January Transfer Window 2012/2013 Season Rumours/Signings

MarcLister · 1 Jan 2013 at 22:15

BaZ87 said:
This extra £40m, £50m, £60m or whatever it will be, is just going to end up going in players pockets.

Hence rumours of clubs (or owners) trying to get their higher earners (also their older players) onto cheaper renewed contracts and not giving their younger players the big pay days they want so that the clubs get more of the increase in TV rights without seeing it go straight to players' wages?

FrankJH said:
just to be clear, its about 13 years since deal was signed - but we have 18 months left to go on the present deal. (frightening how time flies isnt it lol)

Truly frightening!

FrankJH said:
With the Chevy deal and whatever kit deal does get signed - the ~£350m Utd are currently in debt by doesnt seem so bad now does it (even without all the other marketing deals Utd do that add another £60m~/season to the coffers)

I do think that although the Glazers are hated they do seem to have a way of getting more and more money into the club/bank. The icing on the cake has to be the DHL deal for their logo on our training kits.

As long as money for players is given equal priority, if not higher priority, to paying off the debt, then we should be fine. I'm sure the Glazers will find another few deals they can strike to get a nice revenue of cash into the club. How about the club speak to Trafford Council about getting some of the roads around the club renamed? Saudi Telecom Avenue anyone? Budweiser Way?

FrankJH said:
Yep thats what shine's link is saying ......if Utd stay in the top two of course when the new tv deals kick in lol

Oi!

Blasphemer!

BaZ87 · 1 Jan 2013 at 22:17

FrankJH said:
This proportion does appear to be quite vast - of the proposed/estimated £5-6bn (once foreign deals are concluded as well), quick guestimate seems to be that approx 50% of the total amount will be kept back for Stadia and the like and given to other "interested parties" like PFA etc etc etc

Huh? None of it's going to be kept back. Alan Sugar brought this up 10+ years ago and the other chairmen voted against it. All the £5-6bn will go to the clubs and be spent on bigger contracts for players.

FrankJH · 1 Jan 2013 at 22:21

MarcLister said:
I do think that although the Glazers are hated they do seem to have a way of getting more and more money into the club/bank. The icing on the cake has to be the DHL deal for their logo on our training kits. As long as money for players is given equal priority, if not higher priority, to paying off the debt, then we should be fine. I'm sure the Glazers will find another few deals they can strike to get a nice revenue of cash into the club. How about the club speak to Trafford Council about getting some of the roads around the club renamed? Saudi Telecom Avenue anyone? Budweiser Way?

Oi! Blasphemer!

DHL have been payed off - its not an active deal anymore (Utd seem to think it wasnt value for money lol)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/oct/26/manchester-united-training-kit-sponsorship

The Glazers have been immense in regards to the marketing of the club, and they should be given more credit for that. This shouldnt excuse them for what they did originally (the loading of the debt to buy the club)

For good and bad (both in equal measure) the Glazers are responsible for the finiancial "health" of the club in 12/13 and probably for some time after.

hahaha

BaZ87 said:
Huh? None of it's going to be kept back. Alan Sugar brought this up 10+ years ago and the other chairmen voted against it. All the £5-6bn will go to the clubs and be spent on bigger contracts for players.

edit - Im going nuts sorry

shine · 1 Jan 2013 at 22:24

BaZ87 said:
Huh? None of it's going to be kept back. Alan Sugar brought this up 10+ years ago and the other chairmen voted against it. All the £5-6bn will go to the clubs and be spent on bigger contracts for players.

That's not quite true, the majority is split between the clubs after there are deductions for:

PL's running costs
PFA
LMA
Conference
Football Foundation
Football League
Referees’ body
Charities
Parachute Payments

BaZ87 · 1 Jan 2013 at 22:24

These other parties get next to nothing. Practically every penny of the money goes to the clubs.

shine · 1 Jan 2013 at 22:28

BaZ87 said:
These other parties get next to nothing. Practically every penny of the money goes to the clubs.

The overseas money is split equally among the clubs the deductions I listed above are made from the domestic money.

You're right the deductions are tiny in comparison but I just wanted to make sure everyone was aware of the distinction of domestic v foreign TV money split.

FrankJH · 1 Jan 2013 at 22:29

completely my mistake sorry

BaZ87 · 1 Jan 2013 at 22:37

shine said:
The overseas money is split equally among the clubs the deductions I listed above are made from the domestic money.

