comment by RedCred (U11917)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
1) The basis of the OP is conjecture. We don't know whether United have offered a specific sum, whether that has been refused, whether Dortmund's stance is absolute or rhetorical.
2) The sport is going to be hundreds of millions of pounds down in revenue over the coming year. If we splashed out on 2019 market prices and made a catastrophic loss, or were unable to strengthen in other important positions as a result, Woodward could be justifiably criticised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As no 2 is somewhat true, that clearly don't stop our rivals.
And let's not talk about the sport in total, it's ManUtd finances that are interesting. Let's actually say we have 0 match day income for the following season, that would bring us to a loss of revenue by £110, but still a EBITDA above 12%.
Also revenue (loss) have no direct link to what we spend on the transfer market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know revenue loss has no impact on transfers?
“As Redcred says, we’ve wasted a lot of money on a lot of average players.”
Maybe that’s exactly why you can’t afford over 100 million pounds in the middle of a global pandemic?
Bundesliga clubs are much more reliant on gate receipts and other matchday revenue (circa 20% of total revenue) than PL clubs.
I wonder how much that will impact their ability to hang on to their top players in the winter window and next summer if stadia are empty through to 2021?
Mad how much details of the inner workings of united finances RedCred has.
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 27 seconds ago
Mad how much details of the inner workings of united finances RedCred has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ha, to be fair, given that we are a listed company, the full finances are available to anyone who wants to read them, and they're pretty detailed too.
of course most people would rather rely on newspaper gossip than read a set of accounts, but it is possible the lad has done so.
Didn't want him. Never seen him play
Tbh there's no point in wasting a whole window negotiating for a player we may end up not getting. Make an offer and if it's refused, strengthen in several areas, as the squad is clearly lacking any kind of depth
If he’s done so, he’s seen that net debt was up by more than £125m in Q3. And it’ll be up again in Q4.
Although that doesn’t immediately impact our ability to spunk EUR120m on one player, because we have the cash in the bank, it should certainly make the money men think very hard about the wisdom of doing so.
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how much details of the inner workings of united finances RedCred has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you smoke? Official numbers mate, I've read the annual reports and know our business model.
In terms of your previous question, revenue has historical nothing to do with our spending. The books obviously has to balance, but we're still in a process of bounce back as title contenders which should allow us lowering our margins for profits in the club (under COVID-19.).
We have a lot of reserves, which are meant to be for times like this.
COVID will pass, and Sancho will last at least 10 yrs on top level.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 10 seconds ago
Would be funny if we sign no one of note.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It may well happen. We notoriously only negotiate for one player at a time and if we invest all our energy in a player that isn't for sale, I don't see us signing anybody else. Though tbh if we do sign Sancho, it will use up presumably virtually all of our transfer budget. So it's either get him or sign several cheaper players in several positions. What we can't afford to happen is not get him or other players to add depth
comment by merrysupersteve (U1132)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 10 seconds ago
Would be funny if we sign no one of note.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It may well happen. We notoriously only negotiate for one player at a time and if we invest all our energy in a player that isn't for sale, I don't see us signing anybody else. Though tbh if we do sign Sancho, it will use up presumably virtually all of our transfer budget. So it's either get him or sign several cheaper players in several positions. What we can't afford to happen is not get him or other players to add depth
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sancho would improve the first team but even if we can't do that, we need a bit of depth. More cover in the forward positions and possibly a defender or two.
comment by Hansaplast (U1250)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 17 minutes ago
It is frustrating that we’re happy to pay £80m for Maguire, £75m for Lukaku yet when what seems like the perfect signing comes along we decide to be frugal.
As Redcred says, we’ve wasted a lot of money on a lot of average players. When a player like Sancho is available, you get them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's not available, that's the whole point
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends whether reports of a £120m price tag are true.
There's obviously a lot more to it than than, what are Ole's priorities, are we looking to bring in more players , are there Sancho alternatives.
But if we were to sign Sancho, and he played for us for a decade at a good level, £120m is a good price for all parties imo.
He's young, English, a marketing dream and plays in a position we desperately need to improve where there aren't many options on the market. On paper, he ticks every box.
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
If he’s done so, he’s seen that net debt was up by more than £125m in Q3. And it’ll be up again in Q4.
Although that doesn’t immediately impact our ability to spunk EUR120m on one player, because we have the cash in the bank, it should certainly make the money men think very hard about the wisdom of doing so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally some sense.
Yep, q3 and q4 wasn't great. Annual total for 2019 a little loss. Due to no CL. EBITDA -0,6% (0,06B). So more of less status quo, despite Europa League and finishing 6th in PL.
2020 q1 is -0.24B.
2020 won't be great, but we will get back the £60-70m from CL and more income from PL can previous years.
Accounting numbers in $
Ok so
1)TV money being clawed back for the last season
there is not matchday income for at least half the 2020/21 season, maybe longer.
2)Operational costs are up due to all the health and hygiene precautions clubs have to make.
3)Shirt sales will go down because of the economic downturn.
4)We have to find a new sponsor which inevitably is going to bring much less than expect due to the current situation
5)any player sales will generate less money because the smaller clubs are struggling even more. Also 6)United are keeping the none playing staff employed because they are trying to be nice (how long that lasts we don't know).
Given all that, you cannot fault Ed for not wanting to pay inflated prices in this climate. Dortmund cannot be demanding £100m+ in this market, prices have reajusted, and we should not be paying it. Now Dortmund don't need the money and we can't force them to sell for less. So be it. Yes we need to strengthen, but given all the above, do we really need Sancho at £120m?
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Hansaplast (U1250)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 17 minutes ago
It is frustrating that we’re happy to pay £80m for Maguire, £75m for Lukaku yet when what seems like the perfect signing comes along we decide to be frugal.
As Redcred says, we’ve wasted a lot of money on a lot of average players. When a player like Sancho is available, you get them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's not available, that's the whole point
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends whether reports of a £120m price tag are true.
There's obviously a lot more to it than than, what are Ole's priorities, are we looking to bring in more players , are there Sancho alternatives.
But if we were to sign Sancho, and he played for us for a decade at a good level, £120m is a good price for all parties imo.
He's young, English, a marketing dream and plays in a position we desperately need to improve where there aren't many options on the market. On paper, he ticks every box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
/Sign
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 15 minutes ago
If he’s done so, he’s seen that net debt was up by more than £125m in Q3. And it’ll be up again in Q4.
Although that doesn’t immediately impact our ability to spunk EUR120m on one player, because we have the cash in the bank, it should certainly make the money men think very hard about the wisdom of doing so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
At the same time, they have to improve to squad to the point we can be confident of finishing Top 4 again.
Going into next season, with the squad as it is (not saying that'll happen), we stand a good chance of missing out.
Liverpool have had 2 years of success and they're suddenly nearly as valuable as we are.
"there is not matchday income for at least half the 2020/21 season, maybe longer."
Really? Let me know when I'm getting my money back then because I've not seen a penny.
Next seasons ST is a little cheaper, but they'll keep taking our money whilst stadiums aren't full and discounting tickets in future. Cashflow won't be an issue.
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Hansaplast (U1250)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 17 minutes ago
It is frustrating that we’re happy to pay £80m for Maguire, £75m for Lukaku yet when what seems like the perfect signing comes along we decide to be frugal.
As Redcred says, we’ve wasted a lot of money on a lot of average players. When a player like Sancho is available, you get them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's not available, that's the whole point
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends whether reports of a £120m price tag are true.
There's obviously a lot more to it than than, what are Ole's priorities, are we looking to bring in more players , are there Sancho alternatives.
But if we were to sign Sancho, and he played for us for a decade at a good level, £120m is a good price for all parties imo.
