Summer Transfer Window 2016/17 - Rumours & Signings

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
It's not only three years though it is? Juve spread the cost over the length of his contract if he signed too? From their point of view.

Also; the loan fee counts towards the 25 deal, but Juve are also paying wages and will be paying bonuses depending on performances. So it might well end up being more than the 25 arranged.
 
The Running Man said:
Or schneiderlin or Fellaini or Memphis depay or mikhataryn
Click to expand...

for me Memphis depay or mikhataryn arn't really in the same group, depay still on young side and mikhataryn has a season to show what he can do.

the other 4 have been in the prem and for me didn't do even half decent enough.

Tummy said:
:p.

I really don't understand the Sissoko deal.
Click to expand...

amazing what a half decent showing at a euros or world cup can do for a player isn't it :D

not sure i'd pick him ahead of eriksen/alli/lamela, and 30m seems steep for a backup ?
 
Last edited:
Tummy said:
It's not only three years though it is? Juve spread the cost over the length of his contract if he signed too? From their point of view.

Also; the loan fee counts towards the 25 deal, but Juve are also paying wages and will be paying bonuses depending on performances. So it might well end up being more than the 25 arranged.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how that's relevant to anything I said. And Juve will record the loan fee yearly and then any fee to make the deal permanent will be spread over his contract.
Moses said:
Yes, but if it's €5m a year then in the final year they might get €15m in terms of an FFP windfall, which will be offset by the amortised loss in that year but might work out as an FFP profit on Cuadrado in that year. I haven't actually worked out his cost/amortisation cost/etc, though.
Click to expand...

Which is pretty much what I was saying - the actual effect on the books over the longterm is no different, it just allows Chelsea to spread the loss over a number of years.
 
Ha, Moyes showing what a truly great forward thinking, not at all overly comfortable manager with no ambition that he is, by signing Anichibe for Sunderland. Anichibe with a record of 35 goals in literally all of his appearances ever, in 12 freaking seasons.

Regardless of injury, that he is injured so often is another reason to not ever sign him and that he can't score when he does play is another. Best ever season had 8 goals worst is 1 goal in 22 games. I think the most insane thing someone on reddit said about it was, for someone with 229 games and only 35 goals in 12 years he's never played outside the premier league. He's the kind of player who would struggle in league one yet has managed a contract for 12 consecutive years with premiership teams, most of those contracts given to him by Moyes.
 
slackrob said:
None of those cost £30 million ��
Click to expand...

Within 10% or including inflation they would be. So for me they are in the same bracket in new money.

Inflation in footballing world >> real money inflation.

But I think people don't want to compare the Utd 3 older ones because everyone already knows that they are all terrible buys. Jury out on Miky but we see.
 
slackrob said:
Brilliant, the joys of being a United fan.
Click to expand...

I see people attacking the value critique but provide no evidence of any of the three listed being worth the money.

Being a fan means that you watch the team and evaluate their performances more critically than non fans surely? Watching them week in week out those three look pretty bad value for money. We would be lucky to get the money back on any of the three, which is pretty damping really.
 
The thing is, it is pretty rare MU get the full money back on players they have bought for a fee. There aren't many that immediately spring to mind... Ronaldo (superstar), Ince (over 20 years ago), Stam (over 15 years ago) and RvN (over 10 years ago). Doubtless a few others but generally speaking in terms of raw transfer fees MU lose money on most players. I know that doesn't make them bad buys if they stay in the team for years - but just looking at the numbers here.
 
HangTime said:
The thing is, it is pretty rare MU get the full money back on players they have bought for a fee. There aren't many that immediately spring to mind... Ronaldo (superstar), Ince (over 20 years ago), Stam (over 15 years ago) and RvN (over 10 years ago). Doubtless a few others but generally speaking in terms of raw transfer fees MU lose money on most players. I know that doesn't make them bad buys if they stay in the team for years - but just looking at the numbers here.
Click to expand...

because for the most part the player is moving down in success terms (so the buying team generally has less money), and for what ever reason Utd have always been **** at negotiating (both arriving and leaving)

Over the years we have also been overly-generous with the wages, which usually has to be compensated for somewhere when selling the player on.

Potentially (given the changes in the market ) Utd may be able to move players on a little easier next summer (at least those bought in or before summer '15) ....obviously this depends on how the team performs this year also
 
Moses said:
But it could lead to a profit in the final year, which could then be used as 'cap space' to get someone then... which they couldn't do if they just sold him now.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm fully aware. Again it was pretty much what I was referring to. Rather than take a £4m loss now (for example) they can spread that £4m over the next 3 years - whether that be £1.5m for 2 seasons then £1m when they sell or £3m loss for 2 seasons then a £2m profit when they sell. The end result is the same they're just spreading that loss.
 
HangTime said:
The thing is, it is pretty rare MU get the full money back on players they have bought for a fee. There aren't many that immediately spring to mind... Ronaldo (superstar), Ince (over 20 years ago), Stam (over 15 years ago) and RvN (over 10 years ago). Doubtless a few others but generally speaking in terms of raw transfer fees MU lose money on most players. I know that doesn't make them bad buys if they stay in the team for years - but just looking at the numbers here.
Click to expand...

Think you could probably add Vidic and Evra to that list of pretty decent purchases. Fergie made some shockers, no doubt, but some absolute gems as well.
 
£70k p/w

honestly. levy should run seminars on negotiating as eriksen is a £100k+p/w player imo

considering the cl and tv money, how we've managed to keep the wages comparitively uncompetitive is beyond me. we've tied up our best players on long term contracts and i think only kane and lloris are anywhere near £100k
 
cm1179 said:
£70k p/w

honestly. levy should run seminars on negotiating as eriksen is a £100k+p/w player imo

considering the cl and tv money, how we've managed to keep the wages comparitively uncompetitive is beyond me. we've tied up our best players on long term contracts and i think only kane and lloris are anywhere near £100k
Click to expand...

Packet of crisps release clause.
 
Did I see the other day that the Real Madrid / Atletico appeal for alleged UEFA transgressions in regards to under-age players had been rejected? So they both cant do any transfers for two windows?
 
FrankJH said:
Did I see the other day that the Real Madrid / Atletico appeal for alleged UEFA transgressions in regards to under-age players had been rejected? So they both cant do any transfers for two windows?
Click to expand...

You did, they are both talking about taking it to CAS so don't know if that will postpone the ban yet again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom