crossy1686]

I think we pay salaries above the market rate, which means clubs can't justify paying decent transfer fees for our players.

This is also true. Did anyone actually want to leave us when we were guaranteeing at least one trophy a season? Hard to sell people who don't want to leave.

 

[balaks]

When we talk about transfers it is always about buying players. But what about selling? Why we suck in this? Chelsea and Liverpool are selling backup players for ridiculous fees and we can't sell international players for decent fee. We can't sell players that we don't need like Jones, Rojo, Darmian or Fellaini for any fee. We have players like Smalling, Lingard, Shaw or Pereira for whom we can get huge fees in this crazy market and replace them with better players( i am not saying that they are not good or something like that, just making an example). But we don't even try that. We sold young talents like Depay and Januzaj for small money, we gave away Zaha for nothing, sold Nani and RVP for peanuts...

Is it because of big wages or Ed is just incompetent to sell players for good fee so we rather keep that players? Or, and that is my opinion, we don't even try to sell them and Ed is just thinking that offer will come out of nothing? I mean, if your manager gives you transfer list, then you call clubs and agents and you inform them that xy player is for sale? Right?

It's the wages you pay I would imagine - nobody will be able to match them (assuming they are being sold to a smaller level club) and many players will refuse to move unless their salary is at least matched.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

I think your biggest problem with selling players ins the wages you play them. How much is Jones on for example?

 

[ForestRGoinUp]

I'm not particularly bothered about generating large suns through player sales, for me that a sign of a failed transfer (Di Maria) or a 'involuntary' sale of a star player (Ronaldo). In an ideal would, we would only be selling on youngsters who have not made the grade or players in their twilight

I do agree that we do have a problem with transfer exits though. Far too many average players at the club and I'd rather they be moved on to make way for youth

We've at least 3 players who are surplus at FB, CM and CB, where offloading them would have a minimal impact at the club. If we are on the right path of transfers, then I'd expect to see all three offloaded by Feb

Liverpool sold 3 world class (or close) players for more than all of our sales combined in the last 5 years. And they’ve built a better team because of it.

We clearly can’t spend anything we want without selling so it stands to reason that player sales would play a big part in the rebuild that needs to take place.

 

[RedDevil@84]

Jose Mourinho seemed to improve our outgoing business quite a bit, I thought. We sold Morgan Schneiderlin for £24million. Broke even on a terrible player somehow. Great business.

Did the same with Memphis. There's no chance we could have profited on him as he was so disappointing here, but we bought him for £25m, and we sold him for something like £18m rising to £24 with add-ons, which he's likely to have triggered as he's been pretty good over there.

I don't think we could have got much more for RVP or Nani at the time. RVP was more or less finished at the top level. Had one good season in Turkey and then he looked done. He hasn't been particularly good at Feyenoord from what I've read, and he's retiring in a few months. Nani hasn't done much since leaving either, and was injured for nearly the whole of his final season here.

Didn't we fail to sell Darmian because we didn't get offered as much as Mourinho valued him? We could have let him go for peanuts just to get rid, but then it would prove the point of this thread that we are lousy at selling. Personally, I thought that was a good approach, to lay down the marker that United's surplus isn't a bargain bin anymore. Also we didn't try to sell Fellaini. Mourinho wanted him to stay when he could have left for nothing.


I did think we should have got more for Welbeck when we sold him, given that he was young and English and also going to a rival, but given what we know now - that his knees are made of biscuit - it was a great deal in hindsight. But at the time when you had equally average players like Adam Lallana moving for £20m+, I thought we could have pushed for more.

I don't think Mourinho negotiates any sales. All credit for the sale price on Morgan or Memphis is on Woodward. Same with the Darmian price.

I agree about Welbeck. I was shocked when we gave him away for just 16M to a direct rival. English players were getting premium prices, regardless of how good they were. And Welbeck still had the hype. In hindsight, ya 16M seems good enough.