He's young, English, a marketing dream and plays in a position we desperately need to improve where there aren't many options on the market. On paper, he ticks every box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t think it’s necessarily the price that is the issue, it’s the structuring.
By all accounts Dortmund want a lump sum paid up front, very few clubs are capable of that at the best of times - let alone during a pandemic.
United want to pay in installments, which is normal.
Dortmund are essentially saying “we don’t really want to let him go, but if you pay a ridiculous amount in full right now we can go improve the squad immediately”.
United can’t manage that.
prices have reajusted, and we should not be paying it. Now Dortmund don't need the money and we can't force them to sell for less. So be it. Yes we need to strengthen, but given all the above, do we really need Sancho at £120m?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So how much is Sancho worth (now and before)?
Given his price is dropped £20-40m, there was agents/auditors who valued him before the pandemic at £120-160m.
The situation isn't that sexy that we can get Sancho for a steal. His contract isn't close to expire and Dortmund isn't close to bankrupt.
Let's say we got him for £120m, that would mean we over pay how much? £20-40m?
In our situation I would say it's worth it.
How much will ManUtd (commericaly) get back from Sancho?
comment by Tiddles (U17634)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Hansaplast (U1250)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 17 minutes ago
It is frustrating that we’re happy to pay £80m for Maguire, £75m for Lukaku yet when what seems like the perfect signing comes along we decide to be frugal.
As Redcred says, we’ve wasted a lot of money on a lot of average players. When a player like Sancho is available, you get them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's not available, that's the whole point
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends whether reports of a £120m price tag are true.
There's obviously a lot more to it than than, what are Ole's priorities, are we looking to bring in more players , are there Sancho alternatives.
But if we were to sign Sancho, and he played for us for a decade at a good level, £120m is a good price for all parties imo.
He's young, English, a marketing dream and plays in a position we desperately need to improve where there aren't many options on the market. On paper, he ticks every box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t think it’s necessarily the price that is the issue, it’s the structuring.
By all accounts Dortmund want a lump sum paid up front, very few clubs are capable of that at the best of times - let alone during a pandemic.
United want to pay in installments, which is normal.
Dortmund are essentially saying “we don’t really want to let him go, but if you pay a ridiculous amount in full right now we can go improve the squad immediately”.
United can’t manage that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I did read about installments, which I believe is how almost all transfers are paid these days. Like any market, cash up front is valuable.
I don't know if Sancho is great, I've not seen enough, or the state of our finances.
But if someone said to me, be it car, or house or football player "you have to pay what I want, when I want it" I would walk away, there is always another round the corner.
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
I don't know if Sancho is great, I've not seen enough, or the state of our finances.
But if someone said to me, be it car, or house or football player "you have to pay what I want, when I want it" I would walk away, there is always another round the corner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately, it depends who much you want it.
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
I don't know if Sancho is great, I've not seen enough, or the state of our finances.
But if someone said to me, be it car, or house or football player "you have to pay what I want, when I want it" I would walk away, there is always another round the corner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately, it depends who much you want it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not like it grows quality players, who fit the model we want on trees.
Looks like we've lost the dragon fight, unless Sancho pulls up a rabbit from his hat.
Looks like we've lost the dragon fight, unless Sancho pulls up a rabbit from his hat.
It would be nice for us if a player with that caliber went public to say he wanted to United, and is probably what is needed at this stage.
Would also be nice if a player showed a bit of respect to the club that took a chance on him, gave him all the first team football he craved and helped mould him into the player he is.
Thankfully he seems to be that kind of kid, and not the one to throw his toys out of the pram.
Sign in if you want to comment
Sancho update
Page 2 of 3
posted on 14/8/20
comment by RedCred (U11917)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
1) The basis of the OP is conjecture. We don't know whether United have offered a specific sum, whether that has been refused, whether Dortmund's stance is absolute or rhetorical.
