United Thread 2014/15

Status
Not open for further replies.
razman said:
if ANYONE wanted to know what the FFP is catered for :

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/manchester-united/11079274/Manchester-United-vow-to-buy-a-Luis-Suarez-a-year-under-new-aggressive-transfer-policy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... olicy.html</a>

Manchester United vow to buy 'a Luis Suarez a year' under new aggressive transfer policy

Old Trafford's £150m summer spree just the start as new commercial deals give them power to compete despite Champions League exile

There is a phrase that has been used to describe Manchester United’s apparent financial muscle in the world transfer market that has appealed to the club’s hierarchy. When United signed their hugely lucrative new kit deal with Adidas in July it was said to have given them the potential to sign “a Suárez every year”.

United will not be signing Barcelona’s former Liverpool striker of course – although stranger things have happened – but given it took £75 million to take the Uruguayan to the Catalan club, £15 million more than United paid to acquire Ángel di María from Real Madrid in a British record deal, then the inference is clear.

United believe they can make a world-class marquee signing every year for the next decade. And if not Suárez next summer then what are the chances of a move to bring back, for example, Cristiano Ronaldo to Old Trafford? He will, as things stand, have just one more year left on his Real Madrid contract by then.

The Adidas deal to supply their kit from next season is worth £750 million – although that would be reduced should the club fail to qualify for the Champions League for two successive seasons. Nevertheless, it represents a significant markup from the Nike deal it replaces. And other deals are in the pipeline.

It was Kevin Roberts, founder of SportsBusiness International, a specialist magazine, who used the Suárez phrase as he was asked on Sky News about his thoughts on the Adidas deal and United are remarkably bullish about their spending.
Related Articles

Senior sources have already briefed that more money will be committed when the January transfer window opens, with talks understood to have taken place to bring in the Roma and Holland midfielder Kevin Strootman for around £25  million during that time once he has recovered from a cruciate ligament injury.

United understand that more than £150 million spent this summer – by far the biggest outlay in the club’s history – is a massive financial commitment.

However, they insist it is not just something they can afford but something they can afford comfortably, especially as they argue they have reduced the size of their squad at the same time. That overhaul will also continue with high-earners such as Ashley Young, said to be on £115,000 a week, targeted.

United also claim that although they want to be in the Champions League next season they can financially take the hit of not being in the competition – for one more year presumably – even though an improved deal kicks in with the new campaign.

They had promised they could spend up to £200 million this summer, and came close to doing that. Maybe it was not as planned as they had promised – and the argument that Louis van Gaal, the manager, wanted time to assess his squad does not ring true – but it was bold. As is the claim that there is more to follow.

Doubts over new 'loan' deals
There is a new phrase that has kicked in for some big‑money, big-name transfer deals that were agreed during the last window: it is the “obligation to buy” or an obligatory purchase clause. It has been used, as with Alvaro Negredo’s season-long loan from Manchester City to Valencia, ahead of a permanent switch and appears to defer that.

That is not unusual – usually there is an “option to buy” in a deal. But this is a different twist. Now there is, for some, an obligation.

The reasons why probably need some clarification from Fifa and Uefa but would appear to suggest an attempt to get-round, for the buying club, the demands to comply with Financial Fair Play. Valencia are obliged to pay £25 million for Negredo next year when, presumably, the club’s finances will be in better shape following the takeover by the Singapore businessman Peter Lim.

Meanwhile, on loans, Manchester United are adamant that the fee paid to secure Radamel Falcao for a season from Monaco is just £4.76 million. However, that does not come close to covering the overall cost of the deal with United paying the 28-year-old striker’s £265,000-a-week wages. It takes the figure for the season to more than £18.5 million. The club have agreed the terms of a permanent deal should it take up the option next summer of a fee of £43  million – plus meeting Falcao’s wage demands.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I should think that all the top 5 English clubs will be able to afford one massive marquee signing per season when this new TV deal kicks in.
 
FFPR doesn't stop United, but equally without it would not make a difference. They've made a strategy, they've secured huge deals regardless and are happy to go and have the largest wage bill by far and spend shed loads of money, money nobody else is going to pay anyway.

The only thing that stops them is 1) continued lack of CL, b) success, because oddly that would hopefully make the Glazers take more out than spend it, but obviously I don't know whether the sons fancy spending some of the money now, after their dad died earlier in the year. Maybe they want to do things slightly differently.
 
That jacket nuf said.


