Alexis Sanchez

[TRUE BLUE NO1]

Sam from Goal is spot on......if we have to go and spend 80-100mil on another forward in the summer, this makes no sense.

1. Sam Lee‏Verified account @Sammy_Goal 20m20 minutes ago
   If City are willing to let Sanchez join United due to the price of the total package (which would be about £40m in fees, plus wages which were agreed) then they must be thinking of their perception of value, rather than cost. They’ll do very well to find a cheaper alternative.
   
   
2. 
   Sam Lee‏Verified account @Sammy_Goal 16m16 minutes ago
   And by value versus cost I mean this: they must have decided it’s not ‘worth’ paying £40m-odd to Arsenal and agent, but it is worth paying £100m at least for another player (insert your own names). That, or simply they’ve been caught on the hop and have absolutely no say in it.
   
   14 replies6 retweets27 likes
   

 

[uwe rosler 28]

If he ends up there it's a match made in heaven a back stabbing fucker who breaks Promise's playing for the ultimate back stabber

 

[gazzaa2]

It absolutely does. Sterling is our top scorer, he's young and very marketable. He would be well within his rights to ask to be right up there with Sanchez. Jesus and Sane too.

Sterling left Liverpool because while he was negotiating a new contract and Liverpool weren't prepared to go too high, Sturridge signed one for 150k a week. That's when the agent started demanding more.

 

[fulabeer]

IF he signs for the rags, he hasn't "chosen them over us". He had already signed for us in the summer. and thought the deal was done. What will have happened is WE have decided to not let him/his agent raise their demands. The ONLY reason he may not come is because WE decided he wasn't worth the extra demands and walked away.

If another club decides he is worth the higher figures being mentioned, then i've no problem with that.
Our interest in Pogba died a death due to him being over valued. Him and Lacacku has been money well spent, hasn't it?
In the long run, them buying him ruins their up and coming players playing time. Ruins their wage budget/structure, and stops them getting somebody younger/better for the next two/three years.

Still hope we get him. But OK if not...

 

[MarsLlama]

Either way we'll be bringing in a new forward between now and mid-August. Sanchez is one of the best in the business and he'd be cheaper than most.

 

[PJM1891]

So it seems the fat lady is about to sing. Not gonna lie kinda disappointing if we don' get him, think he woud have slotted in perfectly.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

It absolutely does. Sterling is our top scorer, he's young and very marketable. He would be well within his rights to ask to be right up there with Sanchez. Jesus and Sane too.

Or he'd appreciate the circumstances and be sensible.
Anyway looks like we've missed out on a quality player that fits perfectly and would enhance an excellent squad. Your wage structure is intact.

 

[geoff clipp]

Didn't Simon Mullock intimate that we may have had our eye on someone else anyway? That might explain our willingness to let this one go if the numbers aren't stacking up.

 

[markbmcfc]

Would earn more than Silva, De Bruyne, Aguero at those figures. Two figureheads of the club since 2010/11 and the current player of the year who will be one the greats if he isnt already.

City absolutely right not to pay those figures.

It was always a case of hoping Sanchez would turn them down and take the lower wage. Money does talk.

 

[mosssideblue]

Relevant part from the article -
It is understood that United are willing to pay Arsenal around £30m, give Sanchez a huge signing-on fee and a bigger contract - worth around £400,000-a-week - than Manchester City. Sanchez's representatives will also get a huge package with United pulling out all of the stops to beat City to his signature.

the only word that is relevant here is underlined