2) The sport is going to be hundreds of millions of pounds down in revenue over the coming year. If we splashed out on 2019 market prices and made a catastrophic loss, or were unable to strengthen in other important positions as a result, Woodward could be justifiably criticised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As no 2 is somewhat true, that clearly don't stop our rivals.
And let's not talk about the sport in total, it's ManUtd finances that are interesting. Let's actually say we have 0 match day income for the following season, that would bring us to a loss of revenue by £110, but still a EBITDA above 12%.
Also revenue (loss) have no direct link to what we spend on the transfer market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know revenue loss has no impact on transfers?
posted on 14/8/20
“As Redcred says, we’ve wasted a lot of money on a lot of average players.”
Maybe that’s exactly why you can’t afford over 100 million pounds in the middle of a global pandemic?
posted on 14/8/20
Bundesliga clubs are much more reliant on gate receipts and other matchday revenue (circa 20% of total revenue) than PL clubs.
I wonder how much that will impact their ability to hang on to their top players in the winter window and next summer if stadia are empty through to 2021?
posted on 14/8/20
Mad how much details of the inner workings of united finances RedCred has.
posted on 14/8/20
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 27 seconds ago
Mad how much details of the inner workings of united finances RedCred has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ha, to be fair, given that we are a listed company, the full finances are available to anyone who wants to read them, and they're pretty detailed too.
of course most people would rather rely on newspaper gossip than read a set of accounts, but it is possible the lad has done so.
posted on 14/8/20
Didn't want him. Never seen him play
posted on 14/8/20
Tbh there's no point in wasting a whole window negotiating for a player we may end up not getting. Make an offer and if it's refused, strengthen in several areas, as the squad is clearly lacking any kind of depth
posted on 14/8/20
If he’s done so, he’s seen that net debt was up by more than £125m in Q3. And it’ll be up again in Q4.
Although that doesn’t immediately impact our ability to spunk EUR120m on one player, because we have the cash in the bank, it should certainly make the money men think very hard about the wisdom of doing so.
posted on 14/8/20
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how much details of the inner workings of united finances RedCred has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you smoke? Official numbers mate, I've read the annual reports and know our business model.
In terms of your previous question, revenue has historical nothing to do with our spending. The books obviously has to balance, but we're still in a process of bounce back as title contenders which should allow us lowering our margins for profits in the club (under COVID-19.).
We have a lot of reserves, which are meant to be for times like this.
COVID will pass, and Sancho will last at least 10 yrs on top level.
posted on 14/8/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 14/8/20
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 10 seconds ago
Would be funny if we sign no one of note.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It may well happen. We notoriously only negotiate for one player at a time and if we invest all our energy in a player that isn't for sale, I don't see us signing anybody else. Though tbh if we do sign Sancho, it will use up presumably virtually all of our transfer budget. So it's either get him or sign several cheaper players in several positions. What we can't afford to happen is not get him or other players to add depth
posted on 14/8/20
comment by merrysupersteve (U1132)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 10 seconds ago
Would be funny if we sign no one of note.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It may well happen. We notoriously only negotiate for one player at a time and if we invest all our energy in a player that isn't for sale, I don't see us signing anybody else. Though tbh if we do sign Sancho, it will use up presumably virtually all of our transfer budget. So it's either get him or sign several cheaper players in several positions. What we can't afford to happen is not get him or other players to add depth
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sancho would improve the first team but even if we can't do that, we need a bit of depth. More cover in the forward positions and possibly a defender or two.
posted on 14/8/20
comment by Hansaplast (U1250)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 17 minutes ago
It is frustrating that we’re happy to pay £80m for Maguire, £75m for Lukaku yet when what seems like the perfect signing comes along we decide to be frugal.
As Redcred says, we’ve wasted a lot of money on a lot of average players. When a player like Sancho is available, you get them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's not available, that's the whole point
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends whether reports of a £120m price tag are true.
There's obviously a lot more to it than than, what are Ole's priorities, are we looking to bring in more players , are there Sancho alternatives.
