United Thread 2015/16

[ninjamonkey]

So this year only it will show as a 3m loss but in total it's a 14m loss which in one season is shit.

No it will show as a £3 million loss in total to be wrote off this year. In reality it's a bigger loss.

 

[super_city_si]

I see. But outside of book keeping, the basic fact is they bought for 59m and sold him for 45m a year later. That's poor.

 

[mrtwiceaseason]

1) There you go again. How do you KNOW it will show as a £3m loss on their accounts? You've admitted you've not bothered looking at the transfer but you keep on repeating this £3m loss bollox. That's THREE times, at least in different posts you've mentioned the £3m loss. Turn it in.
2) As for the 'Pitiful £14m fee for Dzeko', Edin is fast approaching 30. He is a squad player at best with us and £14m, including his age is not 'pitiful' in the slightest if we can get that for him.

Just a thought on the dzeko fee the rags got virtually nothing back on rvp who some would say is as good so £14m for a 30 year old with no resale value is probably about right

 

[Blueknows]

I heard that one as well! That is the best excuse I have ever heard. They actually believe that shit?

It hasnt and if the Euro had wouldnt that make the pound stronger ? no matter what they say they have lost 15 mill

 

[mancityvstoke]

Utd are losers...........whichever way you look at it

6 - 1.............

 

[BigJoe#1]

It's pretty easy to work out really.

Di Maria was bought for £59.7m (ignoring other costs like signing on bonuses, agents fees etc) on a 5 year deal. From an accounting perspective that's £59.7m spread out over the length of his 5 year contract, so a £11.94m cost per season. He's been at United for 1 season, so £11.94m of his cost has now been written off, meaning Di Maria's "cost" to United for the remaining 4 years will be £47.76m. If they sell him, tomorrow, for the reported £44.5m, that means, from an accounting perspective United will lose £47.76m this season (all his remaining "cost") but will add £44.5m (his sale value). £44.5m - £47.76m = -£3.26m. So, United will actually record a net loss of £3.26m on Di Maria.

The only question I would ask at this point is..... was he worth £11.94m to them last season? You could argue he contributed to their CL qualification. But when you add on wages plus all the extras his true cost, if that's how you want to view it was IRO at least £30m...? Mind you, you may be able to offset some of that against the shirts he sold and indeed the additional sales - given everyone that bought one last season will be buying another this season.

When all said and done, dress it up any way you like it was a terrible piece of business.... and for the record, I believe they would have qualified for the CL without him, so I conclude he was a total waste of at least say.... £25m? If they hadn't done the deal they'd be £25m richer and still in the CL!

I guess you could add the £3.26m of actual cash they lost on the deal too.

 

[CheethamHillBlue]

It's pretty easy to work out really.

Where did you include any payments made by United to FIFA on behalf of Di Maria?

 

[Matty]

Where did you include any payments made by United to FIFA on behalf of Di Maria?

I didn't, because, as mentioned multiple times, we've attempted to "assess" this transfer in the same way we "assess" potential City transfers, by looking at the transfer figures and ignoring any other financial considerations, such as bonuses, wages, agents fees, and payments made to FIFA. When looking at City transfers we don't go into those kinds of details to assess the profit/loss made, mainly because the transfer figures are very easily established, whereas these "other" costs are less well documented, and harder to accurately assess.

 

[CheethamHillBlue]

I didn't, because, as mentioned multiple times, we've attempted to "assess" this transfer in the same way we "assess" potential City transfers,

I think you'll find we are looking at the loss. If any bonus payments were due to FIFA, why wouldn't they be included? Can you name any other player where the buying team had to stump up money to FIFA before they purchased that player?
Me neither so that money needs to be added to Di Maria's loss. "ASSESS' THAT.
Little wonder accountants get called boring bastards. (and that) ;-)

 

[aguero93:20]

I think you'll find we are looking at the loss. If any bonus payments were due to FIFA, why wouldn't they be included? Can you name any other player where the buying team had to stump up money to FIFA before they purchased that player?
Me neither so that money needs to be added to Di Maria's loss. "ASSESS' THAT.
Little wonder accountants get called boring bastards. (and that) ;-)

Arsehole.

How much were the add ons then?