 

[In Rainbows]

It's the wages. Clubs that are in top 6 don't pay the wages that we do. So expecting a team outside of the top 6 to take our players when they're on massive wages is just not going to happen. I understand big wages for players that need convincing to sign. However, United seem to always have leverage and still hand out big wages. There are players in other top 6 sides who are deemed as being better than some of our players, and yet they're on smaller wages. It makes no sense when United are the bigger club and if wages were equal, they would choose United. But that isn't how we treat it.

Jones needs to go. His contract runs out this summer, and seeing as we're trying to buy another CB, we can't extend him. I would have said the same about Rojo, but Mou gave him a new contract in March.

If we can't sell the players, we need to let them leave on a free and replace them with a younger player who is on much smaller wages. Tuanzebe for example can replace Jones.

 

[ForestRGoinUp]

I agree with the OP apart from selling Lingard. Would cost a bomb to replace him like for like, so selling would be pointless.

Liverpool have bought 3/4 much better players each for less than what Lingard would be sold for. Our problem is who we target, always looking for the most expensive players with years left on their contracts and maybe even at big clubs already. The right manager could upgrade Lingard and Mata with a couple of 30-40M type players, as Liverpool and others have proven possible.

Our scouting is atrocious, and for all the things Ed does wrong, player sales/contracts should be at the very top. He's backed us into a corner that isn't easy to get out of.

 

[Bola]

Liverpool sold 3 world class (or close) players for more than all of our sales combined in the last 5 years. And they’ve built a better team because of it.

We clearly can’t spend anything we want without selling so it stands to reason that player sales would play a big part in the rebuild that needs to take place.

Depends if you think a major rebuild is needed. We are probably 3 or 4 players off a world class team*. Which could achieved over two windows and within our current means, or at the very worse, having to offload some fringe players

If we sell our best (martial, pogba, Rashford, De Gea), we move further away from our goal

*there is the potential to fill two of those priorities internally given the amazing talent we have coming through

 

[GBBQ]

We also got completely fleeced on RVN, Beckham and Ronaldo.

I cant think of us really getting a great deal. Maybe Di Maria.

Thought we did good in moving on Schnedierlin and Depay at the time. Clearly not first team prospects at the time but we good good money for them both and a first refusal on Depay looks to be at least sensible given that he has improved at Lyon.

Teams are going to low-ball us on players who aren't needed so its a case of deciding is it worth holding out for a better deal or should we move on a player we don't need and recoup some money and free up a squad position. Our financial status suggests its not that big of an issue either way.

 

[cyril C]

Was it triggered by a journalist to give a good account on Liverpool and Chelsea that made a few bucks on fringe players. Well, I am more concern about the players that we have on pitch, or how good they are, than players that we let go. Also remember that Chelsea sold KDB, Lukaku and Salah. Morale of the story is, it is not about how much can you get from your fringe players, but who did you offload that come back to bite you.

 

[Josep Dowling]

Think I mentioned this in another thread a while back but it deserves mentioning again. Our top 10 highest sales:

1. Ronaldo to Madrid - £80m
2. Di Maria to PSG - £44.3m
3. Beckham to Madrid - £24.5m
4. Schneiderlin to Everton - £24m
5. Depay to Lyon - £16m
6. Welbeck to Arsenal - £16m
7. Stam to Lazio - £15.25m
8. Veron to Chelsea - £15m
9. Blind to Ajax - £14m
10. Van Nistelrooy to Madrid - £10.2m

Schneiderlin being 4th is downright hilarious.

This is truly shocking that Liverpool have sold Solanke for £19m would be 5th on our list! Fans say why does it matter if we can't get value for our players but honestly we would have more money in the pot to spend on players (in theory, it probably wouldn't work like that). Chelsea manage to sell all their duds for good money.

We haven't played Darmian properly for 3 seasons now and he's still here, why? Send him out on loan to get games, add value to his potential transfer fee rather than leaving him to play 5 games a season. Now we are left in a situation where he will leave for nothing. The entire transfer strategy of the club is weak.

 

[Sir Scott McToMinay]

Must be said though, ED is miles better than Gill at selling players, as a matter of fact, he’s probably better than Gill at everything else too.
The amount we got for Ronaldo and Beckham was an absolute joke.

