Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

You might as well believe what the Sun says if you believe the crap Daily Star write.

Comment deleted by Article Creator

And many thanks for deleting that spam crap as well, tedious posters.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

I don't believe it, but there's no football on, and if a bidding war happened, at least there would be something to get excited about x

Highly doubt we will get into a bidding war with your owners, you'd blow us out of the water

Only top clubs in the league I feel we can triumph a bidding war would be Arsenal, Spurs and Liverpool.

Not with FFP around the corner... however arguably Cristiano could double shirt sales for United... maybe more than triple them for City! Hence a big fee/wages might be recouped.

Also a friend of mine who no one would describe as an ITK, but nevertheless works in a related industry reckons that Nike would very much prefer to see Ronaldo playing for a team that is sponsored by them, as opposed to the Adidas sponsored Real... whether that preference is backed up by financial incentives for the player or the club remains to be seen x

I think everyone would have assumed that about Nike, I think Cristiano will eventually sign a mega bucks deal with Real and he'll retire there like Zizou did. Can't see him in a United shirt again, too much financial problems for us.

RVP - you think so (about Nike)?
It's never been a problem with any other player that I've heard, so I don't know why it would become so now.
I mean yes, I'm sure they'd prefer it, but you get that I was inferring they might try to influence proceedings.
I actually think it might set a dangerous precedent x

Ronaldo would NEVER EVER sign for City, even if they paid him £400,000 a week after tax.

He's one of the richest footballers on the planet and set to earn another £100m roughly before he stops playing.

He didn't leave United for money because whatever Madrid offered we would have matched if that was the only issue. He left because his heart lies with Real Madrid and they are his boyhood club.

He'll never come back to play in England I don't think but it would only be United who could get him if he did.

Surely a deal that's partially funded by extra money from a kit supplier would be against ffp rules, otherwise clubs with the biggest sponsorship deals would have a loophole, and the kit companies would start dictating to clubs who they could buy.

I'm with x this could set a dangerous president.

Even by the daily stars standards this story seems prepostourous.

Not even gonna bother reading it. Never will happen

Mancblueloz & X

In fairness.....you lot are not really in a position to talk about financial fairness are you?

Also.....The rumours about Nike paying for Ronaldo were pie in the sky in the first place anyway. It would never ever happen.

If he was really available, United would buy him out right with our own money. The trouble is, he's not available. It would be sucicidal for Madrid to sell him now with Barca getting Neymar to add to their firepower.

Wouldn't a sponsor paying part of a players wages be some sort of third party ownership?

Yes Loz, can't see it being allowed.

"In fairness.....you lot are not really in a position to talk about financial fairness are you?"

Why not Stretford? Uefa and the club both said they are going to comply, we can talk about it as much as anyone else.

Regarding the article, I think I know where the rumour came from and I think they've got the wrong player. All rubbish anyway probably!

Wouldn't a sponsor paying part of a players wages be some sort of third party ownership?

------------

from the rumours going around Nike werent paying part of Ronaldo's wages.

utd would for example pay him 200k a week, and nike would just pay him more in sponsorship to make up the difference.

it would benefit Nike to see Ronaldo playing in a a nike shirt than in a adidas one.

Actually it wouldn't. I believe the players advertising rights are not ownership and can contract them out to whoever they like. Not sure if part of the deal that took Beckham to wherever he went included him maintaining his rights. The fact that the sponsor might pay his wages would not mean that they actually control the player or his contract.

In fairness.....you lot are not really in a position to talk about financial fairness are you?"

Spoken like a true Man U fan, as stated our sponsorship deal has been looked at and our working towards ffp has been clearly laid out by our chairman.

Here's the rub Stratford he knows more about our finances than a Man U fan on a website.

Hope this helps.

If there was any truth to the Ronald's rumour then there would be the feared men in black flying from ring way as we speak just waiting to congregate outside Ronald's villa threatening people an riding round on their bmx's.

Aren't City now sponsored by Nike? Or is that happening soon?

We have just started a 4 year deal with Nike.

comment by X (U4074)

posted 8 hours, 21 minutes ago

you think so (about Nike)?

------------------

X take the case of Beckham - after United he only played for teams with kits manufactured by Adidas.

apart from the short spell with PSG