Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Honestly don't think so. We are making less money, that much is a fact, we will also be earning less playing behind closed doors for the foreseeable future, that much is also a fact. Meanwhile we are paying everyone their normal wages. We also have to plan to stay afloat for possible future stoppages. There's no way spending remains the same for us or anyone.Think it's a bluff, personally.
True, we will likely be earning less, but that discounts two factors:Honestly don't think so. We are making less money, that much is a fact, we will also be earning less playing behind closed doors for the foreseeable future, that much is also a fact. Meanwhile we are paying everyone their normal wages. We also have to plan to stay afloat for possible future stoppages. There's no way spending remains the same for us or anyone.
We spent more than that in one defender.We will spend 60m net as per usual. I guess that's the max the Glazers can afford these days. I very much doubt we'll see another EPL title with these guys around.
The bolded seems nice but any plan can seem nice when you list the pros and omit the cons/drawbacks like us having a massive wage bill and any possible transfer fees we might still be paying. I also don't know about having a warchest of cash reserves, how did you get that info? We aren't going bankrupt anytime soon, we are also more advantaged than other teams but we are definitely not spending more while earning less. It may be pretty unwise to blow 200m while not knowing when financial normalcy returns. Imo any money we have now will be a safety net to keep our bank balance and massive wage bill in the green. We aren't going to take a chunk of it to go shopping just yetTrue, we will likely be earning less, but that discounts two factors:
a) our commercial activities have insulated us against the current financial crisis which has dogged everyone else; &
b) we actually have a lot of cash reserves in the bank, which most clubs don't have to the same degree.
And that's before we factor in the fees we're due for Lukaku and a few others we've let go over the past few years. We also haven't spent anywhere near our cap since 2017 (when we bought Lukaku: 80m, Matic: 40m, and Lindelof: 30m; and then Sanchez in the January of that season). Even taking in to account Bruno signing in January, there's still at least two further big name signings we can afford, even if the market wasn't depressed as it likely will be.
If there is any degree of truth to what Woodward said, I'd think it was more in line to the rumours surrounding Kane coming, rather than Sancho or Grealish. Plus, what Woodward said directly contradicts Ole's remarks, as well as the various murmurings from club sources to the journalists who actually have a line at the club such as Whitwell, Mitten, Ornstein, etc. Namely, that Utd feel that they are in a good enough position to get the players that they need to get, and that they have been using this time off to scout further and exploit the opportunities that could be presented.
I really do think we have enough wherewithal to conduct the transfers that we have earmarked for the last couple of seasons. Someone like Sancho, for example, I can't imagine us being put off because of the current climate. Not when he's been on our wish list for as long as he has been and both himself and Dortmund are seemingly more than open to a move.
You do know United spent 80 on lukaku, 50 on wan bissaka and a huge amount on maguireWe will spend 60m net as per usual. I guess that's the max the Glazers can afford these days. I very much doubt we'll see another EPL title with these guys around.
Net spendWe spent more than that in one defender.
Re the wage bill, every member of the squad took a 20% wage cut for failing to reach the CL last season, and we weren't paying the highest earner (Sanchez)'s wage in full in any case. We have barely bought anyone in the last 3 years, and a lot of those we bought before then have been moved on in any case.The bolded seems nice but any plan can seem nice when you list the pros and omit the cons/drawbacks like us having a massive wage bill and any possible transfer fees we might still be paying. I also don't know about having a warchest of cash reserves, how did you get that info? We aren't going bankrupt anytime soon, we are also more advantaged than other teams but we are definitely not spending more while earning less. You also realise it's pretty unwise to blow a 100m on a player while not knowing when financial normalcy returns. Any money we have now will be a safety net to keep our bank balance in the green. We aren't going to take a chunk of it to go shopping.
Forget what you think Ole might have said, it's probably made up tabloid talk anyway. This is the CEO speaking directly on the issue. That takes precedence over hearsay paper talk
This is where you need to read what Nicky Butt said:We will spend 60m net as per usual. I guess that's the max the Glazers can afford these days. I very much doubt we'll see another EPL title with these guys around.
60m net spend.You do know United spent 80 on lukaku, 50 on wan bissaka and a huge amount on maguire
NET spent was the key part.We spent more than that in one defender.
He started talking about rebates on season tickets.Re the wage bill, every member of the squad took a 20% wage cut for failing to reach the CL last season, and we weren't paying the highest earner (Sanchez)'s wage in full in any case. We have barely bought anyone in the last 3 years, and a lot of those we bought before then have been moved on in any case.
Re the cash reserves, the vid below is a good summary of Utd's strengths vis-a-vis everyone else:
Our broadcasting and matchday income is still 58% of our revenues. To what degree we are insulated, is up for debate. We are less dependent than other clubs on those two income streams but that still represents two-thirds of our revenue. That's a massive chunk.True, we will likely be earning less, but that discounts two factors:
a) our commercial activities have insulated us against the current financial crisis which has dogged everyone else; &
b) we actually have a lot of cash reserves in the bank, which most clubs don't have to the same degree.