 

[ForestRGoinUp]

Depends if you think a major rebuild is needed. We are probably 3 or 4 players off a world class team*. Which could achieved over two windows and within our current means, or at the very worse, having to offload some fringe players

If we sell our best (martial, pogba, Rashford, De Gea), we move further away from our goal

*there is the potential to fill two of those priorities internally given the amazing talent we have coming through

Well, to that I repeat: Liverpool sold Suarez Sterling and Coutinho and built a better attack (for the cost of Suarez), and a better midfield and defense (for the cost of Sterling and Coutinho. Their squad is deep enough that Adam Lallana (a Lingard comp) can’t make the bench.

Banking on internal talent is mostly a fools errand and puts us 3-4 more years from those players reaching the beginning of their peak years.

 

[Bola]

Well, to that I repeat: Liverpool sold Suarez Sterling and Coutinho and built a better attack (for the cost of Suarez), and a better midfield and defense (for the cost of Sterling and Coutinho. Their squad is deep enough that Adam Lallana (a Lingard comp) can’t make the bench.

Banking on internal talent is mostly a fools errand and puts us 3-4 more years from those players reaching the beginning of their peak years.

Liverpool's current team is currently stronger than the Rodgers era (just). But they had to take 2 steps back to walk 2 and a quarter steps forward. Whether it wins them anything remains to be seen - but selling star players is not a strategy for a bigger team like United, we are better off financial than Liverpool and dont have to take drastic measures

Re your point on the 'fools errand' of youth, i'm glad Busby and Fergie didn't take that opinion as I doubt our trophy cabinet would be anywhere near it is now. We ain't a club of galacticos and instant gratification, therefore our transder policy should not resemble it

 

[JK-27]

Woodward. Can't buy players at the right price. Can't sell players at the right price. And yet he's still in charge.

 

[OnlyTwoDaSilvas]

I don't think Mourinho negotiates any sales. All credit for the sale price on Morgan or Memphis is on Woodward. Same with the Darmian price.

I agree about Welbeck. I was shocked when we gave him away for just 16M to a direct rival. English players were getting premium prices, regardless of how good they were. And Welbeck still had the hype. In hindsight, ya 16M seems good enough.

Mourinho likely didn't negotiate, but he did seem adamant that he'd only sell players from the squad if we got what we believed they were worth. That's certainly something that changed as soon as he came in, as opposed to LvG binning most of the squad for pennies. Whether that was Jose's impact or whether Woodward finally realised it's just bad business to buy high and sell low, I guess we won't know. Either way, we have gotten a bit better at selling since around that time.

It was weird when Welbeck went to Arsenal. He seemed to be a bit of a laughing stock when he was here, always derided when he was in the England squad and whatnot, then as soon as he goes there, it's all about how United have lost a star, he's going to be England's #9, his reputation flipped on its head. Now its seems everyone has forgotten he even exists.

 

[VeevaVee]

Our poor buying and crap management/mood at the club since Fergie left has meant the players we do have have had leverage. Their agents know we need a reasonably happy base to build from and buying better players that don't work out has only prolonged it and made it worse. It means they can ask for more money to stay and be happy, even if they're not good enough in the long run. Harder to ship off then.

Not to mention we've hardly put up a good shop window.

 

[JohnnyKills]

Agree, this is a problem. Hopefully DoF will help.

Successful clubs always seem to sell well - they get rid of the deadwood quickly and build lean, efficient squads.