But if we were to sign Sancho, and he played for us for a decade at a good level, £120m is a good price for all parties imo.
He's young, English, a marketing dream and plays in a position we desperately need to improve where there aren't many options on the market. On paper, he ticks every box.
posted on 14/8/20
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
If he’s done so, he’s seen that net debt was up by more than £125m in Q3. And it’ll be up again in Q4.
Although that doesn’t immediately impact our ability to spunk EUR120m on one player, because we have the cash in the bank, it should certainly make the money men think very hard about the wisdom of doing so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally some sense.
Yep, q3 and q4 wasn't great. Annual total for 2019 a little loss. Due to no CL. EBITDA -0,6% (0,06B). So more of less status quo, despite Europa League and finishing 6th in PL.
2020 q1 is -0.24B.
2020 won't be great, but we will get back the £60-70m from CL and more income from PL can previous years.
Accounting numbers in $
posted on 14/8/20
Ok so
1)TV money being clawed back for the last season
there is not matchday income for at least half the 2020/21 season, maybe longer.
2)Operational costs are up due to all the health and hygiene precautions clubs have to make.
3)Shirt sales will go down because of the economic downturn.
4)We have to find a new sponsor which inevitably is going to bring much less than expect due to the current situation
5)any player sales will generate less money because the smaller clubs are struggling even more. Also 6)United are keeping the none playing staff employed because they are trying to be nice (how long that lasts we don't know).
Given all that, you cannot fault Ed for not wanting to pay inflated prices in this climate. Dortmund cannot be demanding £100m+ in this market, prices have reajusted, and we should not be paying it. Now Dortmund don't need the money and we can't force them to sell for less. So be it. Yes we need to strengthen, but given all the above, do we really need Sancho at £120m?
posted on 14/8/20
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Hansaplast (U1250)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 17 minutes ago
It is frustrating that we’re happy to pay £80m for Maguire, £75m for Lukaku yet when what seems like the perfect signing comes along we decide to be frugal.
As Redcred says, we’ve wasted a lot of money on a lot of average players. When a player like Sancho is available, you get them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's not available, that's the whole point
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends whether reports of a £120m price tag are true.
There's obviously a lot more to it than than, what are Ole's priorities, are we looking to bring in more players , are there Sancho alternatives.
But if we were to sign Sancho, and he played for us for a decade at a good level, £120m is a good price for all parties imo.
He's young, English, a marketing dream and plays in a position we desperately need to improve where there aren't many options on the market. On paper, he ticks every box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
/Sign
posted on 14/8/20
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 15 minutes ago
If he’s done so, he’s seen that net debt was up by more than £125m in Q3. And it’ll be up again in Q4.
Although that doesn’t immediately impact our ability to spunk EUR120m on one player, because we have the cash in the bank, it should certainly make the money men think very hard about the wisdom of doing so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
At the same time, they have to improve to squad to the point we can be confident of finishing Top 4 again.
Going into next season, with the squad as it is (not saying that'll happen), we stand a good chance of missing out.
Liverpool have had 2 years of success and they're suddenly nearly as valuable as we are.
posted on 14/8/20
"there is not matchday income for at least half the 2020/21 season, maybe longer."
Really? Let me know when I'm getting my money back then because I've not seen a penny.
Next seasons ST is a little cheaper, but they'll keep taking our money whilst stadiums aren't full and discounting tickets in future. Cashflow won't be an issue.
posted on 14/8/20
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Hansaplast (U1250)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 17 minutes ago
It is frustrating that we’re happy to pay £80m for Maguire, £75m for Lukaku yet when what seems like the perfect signing comes along we decide to be frugal.
As Redcred says, we’ve wasted a lot of money on a lot of average players. When a player like Sancho is available, you get them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's not available, that's the whole point
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends whether reports of a £120m price tag are true.
There's obviously a lot more to it than than, what are Ole's priorities, are we looking to bring in more players , are there Sancho alternatives.
