Transfer Rumours 21/22
- Thread starter King Binny
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
No I meant net spends over one summer, such as the one you're suggesting with Tchouameni and Nunez - ie like £80m net at least.
That spending doesn't happen, ever.
Maybe we'll see an exception next summer for Bellingham. Maybe. But I've been saying that for about 5 years now.
That spending doesn't happen, ever.
Maybe we'll see an exception next summer for Bellingham. Maybe. But I've been saying that for about 5 years now.
They weren't. But once Mbappe flipped the bird at Madrid, it drove the price up for Tchouameni from £60m to £80m.
We had a 60 mill net spend last season, and have more money available this season.
You mean including Diaz? He was from the summer budget so you're cheating.
Let's see what the net this year ends up.
A signing made in January in the 21/22 season is cheating?
If you want to include him in this summers budget then our net spend this summer is 85 mill.
Which even further proves my point.
Mane, Ox, Taki, Nat, Neco is like 90m. It'll be a bit of an increase but the overall pattern of 20m or so a season is still the same
Mirror
[article]
Porto expect Liverpool to firm up their interest in winger Otavio this week after rejecting £26million bid from Leeds.
The Portuguese side believe an official offer of around £34m will be made by Jurgen Klopp’s club in what is expected to be a pivotal week for the player’s future. Brazil-born Portugal international Otavio has a release clause of around £51m in his contract.
But it is understood the Primeira Liga side are willing to do business at around the £38m mark and the player’s agent, Israel Oliveira, is in England trying to get a deal over the line for the 27-year-old.
[/article]
[article]
Porto expect Liverpool to firm up their interest in winger Otavio this week after rejecting £26million bid from Leeds.
The Portuguese side believe an official offer of around £34m will be made by Jurgen Klopp’s club in what is expected to be a pivotal week for the player’s future. Brazil-born Portugal international Otavio has a release clause of around £51m in his contract.
But it is understood the Primeira Liga side are willing to do business at around the £38m mark and the player’s agent, Israel Oliveira, is in England trying to get a deal over the line for the 27-year-old.
[/article]
@Beamrider - given that United are now valued approximately the same as we are (and our revenues are also similar), I'm genuinely confused as to how they can so easily spend vastly greater sums on transfers and wages. Can you provide some insight into how that works, and why we cannot compete? It seems like the long term implications of overspending never really come home to roost anyway.
It was close during the lock down, not sure it is now. Regardless there is mounting debt, totalling £500m, which is what fans are worried more about
So far its 40 mill with Mane and Minamino
Been out all day mate but will have a look at this for you tomorrow. Without checking, I suspect it’s because they’re more willing to spend themselves into extra debt than we are, but our spending in capital projects in recent years is likely also a factor - some of our cash profit has gone into the training ground and the Annie Road, whereas I’m not aware that they’ve done any major projects.
The lack of capital projects is also one of their fans complaints.
On the whole question of why FSG run things differently to other owners, I think they key point to remember is that we are just one “asset” in their portfolio. Note I’m using their language to present the answers reform their perspective, not because I agree..
I think I’ve mentioned this before but I understand they have something like 30-40 shareholders in FSG itself. Whilst most of them only have small stakes (probably less than 1% in most cases) some of them are likely major business players / influencers (it was reported that a former Democratic senator was a shareholder as he was conflicted in a drugs in baseball investigation he was running) and others are likely billionaires with diverse investments.
But almost without exception, they’re American. So they like money, and they like NASCAR, and hockey, and basketball and especially baseball. “Soccer” not so much, but they like success, so we’re OK.
So my sense is that whilst the key players in FSG are committed to LFC (Werner, Henry and especially Gordon, probably Red Bird too), the other guys are not. And whilst the holy trinity could out-vote the other guys every time, they’re probably not the kind of people you want to piss off in ordinary life. So you appease them by investing in rounders and sneak anything LFC needs in any other business.
If you can sell the LFC “project” to them as self-sustaining, and not affecting the shit sports they’re into, then that gives you a nice easy life. And that’s why I think we don’t see the kind of investment that other clubs are getting. The minority guys are happy for us to carry on as we are, as along as it doesn’t cost them very much.
TLDR - shareholder politics.
I think I’ve mentioned this before but I understand they have something like 30-40 shareholders in FSG itself. Whilst most of them only have small stakes (probably less than 1% in most cases) some of them are likely major business players / influencers (it was reported that a former Democratic senator was a shareholder as he was conflicted in a drugs in baseball investigation he was running) and others are likely billionaires with diverse investments.
But almost without exception, they’re American. So they like money, and they like NASCAR, and hockey, and basketball and especially baseball. “Soccer” not so much, but they like success, so we’re OK.
So my sense is that whilst the key players in FSG are committed to LFC (Werner, Henry and especially Gordon, probably Red Bird too), the other guys are not. And whilst the holy trinity could out-vote the other guys every time, they’re probably not the kind of people you want to piss off in ordinary life. So you appease them by investing in rounders and sneak anything LFC needs in any other business.
If you can sell the LFC “project” to them as self-sustaining, and not affecting the shit sports they’re into, then that gives you a nice easy life. And that’s why I think we don’t see the kind of investment that other clubs are getting. The minority guys are happy for us to carry on as we are, as along as it doesn’t cost them very much.
TLDR - shareholder politics.
[article]
Man United Tipped To Borrow Another £200m To Expand Old Trafford By 15,000 Seats
- ROBERT SUMMERSCALES
- APR 18, 2022
Manchester United are expected to extend Old Trafford by approximately 15,000 seats to boost the capacity of their famous stadium to around 88,000.