And that's before we factor in the fees we're due for Lukaku and a few others we've let go over the past few years. We also haven't spent anywhere near our cap since 2017 (when we bought Lukaku: 80m, Matic: 40m, and Lindelof: 30m; and then Sanchez in the January of that season). Even taking in to account Bruno signing in January, there's still at least two further big name signings we can afford, even if the market wasn't depressed as it likely will be.
If there is any degree of truth to what Woodward said, I'd think it was more in line to the rumours surrounding Kane coming, rather than Sancho or Grealish. Plus, what Woodward said directly contradicts Ole's remarks, as well as the various murmurings from club sources to the journalists who actually have a line at the club such as Whitwell, Mitten, Ornstein, etc. Namely, that Utd feel that they are in a good enough position to get the players that they need to get, and that they have been using this time off to scout further and exploit the opportunities that could be presented.
I really do think we have enough wherewithal to conduct the transfers that we have earmarked for the last couple of seasons. Someone like Sancho, for example, I can't imagine us being put off because of the current climate. Not when he's been on our wish list for as long as he has been and both himself and Dortmund are seemingly more than open to a move.
Our net spent this year was over 150m....NET spent was the key part.
Our net spent this year was over 150m....Net spend
That net spend is not a "real" thing, its just something that appears in Transfermarkt and gives a overview of players in/out and their transfer fee. Clubs do not do accounting that way.We will spend 60m net as per usual. I guess that's the max the Glazers can afford these days. I very much doubt we'll see another EPL title with these guys around.
https://www.90min.com/posts/6550125...-will-impact-man-utd-s-summer-transfer-budgetOur net spent this year was over 150m....
Businesses tend to try to balance the books. United are not an exceptionThat net spend is not a "real" thing, its just something that appears in Transfermarkt and gives a overview of players in/out and their transfer fee. Clubs do not do accounting that way.
We brought forward a signing we were going to make in the summer.Our net spent this year was over 150m....
He’s extremely successful in finance is he not? I don’t quite get this criticism.Given his track record, financial forecasting or advice from Ed Woodward is about as meaningful as Weinstein telling you how to behave respectfully to women.
Yeah? But that has nothing to do with a "net spend" of £60m. That figure, again, does not exist in accounting. It's used in cash accounting to determine in and out over a short period of time for small businesses, it's a tool to, as you say, help them balance teh books and get a overview of their spending power.Businesses tend to try to balance the books. United are not an exception
Oh I get that and in fact the transfers I mentioned are young players with the potential to be WC. Sir Alex used to use this strategy as well with the likes of Butt, Phil Nev, Oshea and co providing bodies to the team while money was spent on the first team when needed. Unfortunately the league is becoming more competitive with Dubai and now Saudi coming into scene + Sir Alex was always given the resources to buy top players like Rooney and Rio if he wanted to. Can you see us do the same with a 60-70m net per year unless of course we sell players first?This is where you need to read what Nicky Butt said:
"If you look at the cost for an average player now, why would you not create your own? That's where the [youth player] recruitment drive came from. As soon as Ole came in, it went to a whole new level, because he gets it".
Well we're not even paying the debt, just interest. Have we even repaired OT's roof btw?Yeah? But that has nothing to do with a "net spend" of £60m. That figure, again, does not exist in accounting. It's used in cash accounting to determine in and out over a short period of time for small businesses, it's a tool to, as you say, help them balance teh books and get a overview of their spending power.
Manchester Uniteds finances are, or at least were, in tip top shape before the lockout. .
We keep being told he is succesful in finance by people who have no idea if he is or not or what that even means.He’s extremely successful in finance is he not? I don’t quite get this criticism.
Quite a while ago now that, and also his first ever transfer window.We keep being told he is succesful in finance by people who have no idea if he is or not or what that even means.
When it comes to transfers and transfer value he has an extremely documented public history with us of having absolutely no idea what he is doing.
You are saying you don't get the criticism of someone who paid £4m OVER Fellaini's buyout clause, in order to sign him 2 months too late. This same man who anyone is supposed to pay attention to when he starts talking about the value of transfers...
and I certainly dont see anybody wanting to pay even half sanchez wages to take him on loan... so pretty sure he will end up back at old trafford next yearI guess it would also effect outgoings. No one would be able to afford Pogba.
Donald, is that you ?We keep being told he is succesful in finance by people who have no idea if he is or not or what that even means.
When it comes to transfers and transfer value he has an extremely documented public history with us of having absolutely no idea what he is doing.
You are saying you don't get the criticism of someone who paid £4m OVER Fellaini's buyout clause, in order to sign him 2 months too late. This same man who anyone is supposed to pay attention to when he starts talking about the value of transfers...
Backlash due to them "bragging" about taking advantage of other clubs financial problems some weeks ago.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date