<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2746254/SCANDAL-OF-MATCH-FIXING-REVEALED-The-FA-s-secret-list-suspects-playing-England.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... gland.html</a>
 
JoeMercer'sWay said:
FFPR doesn't stop United, but equally without it would not make a difference. They've made a strategy, they've secured huge deals regardless and are happy to go and have the largest wage bill by far and spend shed loads of money, money nobody else is going to pay anyway.

The only thing that stops them is 1) continued lack of CL, b) success, because oddly that would hopefully make the Glazers take more out than spend it, but obviously I don't know whether the sons fancy spending some of the money now, after their dad died earlier in the year. Maybe they want to do things slightly differently.
Click to expand...
Of course FFP does not stop United, but you are wrong about it making no difference. It makes a huge difference. Without FFP then PSG would have signed Di Maria and you possibly would have signed Falcao. Otherwise even with the huge wages and transfers they could offer players would still have rejected them.

I was one that did not believe they had a 200 million transfer kit for this coming season, but they obviously did.
 
supercrystal7 said:
JoeMercer'sWay said:
FFPR doesn't stop United, but equally without it would not make a difference. They've made a strategy, they've secured huge deals regardless and are happy to go and have the largest wage bill by far and spend shed loads of money, money nobody else is going to pay anyway.

The only thing that stops them is 1) continued lack of CL, b) success, because oddly that would hopefully make the Glazers take more out than spend it, but obviously I don't know whether the sons fancy spending some of the money now, after their dad died earlier in the year. Maybe they want to do things slightly differently.
Click to expand...
Of course FFP does not stop United, but you are wrong about it making no difference. It makes a huge difference. Without FFP then PSG would have signed Di Maria and you possibly would have signed Falcao. Otherwise even with the huge wages and transfers they could offer players would still have rejected them.

I was one that did not believe they had a 200 million transfer kit for this coming season, but they obviously did.
Click to expand...

Di Maria may have gone elsewhere, but the point was United regardless have made a statement that they're happy to extravagantly overspend on whoever they want, if not Di Maria they'd have bought someone else for an inflated fee and vastly inflated wages, that is just a strategy they can afford regardless of FFPR being involved or not. They aren't flinching, and to be honest with the wages offered in the NFL, I don't think the young Glazers are fazed by the amounts they're offering.
 
The point is United have made less than £200m profit in the years 2011, 2012 and 2013 but in the year 2013 they made £145m

Clearly their turnover will increase due to increased sponsorship deals but other revenue streams such as CL will be turned off

So clearly they have this amount of money to spend BUT any other splurges of this magnitude in the future will be on borrowed money as there is only so much in the well. Also they are still in significant debt and those costs still have to be met and how long will their owners stick with it if they cant withdraw funds from their cash cow. The running costs will have significantly increased as I am sure Falcao earns more than Welbeck and Di Maria more than Cleverley..:)

Should they fail to make CL next year I am sure I have read that the new shirt deal is halved in value and would mean a further rise in spending plus the inherent additional running costs as players have to be attracted without the CL carrot this really could be a pivotal moment in United history as I am sure the Glazer's did not sign up to United being a cash drain!!!
 
chesterguy said:
The point is United have made less than £200m profit in the years 2011, 2012 and 2013 but in the year 2013 they made £145m

Clearly their turnover will increase due to increased sponsorship deals but other revenue streams such as CL will be turned off

So clearly they have this amount of money to spend BUT any other splurges of this magnitude in the future will be on borrowed money as there is only so much in the well. Also they are still in significant debt and those costs still have to be met and how long will their owners stick with it if they cant withdraw funds from their cash cow. The running costs will have significantly increased as I am sure Falcao earns more than Welbeck and Di Maria more than Cleverley..:)

Should they fail to make CL next year I am sure I have read that the new shirt deal is halved in value and would mean a further rise in spending plus the inherent additional running costs as players have to be attracted without the CL carrot this really could be a pivotal moment in United history as I am sure the Glazer's did not sign up to United being a cash drain!!!
Click to expand...

Far as I know the Adidas deal gets a 30% reduction after 2 consecutive years out of CL, whether that's from this year or next year when the contract starts... IDK.
 
These new 'commercial deals' utd have done - surely they now open the door for other big clubs to strike similar huge deals? Surely a club who finished in 7th who are not in the CL are not worth as much in sponsorship as us or Chelsea?

Therefore it only gives them a temporary advantage? And actually allows us to now increase our revenue through sponsorship to at least equal theirs?

And won't these huge deals simply make the gap between the haves and have nots even bigger? I can't see anything 'fair' about that.

It really is a load of bollocks this FFP isn't it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.