United Thread 2015/16

[Henkeman]

And Mangala?

Hard to tell. He hasn't been sold after a year for a huge loss.

 

[Alex - City Matters]

And Mangala?

And Falcao?

 

[ninjamonkey]

This is a cyclical discussion, I'm saying we have considered the items we ALWAYS consider when looking at the profit/loss of a transfer, namely the actual transfer fee involved (specifically the amount of money handed over to the selling club in order to purchase the player). We're treating Di Maria in the same way we treat any transfer, for our very basic assessment of his profit/loss. You are saying, for this specific transfer you believe we should include payments made by United to FIFA. Yes, we could include those, however then the comparison between the profit/loss on Di Maria, and the profit/loss on any other player we've considered wouldn't be possible. As I don't know the ins and outs of specific transfer dealings I clearly can't provide examples of other transfers where FIFA were paid money as well as the selling club, however I doubt Di Maria is the one and only time this has ever happened. Why would we include bonus payments to FIFA, but not bonus payments to Di Maria himself? Money being spent is money being spent, regardless of who it goes to. As that just opens up a murky, complex world of figures we simply don't have enough details on to specify it seems logical to keep this as simple as possible.

I'm saying we should use the transfer fee to compare the profit/loss, you're saying we should use the transfer fee and a bonus paid to FIFA. My argument is we normally exclude any and all bonus payments so why include one specific one in this instance? Rumour has it we need to buy Pogba's image rights if we're to sign him, if that isn't included in the transfer fee however, and is a separate figure not made widely available then I wouldn't expect us to use that when we, in our very amateur manner, assess the value of his (potential) purchase.

I wouldn't bother. I had to say it 4 times, as he kindly pointed out, in the most simplistic way I possibly could and he's still not grasped it.

 

[2sheikhs]

Mangala is one that comes under the banner of potential. Nobody is suggesting he's the finished article that was expecting to start every game.
Aguero, Silva and Toure were and are at their peak.
You bought shaw, Mata and tia maria expecting them to hit the ground running as you have with swinesteiger and did with your namesake.

 

[yeah whatever !!]

And Mangala?

Is quicker stronger faster than Stan Jones... he will prove many wrong this season.

 

[mancityvstoke]

And Mangala?

Do one.........clueless rag

 

[CheethamHillBlue]

I wouldn't bother. I had to say it 4 times, as he kindly pointed out, in the most simplistic way I possibly could and he's still not grasped it.

4 times and you still admit you didn't read anything about the transfer except the fee you saw in the paper. You're not Nick Leeson are you?
So the simplistic way is the balance sheet WON'T show the fact United paid FIFA £3.2m, bringing the yearly loss to nearly £7m? Hope it's picked up on the FFP check. ;-)

 

[goatersnipple]

So the simplistic way is the balance sheet WON'T show the fact United paid FIFA £3.2m, bringing the yearly loss to nearly £7m? Hope it's picked up on the FFP check. ;-)

Exactly.
Fuck off u red ****

 

[CheethamHillBlue]

why haven't you changed your name yet?

He's giving Falcao a month at Chelsea first. If he starts scoring, he said he'll change his team instead. ;-)

 

[Barcon]

And Mangala?

Far better than any centerback you cunts have.