 

[ForestRGoinUp]

Liverpool's current team is currently stronger than the Rodgers era (just). But they had to take 2 steps back to walk 2 and a quarter steps forward. Whether it wins them anything remains to be seen - but selling star players is not a strategy for a bigger team like United, we are better off financial than Liverpool and dont have to take drastic measures

Re your point on the 'fools errand' of youth, i'm glad Busby and Fergie didn't take that opinion as I doubt our trophy cabinet would be anywhere near it is now. We ain't a club of galacticos and instant gratification, therefore our transder policy should not resemble it

1. Liverpool are not just barely better than the Rodger's iteration. Be real. They didn't have the squad depth, the midfield or certainly the defense then that they do now.
2. Call us bigger if you want, but our approach to transfers is no bigger than theirs is. We hit a limit every year (and it's not some absurdly high limit) that could be offset by player sales. We aren't making the sales that would allow for more purchasing, for reasons put forth throughout the thread.
3. I understand the history. It should be acknowledged that the sport has changed (just a tad) from the days of Busby and early Ferguson, no?

 

[el3mel]

We give crap players huge salaries that they refuse a pay cut and no other club is going to offer them that salary so we fail to sell them. It's that simple.

Has been a problem ever since Ed got the job. The man has no football brain.

 

[Bola]

1. Liverpool are not just barely better than the Rodger's iteration. Be real. They didn't have the squad depth, the midfield or certainly the defense then that they do now.
2. Call us bigger if you want, but our approach to transfers is no bigger than theirs is. We hit a limit every year (and it's not some absurdly high limit) that could be offset by player sales. We aren't making the sales that would allow for more purchasing, for reasons put forth throughout the thread.
3. I understand the history. It should be acknowledged that the sport has changed (just a tad) from the days of Busby and early Ferguson, no?

1. Better 1st team. The squad depth is not much better.

2. Look at our revenues, we have higher income for tranfers so we are bigger in that sense (amongst others). That's really a side point as I think we need 200 million max to fill the 3 or 4 key positions - we can do that by selling fringe players and our 'natural transfer budget over 2 windows

3. Nothing has changed - talent and desire will always suceed. I a recall an expert writing Fergie off approx 40 years after the Busby Babes. Its been around 25 years since the 'Class of 92' emerged. I don't see what has changed recently (that is relevant) only a mindset at certain clubs


I certainly won't disagree that Liverpool have done a far better job than United at selling 'fringe' players, something we can learn from. I still stand by my orinigal point that United should never have to rely on taking in big incomes from transfers - that should not happen to the biggest teams in the world

 

[ForestRGoinUp]

1. Better 1st team. The squad depth is not much better.

2. Look at our revenues, we have higher income for tranfers so we are bigger in that sense (amongst others). That's really a side point as I think we need 200 million max to fill the 3 or 4 key positions - we can do that by selling fringe players and our 'natural transfer budget over 2 windows

3. Nothing has changed - talent and desire will always suceed. I a recall an expert writing Fergie off approx 40 years after the Busby Babes. Its been around 25 years since the 'Class of 92' emerged. I don't see what has changed recently (that is relevant) only a mindset at certain clubs


I certainly won't disagree that Liverpool have done a far better job than United at selling 'fringe' players, something we can learn from. I still stand by my orinigal point that United should never have to rely on taking in big incomes from transfers - that should not happen to the biggest teams in the world

It does happen to the biggest clubs in the world though. It's not about having some sort of pride in not needing to sell players, or not wanting to be considered a selling club. It's about actively evolving and progressing and refreshing your team before certain players reach their expiration date (whether physically or financially in a contract sense).

There is something insecure about the pride United fans have in "not being a selling club." Real Madrid have made over 100M in sales in 3 of the past 5 seasons. Barcelona have sold for 400M in the last 2 years. Juve over 100M in sales the last 3 years, with Dybala likely making it a 4th consecutive year.

We seem to sell and remain loyal to players similar to Bayern, but we've not countered that by buying up the young domestic talent cheaply as they have. Obviously comparing us to them is foolish on that alone.

Big as our revenues are, we are not a bigger fish in the transfer market than Liverpool are at the moment. Not sure how that can be argued, or how not being a selling club is working out for us.

 

[kundalini]

It is very easy to sell players when you pay them less than their market value. It is very difficult to sell players when you pay them far more than they would get elsewhere.

It isn't a United issue.

 

[Buster15]

I think we pay salaries above the market rate, which means clubs can't justify paying decent transfer fees for our players.

That’s right. Because of the high wages and the draw of being a Manchester United player, underperforming players don't want to leave.