But if we were to sign Sancho, and he played for us for a decade at a good level, £120m is a good price for all parties imo.
He's young, English, a marketing dream and plays in a position we desperately need to improve where there aren't many options on the market. On paper, he ticks every box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t think it’s necessarily the price that is the issue, it’s the structuring.
By all accounts Dortmund want a lump sum paid up front, very few clubs are capable of that at the best of times - let alone during a pandemic.
United want to pay in installments, which is normal.
Dortmund are essentially saying “we don’t really want to let him go, but if you pay a ridiculous amount in full right now we can go improve the squad immediately”.
United can’t manage that.
posted on 14/8/20
prices have reajusted, and we should not be paying it. Now Dortmund don't need the money and we can't force them to sell for less. So be it. Yes we need to strengthen, but given all the above, do we really need Sancho at £120m?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So how much is Sancho worth (now and before)?
Given his price is dropped £20-40m, there was agents/auditors who valued him before the pandemic at £120-160m.
The situation isn't that sexy that we can get Sancho for a steal. His contract isn't close to expire and Dortmund isn't close to bankrupt.
Let's say we got him for £120m, that would mean we over pay how much? £20-40m?
In our situation I would say it's worth it.
How much will ManUtd (commericaly) get back from Sancho?
posted on 14/8/20
comment by Tiddles (U17634)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Hansaplast (U1250)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 17 minutes ago
It is frustrating that we’re happy to pay £80m for Maguire, £75m for Lukaku yet when what seems like the perfect signing comes along we decide to be frugal.
As Redcred says, we’ve wasted a lot of money on a lot of average players. When a player like Sancho is available, you get them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's not available, that's the whole point
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends whether reports of a £120m price tag are true.
There's obviously a lot more to it than than, what are Ole's priorities, are we looking to bring in more players , are there Sancho alternatives.
But if we were to sign Sancho, and he played for us for a decade at a good level, £120m is a good price for all parties imo.
He's young, English, a marketing dream and plays in a position we desperately need to improve where there aren't many options on the market. On paper, he ticks every box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t think it’s necessarily the price that is the issue, it’s the structuring.
By all accounts Dortmund want a lump sum paid up front, very few clubs are capable of that at the best of times - let alone during a pandemic.
United want to pay in installments, which is normal.
Dortmund are essentially saying “we don’t really want to let him go, but if you pay a ridiculous amount in full right now we can go improve the squad immediately”.
United can’t manage that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I did read about installments, which I believe is how almost all transfers are paid these days. Like any market, cash up front is valuable.
posted on 14/8/20
I don't know if Sancho is great, I've not seen enough, or the state of our finances.
But if someone said to me, be it car, or house or football player "you have to pay what I want, when I want it" I would walk away, there is always another round the corner.
posted on 14/8/20
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
I don't know if Sancho is great, I've not seen enough, or the state of our finances.
But if someone said to me, be it car, or house or football player "you have to pay what I want, when I want it" I would walk away, there is always another round the corner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately, it depends who much you want it.
posted on 14/8/20
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
I don't know if Sancho is great, I've not seen enough, or the state of our finances.
But if someone said to me, be it car, or house or football player "you have to pay what I want, when I want it" I would walk away, there is always another round the corner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately, it depends who much you want it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not like it grows quality players, who fit the model we want on trees.
Looks like we've lost the dragon fight, unless Sancho pulls up a rabbit from his hat.
Looks like we've lost the dragon fight, unless Sancho pulls up a rabbit from his hat.
It would be nice for us if a player with that caliber went public to say he wanted to United, and is probably what is needed at this stage.
posted on 14/8/20
Would also be nice if a player showed a bit of respect to the club that took a chance on him, gave him all the first team football he craved and helped mould him into the player he is.
Thankfully he seems to be that kind of kid, and not the one to throw his toys out of the pram.
Page 2 of 3