You really are a bit thick aren't you
There is still a chance we will get Varane too and Ole won't fund that either, the club will out of the money we are left with after the owners have taken their large share.
Transfer Rumours Transfer Rumours thread
- Thread starter Bozz
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
There is still a chance we will get Varane too and Ole won't fund that either, the club will out of the money we are left with after the owners have taken their large share.
- May 22, 2011
- 73,292
- 27,980
- 113
You really are a bit thick aren't you
There is still a chance we will get Varane too and Ole won't fund that either, the club will out of the money we are left with after the owners have taken their large share.
Don’t be pathetic and call names.
So the money comes from the club? And who owns the club? So ergo, the money for transfers is provided by the owners. Or are you saying that the owners have no say about how much money is spent on transfers.
like I said the owners may take 50m out a year, but they leave the club with the other 150m to spend.
So, would you rather the club make 200m, owners take out 50 and leave 150 for transfers.
or club make 100m, owners take nothing and leave 100m for transfers?
Yeah, sorry about the name call fella, really. I think i have been on here long enough for you to know it's not the norm for me.
Back to the owners, we are being literally raped by ours, they have taken well over £1bl out of the club over the years and saddled us with £500k of debt, debt we got down to £3750 at one point until they took out a further loan.
They are parasites and although i don't know as much about your owners i am of the opinion they are not too dissimilar.
Player costs don't interest me, we all buy at a price we think is right. Sometimes it works often it doesn't so i'm not getting into a piussing contest with that one.
That was only half of him though.In theory you egg form was still in your.mothers ovaries though. Don't run yourself down mate
Half man, half Biscan.
the usual suspect now linking Saul to man utd. His agent has been quite busy making up stories this summer to try keep his name in the news.
i'd say within 24 hours there will be another story about us.
i'd say within 24 hours there will be another story about us.
They don't pump money in, they take it out and have no interest in the club
Nice to know you are happy with FSG though, that sell to buy policy has always done you well.
just ask Rafa
I'm not a massive fan of the sell to buy policy but we literally did win a CL and a PL (along with Super Cup and World Club Cup).
It is limited. You have to have a Coutinho type deal and great investment with those funds to move the needle. It is however, sustainable.
I have no issues with selling to buy but my issue is the extent to which we do it. Going back to January really opened my eyes to how tight we are - we were in the biggest defensive crisis ever and at severe risk of missing out on top 4 but the owners left Klopp out to dry. it wasn't until Matip had his tests done and was confirmed that he would miss the rest of the season did we start to even look at defenders - and even then, we picked up Kabak and Davies. Come on now, that is pathetic.
The historical picture is clear.
LFC have scope for approximately 40million in transfers.
FSG have worked to increase revenues, lent 120mil with expectation to get it back over 10 years and in general support the club only to turn it into a self sustaining asset they exploit commercially (ride the coat tails).
Its neither sell to buy nor anything like it.
By contrasts the "don't even paint the steel" merchants would have you believe the glaziers have drained utd dry. nothing could be further from the real truth. Over the past 10/12 years utd's revenues have doubled Depending on what model of fakery you believe they are either most valuable or 4th most valuable club on the planet (the broke Spanish clubs somehow are worth more to some)
the last time utd had a negative net spend was 2009 when ronaldo left. since 2014 its been well north of 60mil per year.
The utd fans have this chip on their shoulders that their owners take some money (their asset their money btw ) out.
The incompetence at the top at utd is clear for all to see but its on the football side and something ferguson did nothing to address as he moved to retire. he appointed his own replacement and start utd out on the path to 7th. 60mil next spend every year and a lot more.
this summer 75mil so far, last season, 60mil season before, 130mil, season before, 55mil.
The real truth is the american model is to make money so they focus on real revenues as they do not have access to a states oil reserves to create holding companies and other such mechanisms to pay half the expenses.
Utd go into next season with a very expensive 30mil keeper, Back 4 likely to be a 50mil RB, a 50mil RCB, a 80mil LCB and a 30MIL RB. Then a 50mil fred lols, a 90mil odd pogba, a 56 mil fernandes. then up top something of the order of a 70mil martial, a 75mil sancho and one other possibly cavani as rashford is recovering.
don't know they were born comes to mind.