Nevertheless, we don't seem anything like hard nosed enough to off load fringe players.

SAF was pretty good at that. He instinctively knew when to get rid of certain players and we do seem to have lost that ability and it is costing us many many millions in inefficient wages.

 

[AndyJ1985]

We pay crap players far too much. Clubs aren't going to throw money at them just because they play for United.

 

[mancan92]

Think I mentioned this in another thread a while back but it deserves mentioning again. Our top 10 highest sales:

1. Ronaldo to Madrid - £80m
2. Di Maria to PSG - £44.3m
3. Beckham to Madrid - £24.5m
4. Schneiderlin to Everton - £24m
5. Depay to Lyon - £16m
6. Welbeck to Arsenal - £16m
7. Stam to Lazio - £15.25m
8. Veron to Chelsea - £15m
9. Blind to Ajax - £14m
10. Van Nistelrooy to Madrid - £10.2m

Schneiderlin being 4th is downright hilarious.

This is ridiculous considering the calibre of players we have had

 

[Reddy Rederson]

The reason is Ed Woodward. Just like all roads led to jose for the dross we were watching, they also lead to Ed for the matters of buying, selling and contracts.

 

[paulscholes18]

Think I mentioned this in another thread a while back but it deserves mentioning again. Our top 10 highest sales:

1. Ronaldo to Madrid - £80m
2. Di Maria to PSG - £44.3m
3. Beckham to Madrid - £24.5m
4. Schneiderlin to Everton - £24m
5. Depay to Lyon - £16m
6. Welbeck to Arsenal - £16m
7. Stam to Lazio - £15.25m
8. Veron to Chelsea - £15m
9. Blind to Ajax - £14m
10. Van Nistelrooy to Madrid - £10.2m

Schneiderlin being 4th is downright hilarious.

The only one of those we wanted to keep was Ronaldo, but he had his heart set on Madrid, had SAF not fallen out with Beckham, Stam & RVN they wouldn’t have been sold

 

[ForestRGoinUp]

The only one of those we wanted to keep was Ronaldo, but he had his heart set on Madrid, had SAF not fallen out with Beckham, Stam & RVN they wouldn’t have been sold

That’s not the point, I’m fairly certain.

 

[finneh]

When we talk about transfers it is always about buying players. But what about selling? Why we suck in this? Chelsea and Liverpool are selling backup players for ridiculous fees and we can't sell international players for decent fee. We can't sell players that we don't need like Jones, Rojo, Darmian or Fellaini for any fee. We have players like Smalling, Lingard, Shaw or Pereira for whom we can get huge fees in this crazy market and replace them with better players( i am not saying that they are not good or something like that, just making an example). But we don't even try that. We sold young talents like Depay and Januzaj for small money, we gave away Zaha for nothing, sold Nani and RVP for peanuts...

Is it because of big wages or Ed is just incompetent to sell players for good fee so we rather keep that players? Or, and that is my opinion, we don't even try to sell them and Ed is just thinking that offer will come out of nothing? I mean, if your manager gives you transfer list, then you call clubs and agents and you inform them that xy player is for sale? Right?

Simply yes. Our squad players earn far more than even the best players at almost every other club in the world. Therefore to offload them we have to reduce the fee considerably to make the deal viable for the buying club. Lets say Dortmund were interested in Lingard. They approach United who say he's available at €40m, which in this market would be quite reasonable but at the top end of their budget. They just about get over the hurdle of his fee and then his agent tells them he's looking for €120k per week. For that kind of €70m package over a 5 year contract they'd be expecting a player that not only would instantly improve them, but would also have a much greater resale value in 3-4 years.

The statement that "we can get huge fees" for the likes of Smalling, Lingard, Shaw & Pereira. That simply isn't true. The foremost three players for example are all reportedly on salaries of £80k or more. You then look at the kind of club that might buy these players... The teams that could justify splashing out a huge fee either wouldn't want them (Real, Barca, Bayern, PSG etc) or couldn't afford their salaries (mid table Premier League or pretty much anyone else outside the top 10 clubs in Europe).

