Match Day Thread 2016/17 Premier League, Cups & Euro Watch

How is it a story?
Are the facts stated true or not?
It doesn't change the price, it doesn't change anything at all. Why are you so desperate for it to be wrong?

 

I would suggest you ask the BBC that one

Just to calm your nerves a bit, I can confirm that Pogba's price is still classed as £89m

 

Why not as a percentage of blag shirts sold with his name on the back?

Do Man Utd pay their taxes as a percentage of their fans who aren't plastic?

#creativeaccounting

 

So he's still #officially the biggest #flop in the history of the game

 

The whole premise of the story title is complete bolox designed to please knobheads like yourself. Ask yourself this, why does it use figures from one or two transfers when football finances were very different? why does the title not say pogba is twice as expensive as RVP ( as a percentage of turnover) etc or compare against modern midfielders eg giggs or ronaldo? Not sure what they would be as ronaldo was not cheap but at least it would be more coherent story rather than that gibberish mish mash of nonsense.

 

He still cost £89m

 

thats my point exactly, its not but ****wits like you will defend it whilst others laugh at you for trying.

 

Transfering his player registration cost £89m, the player himself cost a lot more overall

 

Then they have failed badly, I am not pleased or miffed or anything at all really. I am one of those who couldn't give a stuff what players cost as long as they improve the team. I do like to try and find out what angers other people about this kind of thing though hence the questions.

You picked two bad players there by the way, Ronaldo was much cheaper than Pogba even using the percentage thing, Giggs was bought as a schoolboy and barely showed up in the accounts

 

As I have said, I am defending nothing, I haven't even read the article other than the bit Astro posted. All I have asked is what is wrong in the article and why it annoys people so much.
Do you think maybe the BBC have written it on purpose to wind Liverpool supporters up? They are based in Salford you know

 

nobody here is angry about utd paying that much but maybe about the bbc putting out a complete bollox story with nonsense stats.

ermmmm... if they were both cheaper using "the perecentantage thing" as you choose to call it, doesn't that back up my point that the story is complete bollox?

 

Well of course he does, you don't expect a player to play for free do you.
I have no idea what his wages are but I dare say I will find out on here when year end is published ( that is if individual wages are published which I doubt), someone will no doubt guesstimate it from the overall wage expenditure figure.

 

But the stats aren't nonsense, they are factual and true

How does the fact that two other players were cheaper back up your point, in fact what is your point?

 

So maybe if you calculated total cost of transfer and contract as a percentage of club income after debt you'd be half way to having some kind of point

As it stands, this transfer fee as a percentage of revenue stat is meaningless BS that has never been quoted before and will probably never be used for any other player ever again

 

Facts can't be nonsense but they can be meaningless

 

Well originally it was that the bbc story is nonsense but it now seems to have turned into you wanting to point out how much of a bellend you are.

 

I think the BBC were just trying a new spin to get everyone talking as that is their job, personally if they were trying to justify it I think it would have been easier to explain the purchase as a statement of intent.
They have spending power that would be my angle. The percentage thing whilst not factually wrong stank of desparation. This kind of analysis has not been used before, we just wait to see if it becomes the norm or just saved for special occasions.
Btw if that is the method for analysis Balo was not a problem
Like it or not Utd can afford to blow money on players. Pogba could easily turn good, and could turn out to be a steal at £89mil. It also puts financial pressure on future buys for other clubs making it difficult for them to keep up.
When Spurs and us sold Bale and Suarez we had the money to buy flops, some of which (for both clubs) are starting to pay dividends.
All i can hope is that Utd implode by keep spending £89mil on players. However the chance of that seems unlikely

 

The other two players were bought when man u weren't the richest club in England(or in the top 3 globally)so the lad over the road from OT at the quays)is making comparisons that ain't valid, back in the days of those particular signings the club couldn't have afforded to make world record fee signings.
But the BBC football chappies agenda is to make man u all sweetness and light no matter what they do or how they do it.

 

Loved your whining about the ref last night btw, I read it earlier

I watched the game with a mixed set of fans down the pub, and not one of us even mentioned the ref throughout, there was literally nothing contentious in the entire game