flb
Well-Known Member
They could sell Pogba and Lookackoo for £200m mate and it still wont make a difference. Who would you rather play under? The best manager in the world or Ollie the wally?
Harry Maguire
- Thread starter Super Joey Hart
- Start date
- Status
They could sell Pogba and Lookackoo for £200m mate and it still wont make a difference. Who would you rather play under? The best manager in the world or Ollie the wally?
There's another problem with the way the Maguire "transfer" is being presented and that is the Premier League wages cap.
These are laid out in the PL handbook in section E-19 that anyone can download from the PL web-site.
In brief, your wagebill can increase each season by £7m which is very approx £150k pw to keep it in simple figures. In the past Utd have circumvented this rule as you can use rising revenues to offset excess....but Utd are out of the CL so this this season they have to adhere to the rule.
In the Summer, Utd released Herrera and Valencia. I don't know how much they were on, but given that Utd have the highest wage bill in the country let's assume that it's £400k pw between them. That means that they have £550k pw to play with but they've already used £200k on James and AWB, so it means that they have £350k pw headroom.
The result is that they are juggling players wages. They could just about meet Maguire's wage-bill, but it would be close, and I don't think they would want to be right on the edge as it would allow them zero flexibility in the event of injury etc in the Jan window.
Of course you wont see this mentioned in the papers because they use transfer headlines to sell papers, but Maguire can only really become a Man Utd target if they sell another player i.e. Lukaku. This is another reason why James and AWB were targets for Man Utd.....low wage expectations (only £100k pw - they are low compared to Pogba and Sanchez).
Marvin it's amazing you took the time to write such a long post without reading the very rules you posted.
that the excess increase, over and above the £7m referred to at Rule E.19.1, arises as a result of contractual commitments entered into on or before 31 January 2013, and/or has been funded only by Club Own Revenue Uplift as compared to the previous Contract Year and/or Averaged Three Year Player Trading Profit; or
Manchester United's revenue is up from £590m to £630m this year as per their latest report. That money came from non-PL related money, ie commercial and/or matchday increases, which means they can use it to increase their wages. They could spend £40m above the £7m limit.
I can't believe anyone would actually think there would be a hard cap on increasing your wage bill by £150k/week per year. Just think it through, in what universe would the clubs agree to that?
Last edited:
We very clearly are in for him. I don't know why so many are in denial about it.
It's just going to be a case of whether we can agree a fee we deem to be worth it.
I think he'd actually be really, really good for us. But given the costs banded around, he's going to have to be, because the pressure on him is going to be ramped up ten fold and we're going to be ridiculed for paying so much for him if he doesn't perform. Hope he is up for it if the transfer goes through.
dachoosen1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 2,574
Thanks mate for the brief mate never thought about wages in the ffp stuffThere's another problem with the way the Maguire "transfer" is being presented and that is the Premier League wages cap.
These are laid out in the PL handbook in section E-19 that anyone can download from the PL web-site.
In brief, your wagebill can increase each season by £7m which is very approx £150k pw to keep it in simple figures. In the past Utd have circumvented this rule as you can use rising revenues to offset excess....but Utd are out of the CL so this this season they have to adhere to the rule.
In the Summer, Utd released Herrera and Valencia. I don't know how much they were on, but given that Utd have the highest wage bill in the country let's assume that it's £400k pw between them. That means that they have £550k pw to play with but they've already used £200k on James and AWB, so it means that they have £350k pw headroom.
The result is that they are juggling players wages. They could just about meet Maguire's wage-bill, but it would be close, and I don't think they would want to be right on the edge as it would allow them zero flexibility in the event of injury etc in the Jan window.
Of course you wont see this mentioned in the papers because they use transfer headlines to sell papers, but Maguire can only really become a Man Utd target if they sell another player i.e. Lukaku. This is another reason why James and AWB were targets for Man Utd.....low wage expectations (only £100k pw - they are low compared to Pogba and Sanchez).
No they don't, that's not how it works.
You are allowed to increase wages by over £7m if the money comes from the club's own revenue increases that year. If your revenue drops next year then you won't be able to go above £7m, but this years dealings have nothing to do with it.
Not to mention in United's case in particular they have a bunch of players - Young, Valencia, Matic, Darmian - leaving next summer so that won't be an issue.
It means they can spend big. Personally I'm not sure the Glazers/Woodward want to, and it seems like Solskjaer's decided he wants to buy a bunch of cheap English kids like Dan James and Longstaff and hope they'll magically turn into world class players when they see Ferguson's car park spot is still empty or get forced to watch the 99 CL final on repeat all preseason.
Exactly. I have been on about this rule for over a season but Prestwich Blue said it wouldn't apply last season because they could use revenue increases to get around it but as you say that can't be a get out for them this season.
If we were in for Maguire, and I'm not convinced yet, then now would be the perfect time to strike with a bid because Man Utd are handicapped with their wages issue, at least until they sell a player. I am not convinced we are in for him though. The media keep insisting we are (everyone) and yet there has been no activity, perhaps we were waiting until Utd effectively put themselves out of the running by buying elsewhere? It's put up or shut up now though. This speculation can not continue forever without fire.
Not Exactly. Next years revenue means fuck all to this.
Fact is, you've written a massive post about there being a £7m wage bill increase which simply does not exist, and you've ignored the 2 sections of the rule which explicitly state you can increase the wage bill by more than £7m.
United's revenue increase this year means they can increase their wage bill well over £7m, in fact by closer to £50m. Worst case scenario for them, next year revenues decrease and they are then limited to a £7m increase next summer, but they don't need to worry about that presently at all, it doesn't effect this years transfers - if anything it would incentivise them to spend the money this year when they have the space to grow the wage bill.
@Prestwich_Blue Blue told you it didn't apply because he understands the rule.
Last edited:
I don't really know what they mean by contract year. I read over that and thought that it meant that wage uplift in the current season can only be financed by revenue increases in the current season as opposed to the last, whereas you are saying that the rule implies a year's lag.
Centurions
Well-Known Member
You're wrong about the rags and their wage bill this season but that aside, what 'activity' exactly do you expect to see regarding Maguire?
tolmie's hairdoo
Well-Known Member
I believe the promise was verbal and was made last season by the now-deceased owner, if he signed a new deal. He wanted to join United last summer after the World Cup and was a United fan, but Woodward blocked Mourinho's express wish to pay the £75m they were quoted.
Pep has been a massive fan of Maguire's since the first League Cup game which went to penalties at the King Power, he was being discreetly sounded-out even back then.
I don't know what our present strategy is with regards lodging an official bid. We don't tend to do that and prefer to discuss and barter most of the time.
Our interest is very real. Our primary focus is a holding midfielder (Rodri, I expect next week) and just one centre-back, that didn't change when Vinny told us he was leaving. That won't change either if Otamendi also asks to leave.
United have the cash and their squad will take big drops on wages this season as a result of not qualifying in the Champions League.
Lukaku is out and I expect Pogba to push things even more.
Sadly, I think the penny is finally dropping for United, they know their transfer strategy has been flawed. Thankfully, they are playing catch-up and don't have the expertise yet to turn around the tanker.
I knew you could exceed the £7m wage cap if you can show a revenue uplift, but I thought that the benchmark for the revenue uplift was the current season versus the last.
tolmie's hairdoo
Well-Known Member
You don't think Pep was also telling our boys that Messi is shit if you force him inside on to his right foot?
tolmie's hairdoo
Well-Known Member
United's dilemma continues to be the contract renewals of De Gea and Rashford.
De Gea in his final year and demanding money closer to Sanchez.
United have an option to extend Rashford's final year by another 12 months and he's happy to sit tight.
lcfc_chump
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Jun 2019
- Messages
- 369
- Team supported
- Leicester
That sounds like tapping up, discreet or otherwise.
I'd expect us to submit a bid if we were interested in the player in a deal that would be a record for City and possibly a record British deal. Deals like that take ages to conclude.
Yes, it is. United's revenue has/is forecast to increase £40m this year ie 2018/19 is higher than 2017/18.
So that can all go to wages in summer 2019.
tolmie's hairdoo
Well-Known Member
It's okay, we let you do it to Patrick Roberts for over a year ;)
Pep made sure Maguire knew how highly he rated him on the actual pitch at the final whistle.
- Status