Our team will be similarly expensive. Its miles off sell to buy jibes. extremely expensive keeper, back 4 that cost 110mil or so, midfield 3 that 2 are older in but you could still fit a keita or ox reserve in to inflate the value and 3 form 4 forwards who all cost 30mil + and 45 mil in jota's case.
We have run more negative net spend seasons because we've had more times clubs have seen us as someone to pick players out of but that was our own incompetence and poor former owners fault.
The argument is one with cheap shots but read like we don't know we were born, pure privilege compared to the clubs who have the work hard for it every year just to keep in the league.
I know of a chelsea fan on social media who genuinely cannot understand the concept that the clubs seeking to buy tammy abrahams cannot afford to pay cheslea money for a lad nearly out of contract so they won't get 50 or 60mil. genuinely cannot get west ham won't spend 40mil on a player.
LFC have scope for approximately 40million in transfers.
FSG have worked to increase revenues, lent 120mil with expectation to get it back over 10 years and in general support the club only to turn it into a self sustaining asset they exploit commercially (ride the coat tails).
Its neither sell to buy nor anything like it.
By contrasts the "don't even paint the steel" merchants would have you believe the glaziers have drained utd dry. nothing could be further from the real truth. Over the past 10/12 years utd's revenues have doubled Depending on what model of fakery you believe they are either most valuable or 4th most valuable club on the planet (the broke Spanish clubs somehow are worth more to some)
the last time utd had a negative net spend was 2009 when ronaldo left. since 2014 its been well north of 60mil per year.
The utd fans have this chip on their shoulders that their owners take some money (their asset their money btw
) out.The incompetence at the top at utd is clear for all to see but its on the football side and something ferguson did nothing to address as he moved to retire. he appointed his own replacement and start utd out on the path to 7th. 60mil next spend every year and a lot more.
this summer 75mil so far, last season, 60mil season before, 130mil, season before, 55mil.
The real truth is the american model is to make money so they focus on real revenues as they do not have access to a states oil reserves to create holding companies and other such mechanisms to pay half the expenses.
Utd go into next season with a very expensive 30mil keeper, Back 4 likely to be a 50mil RB, a 50mil RCB, a 80mil LCB and a 30MIL RB. Then a 50mil fred lols, a 90mil odd pogba, a 56 mil fernandes. then up top something of the order of a 70mil martial, a 75mil sancho and one other possibly cavani as rashford is recovering.
don't know they were born comes to mind.
Our team will be similarly expensive. Its miles off sell to buy jibes. extremely expensive keeper, back 4 that cost 110mil or so, midfield 3 that 2 are older in but you could still fit a keita or ox reserve in to inflate the value and 3 form 4 forwards who all cost 30mil + and 45 mil in jota's case.
We have run more negative net spend seasons because we've had more times clubs have seen us as someone to pick players out of but that was our own incompetence and poor former owners fault.
The argument is one with cheap shots but read like we don't know we were born, pure privilege compared to the clubs who have the work hard for it every year just to keep in the league.
I know of a chelsea fan on social media who genuinely cannot understand the concept that the clubs seeking to buy tammy abrahams cannot afford to pay cheslea money for a lad nearly out of contract so they won't get 50 or 60mil. genuinely cannot get west ham won't spend 40mil on a player.
As clear a club "come and get him" shout as I've seen in a long time.
So examine the spend for 20/21, by the time the two CB had come in we had already committed to get jota, Thiago and tsimikas for in and around the 40million level. some fees to be paid later but still committed. Thats in a very very tight season with a massive drop in revenues.
the prior season we actually took in 28mil in fees to balance the FFP ****e. the season before spend 126mil, the seaosn before took in 9mil. average it out. 30 - 40mil a year.
that's what we have to spend. it was a defensive crisis right enough but the money clearly isn't there. Who is to say we didn't have tragets and desires at one level but above that the money just doesn't add up. you got a jota and a thiago and a tsimikas that solved every problem we had over the summer but 3 injuries blew that all away.
As of now we have balanced the books so we can all look forward to another player coming in in the 40mil range.
not sure about that level. had an alright euros though.
I would have said 10-13mil max.
This is the thing - I'm not expecting our owners to completely bankroll unreasonable spending for years ala Chelsea and City. But I was expecting them to maybe inject some personal financing into the club to help tie us over as a very short term solution.
Will have to try and find the chart but our owner financing is incredibly low compared to the rest of the league, which is great as we want to run as a sustainable club, but we were desperate in January and failing to qualify for CL would have had far worse financial impact.