You can look at our sales and see where the money has gone. If Blind were on £30k a week we'd have probably sold him for £30m... As he earned maybe £3m a year more than this figure this was deducted from the transfer fee (over 4-5 years) that Ajax paid. Likewise Januzaj was sold for £10m compared with Ibe selling for £15m... The difference was that Januzaj earned £1m per annum more than Ibe which was factored into a reduced fee paid.

It's all about supply and demand so no team can be "good" at selling players and no team can be "bad". If we want to start receiving good fee's we need to completely rebuild our wage structure from the ground up. This Summer is a good opportunity as there are several players earning far higher salaries than their contributions would dictate which we can ship out whatever the fee... The likes of Jones, Valencia, Fellaini, Darmian & Young. Then there's the likes of Mata who would need to accept a lower salary to reflect his status.

The following "unproven" players should be earning £40k max per week: Rojo, Bailly, Lindelof, Dalot, Romero, McTominay
The following "squad" players should be earning £60k max per week: Young, Jones, Valencia, Fellaini, Smalling, Lingard, Darmian
The following "first team" players should be earning £125k max per week: Matic, Herrera, Mata, Shaw, Fred, Lukaku, Martial, Rashford
The following "key" players should be earning anything up to £300k: Sanchez, Pogba, De Gea

If you read through that list you'll notice that we're paying our first team and key players roughly in line with what you'd expect (anomaly is Lukaku). However pretty much every single unproven or squad player is earning a far, far greater salary than their contributions would imply.

Our wage structure was set up by Fergie as a socialist system of "it takes a 25 man squad to win a title". However it should be "what is the absolute maximum these players would earn at another club". Would Lingard, Fellaini, Young, Jones or Valencia earn as much as Erikson at Spurs? Of course not.

 

[ForestRGoinUp]

Simply yes. Our squad players earn far more than even the best players at almost every other club in the world. Therefore to offload them we have to reduce the fee considerably to make the deal viable for the buying club. Lets say Dortmund were interested in Lingard. They approach United who say he's available at €40m, which in this market would be quite reasonable but at the top end of their budget. They just about get over the hurdle of his fee and then his agent tells them he's looking for €120k per week. For that kind of €70m package over a 5 year contract they'd be expecting a player that not only would instantly improve them, but would also have a much greater resale value in 3-4 years.

The statement that "we can get huge fees" for the likes of Smalling, Lingard, Shaw & Pereira. That simply isn't true. The foremost three players for example are all reportedly on salaries of £80k or more. You then look at the kind of club that might buy these players... The teams that could justify splashing out a huge fee either wouldn't want them (Real, Barca, Bayern, PSG etc) or couldn't afford their salaries (mid table Premier League or pretty much anyone else outside the top 10 clubs in Europe).

You can look at our sales and see where the money has gone. If Blind were on £30k a week we'd have probably sold him for £30m... As he earned maybe £3m a year more than this figure this was deducted from the transfer fee (over 4-5 years) that Ajax paid. Likewise Januzaj was sold for £10m compared with Ibe selling for £15m... The difference was that Januzaj earned £1m per annum more than Ibe which was factored into a reduced fee paid.

It's all about supply and demand so no team can be "good" at selling players and no team can be "bad". If we want to start receiving good fee's we need to completely rebuild our wage structure from the ground up. This Summer is a good opportunity as there are several players earning far higher salaries than their contributions would dictate which we can ship out whatever the fee... The likes of Jones, Valencia, Fellaini, Darmian & Young. Then there's the likes of Mata who would need to accept a lower salary to reflect his status.

The following "unproven" players should be earning £40k max per week: Rojo, Bailly, Lindelof, Dalot, Romero, McTominay
The following "squad" players should be earning £60k max per week: Young, Jones, Valencia, Fellaini, Smalling, Lingard, Darmian
The following "first team" players should be earning £125k max per week: Matic, Herrera, Mata, Shaw, Fred, Lukaku, Martial, Rashford
The following "key" players should be earning anything up to £300k: Sanchez, Pogba, De Gea

If you read through that list you'll notice that we're paying our first team and key players roughly in line with what you'd expect (anomaly is Lukaku). However pretty much every single unproven or squad player is earning a far, far greater salary than their contributions would imply.