That would make Old Trafford the UK's second biggest stadium, behind the 90,000-seater Wembley.
According to the Daily Mail, United are likely to expand the Sir Bobby Charlton Stand and upgrade corporate facilities at the venue.
It is reported that the redevelopment at Old Trafford will cost around £200 million and that United will pay for it by taking out another loan.
This is despite the club already being in £495m of debt as of the end of last year.
United's stadium project will be worked on by the same master planners who designed the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium.
A general view from inside Old Trafford before Manchester United's game against Norwich City
IMAGO/Pro Sports Images/Phil Duncan
Despite United frequently failing to impress on the pitch this season, there remains a massive demand for tickets at Old Trafford.
United already have over 50,000 season-ticket holders, plus a further 100,000 on a waiting list.
Although United have the biggest stadium in the Premier League, Old Trafford does not hold the competition's record for the highest ever attendance.
The current record was set in 2018 when Tottenham were temporarily playing their home games at Wembley, where 83,222 fans watched them beat Arsenal 1-0.
[/article]
As far a I remember, they were in a similar predicament to us. In that they needed to redevelop outside the ground, before they could expand.[article]
Man United Tipped To Borrow Another £200m To Expand Old Trafford By 15,000 Seats
- ROBERT SUMMERSCALES
- APR 18, 2022
Manchester United are expected to extend Old Trafford by approximately 15,000 seats to boost the capacity of their famous stadium to around 88,000.
That would make Old Trafford the UK's second biggest stadium, behind the 90,000-seater Wembley.
According to the Daily Mail, United are likely to expand the Sir Bobby Charlton Stand and upgrade corporate facilities at the venue.
It is reported that the redevelopment at Old Trafford will cost around £200 million and that United will pay for it by taking out another loan.
This is despite the club already being in £495m of debt as of the end of last year.
United's stadium project will be worked on by the same master planners who designed the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium.
A general view from inside Old Trafford before Manchester United's game against Norwich City
IMAGO/Pro Sports Images/Phil Duncan
Despite United frequently failing to impress on the pitch this season, there remains a massive demand for tickets at Old Trafford.
United already have over 50,000 season-ticket holders, plus a further 100,000 on a waiting list.
Although United have the biggest stadium in the Premier League, Old Trafford does not hold the competition's record for the highest ever attendance.
The current record was set in 2018 when Tottenham were temporarily playing their home games at Wembley, where 83,222 fans watched them beat Arsenal 1-0.
[/article]
And it needs more the £200m.
Ah so United are half a billion pounds in debt. At what point does that even matter though? I mean, Spurs are a billion in debt, Barcelona are 1.5 billion Euros in debt etc., but they're all still outspending us.
That's the thing - we try and live clean, and with that comes I get the feeling that for our owners - they have bit of the Wenger's in them, you know keep getting CL qualification and look like you are competing. We are doing more than that - especially last season, but I think they actually have some sort of forecast of what is acceptable from season to season. Like for instance this season - if they don't get a midfielder in - then they are taking that risk - where they think OK - lets see what these guys do in this aging midfield with a bunch of cripples - they think we can still get 4th, but maybe winning something is not top of their list this season - its a potential "build" season. Then of course the season after next they will get someone for that midfield - and they will think - OK - we are covered now, lets go for it - meaning PL/CL.
Of course these fucking lunatics and I suspect Klopp is also in line with them to some degree, dont' realize that we may lose Salah next season so that will mean we won't get an expensive replacement for him, instead we will hope Elliot is ready to go in that area, but still get the expensive midfielder.
That's 50
Because we wanted to sign Konate - which we did.
If memory serves, we wouldn’t have signed him earlier because he was injured and I’m not sure whether the release clause that we paid, was active before that transfer window.
The issue the January was why we waited till the last minute to bring in who we did - we were top of the league at December - maybe they thought they could muddle through - dunno, but that was clearly a mistake.
Also, people just love bringing up net spend to support tge “we don’t spend enough argument”. But if you strip out City, Utd & Chelsea’s who don’t care about money - it kind of shows how badly other teams are spending their money.
Isn’t it more of a case of what you spend it on not how much you spend - look at all the shite Everton have bought - and Arsenal, Spurs, Villa, West Ham for that matter (who all have higher net spends).
That actually suggests our approach of not buying just anyone, but only specific players is working.
Whoever said that the Nunez transfer was likely triggered by Mané leaving is likely correct and we would have possible signed Tchouaméni regardless of that had while Madrid were fawning themselves over signing Mbappe.
Given Bellingham plays in a different role to Tchouaméni, maybe we do have our sights on someone else
Maybe
If you’re using the add ons to reach that total - that makes our transfer outlay (Jan included) well over £150m.
Konate's buy out clause didn't kick in till the summer window, so it was either overpay the value of the clause or wait till the summer and get him which we did. I think it's pretty clear with Klopp and the targets that if we have to wait to get our first choice then we wait, we won't waste money on other targets. I mean we did the very same thing with Van Dijk.
I guess all of it’s maybe, because none of us are privy to ”the plan”.
Methinks you're forgetting the extra support beams added to the OT stands to keep them standing.
That is a tangent I'd never considered. Quality point being made.
Read a rumour today that we are in for Otavio of Porto. Leeds are also chasing him and have bid 30m+. 27 years old and doesn't fit in with the statement that Ramsay is our last signing.
But I would be intrigued by his signing. Think he's what we need and may have a bigger impact than Nunez even
But I would be intrigued by his signing. Think he's what we need and may have a bigger impact than Nunez even
- Status