Our wage structure was set up by Fergie as a socialist system of "it takes a 25 man squad to win a title". However it should be "what is the absolute maximum these players would earn at another club". Would Lingard, Fellaini, Young, Jones or Valencia earn as much as Erikson at Spurs? Of course not.

Bravo

 

[MalcolmTucker]

It's the wages. Clubs that are in top 6 don't pay the wages that we do. So expecting a team outside of the top 6 to take our players when they're on massive wages is just not going to happen. I understand big wages for players that need convincing to sign. However, United seem to always have leverage and still hand out big wages. There are players in other top 6 sides who are deemed as being better than some of our players, and yet they're on smaller wages. It makes no sense when United are the bigger club and if wages were equal, they would choose United. But that isn't how we treat it.

Jones needs to go. His contract runs out this summer, and seeing as we're trying to buy another CB, we can't extend him. I would have said the same about Rojo, but Mou gave him a new contract in March.

If we can't sell the players, we need to let them leave on a free and replace them with a younger player who is on much smaller wages. Tuanzebe for example can replace Jones.

Good post - I agree

 

[RedStarUnited]

Think I mentioned this in another thread a while back but it deserves mentioning again. Our top 10 highest sales:

1. Ronaldo to Madrid - £80m
2. Di Maria to PSG - £44.3m
3. Beckham to Madrid - £24.5m
4. Schneiderlin to Everton - £24m
5. Depay to Lyon - £16m
6. Welbeck to Arsenal - £16m
7. Stam to Lazio - £15.25m
8. Veron to Chelsea - £15m
9. Blind to Ajax - £14m
10. Van Nistelrooy to Madrid - £10.2m

Schneiderlin being 4th is downright hilarious.

Beckham and Stam were emotional sells that really should have been higher. Beckham especially, Such a high profile commercial player should have gone for a near record fee.

 

[Flying_Heckfish]

No one else would retain the players we do, at the wages we do. Simple as that really.

We saw when a marketable player was made available at a reasonable price, we had bites - Schneiderlin, Memphis - but otherwise, we get derogatory bids.

We should not make this mistake this summer, those who have expiring contracts and are of no use should be left. Renewing causes more issues.

 

[Mindhunter]

It’s very simple. When we want players to leave that automatically lowers the selling price - we have extracted their value by playing them and hopefully having success.

We are at/near the top of the food chain, so clubs cannot simply buy players we still want to retain - Ronaldo went for a world record fee because we wanted to keep him.

I’d far rather we extract value from these players by hanging on to them and playing them. We don’t really seem to need or use the money from player sales anyway, it’s just bragging rights people want.

This. We aren't good at selling because we aren't a selling club.

 

[Fosu-Mens]

This. We aren't good at selling because we aren't a selling club.

No. @finneh is right. We are not a selling club because the players does not want to leave since they will never get the same wages anywhere else in Europe. And for smaller clubs to afford to attract our players they can't afford to pay the "market price" for them.

We should hope the likes of Sunderland and Stoke comes back into the Prem so that we can offload our deadwood to them for a stupid amount.

 

[Gopher Brown]

No. @finneh is right. We are not a selling club because the players does not want to leave since they will never get the same wages anywhere else in Europe. And for smaller clubs to afford to attract our players they can't afford to pay the "market price" for them.

We should hope the likes of Sunderland and Stoke comes back into the Prem so that we can offload our deadwood to them for a stupid amount.

Yes, but we pay high wages because the club makes an enormous amount of money and the players are the reason (prize money, advertising etc). No business pays its employees over the odds for no reason, and if you worked for a company where your contribution resulted in their profits growing, you’d want a slice of the financial success.

Having said that, I’d very hard to justify £110,000 per week for Ashley Young or £300,000 per week for Rooney back in the day.