You're right the deductions are tiny in comparison but I just wanted to make sure everyone was aware of the distinction of domestic v foreign TV money split.

I know that, I mentioned it in my first post on the subject.

I went on to raise a suggestion that Alan Sugar made many years ago regarding the Premier League withholding a proportion of the money from the clubs as it's proven time and time again that the money ultimately ends up in players pockets.

shine · 1 Jan 2013 at 22:44

BaZ87 said:
I know that, I mentioned it in my first post on the subject.

I went on to raise a suggestion that Alan Sugar made many years ago regarding the Premier League withholding a proportion of the money from the clubs as it's proven time and time again that the money ultimately ends up in players pockets.

I realised that and it wasn't for you benefit but those that didn't know.

MarcLister · 1 Jan 2013 at 23:22

MissChief said:
I did hear about a swap, Casillas for De Gea last week. I know mourinho and Iker don't get on.

Why would we do that? Casillas is 31. De Gea is 22. I know who I'd rather have between the sticks.

FrankJH said:
DHL have been payed off - its not an active deal anymore (Utd seem to think it wasnt value for money lol)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/oct/26/manchester-united-training-kit-sponsorship

Of course! I forgot about that.

FrankJH said:
The Glazers have been immense in regards to the marketing of the club, and they should be given more credit for that. This shouldnt excuse them for what they did originally (the loading of the debt to buy the club)

For good and bad (both in equal measure) the Glazers are responsible for the finiancial "health" of the club in 12/13 and probably for some time after.

Yeah. I don't think it is a coincidence that AIG, Aon and Chevrolet are all major US companies and all have agreed sponsorship deals with Utd post Glazers taking ownership, although I must admit I'm not 100% when the AIG deal was agreed, i.e. was it before or after the Glazers took over? Nike, although in place before the Glazers, are going to have to pay Utd a lot more money to stay as our shirt sponsor.

Had the Glazers not dumped the debt incurred in buying the club back onto the club I think the Glazers would be moderately popular. We've remained fairly successful since they took over and it's only due to City and Chelsea becoming incredibly rich that we've not dominated the league.

Stewy · 2 Jan 2013 at 00:35

We haven't bought Gotze and / or Eriksen yet. And I have issues with this. If Ronaldo returned I may forgive them. May.

cm1179 · 2 Jan 2013 at 00:51

any spurs fans heard the rumour that VDV hit his wife at a nye party and the relationship is in crisis?

don't know if it it's true or not but if he's looking for an escape, he's always welcome back at spurs.

Lord-Jaffa · 2 Jan 2013 at 00:57

cm1179 said:
any spurs fans heard the rumour that VDV hit his wife at a nye party and the relationship is in crisis?

don't know if it it's true or not but if he's looking for an escape, he's always welcome back at spurs.

Cant imagine there is a guy on the planet who wouldnt mind the chance at hitting that!

cm1179 · 2 Jan 2013 at 01:00

heh.

anyway, we're apparently in talks over a lad called holtby? never heard of him but freund apparently worked with him in the german youth squad.

MarcLister · 2 Jan 2013 at 01:03

Stewy said:
We haven't bought Gotze and / or Eriksen yet. And I have issues with this. If Ronaldo returned I may forgive them. May.

May?

Is Eriksen the DC or MC? I forget.

drunkenmaster · 2 Jan 2013 at 01:35

shine said:
It's not as straightforward as that as there are payments for the number of time you are on TV so it will obviously be worth more to the top clubs v bottom:

http://www.sportingintelligence.com...ng-where-the-money-goes-and-what-next-190601/

It is serious money though and it could easily fund one or two signings for each club.

FrankJH said:
Fair enough, the original article I read was mentioning 1bn being shared equally - this is apparantly wrong, fair enough.

Either way, its looks like from shine's link above (thank you) its around £30-£60m extra depending on where the club finishes (from '13 onwards) come that summer

edit - to be clear I did mean that figure per season, so it is a nice leap - theoretically allowing 1 extra major signing per season (cynically thinking transfer fees to massivly grow at the same time)

MarcLister said:
So Utd could, potentially, according to your £30-£60m extra, and Shine's link be looking at getting £90-£120m a year in TV rights? That'll make the Glazers' bank manager happy then.

Where are these numbers coming from? Shines link and quote basically says the current deal per year for ALL tv deals is 1.1billion or so and is going to end up between 1.7-2billion after the foreign rights are done and that OVERALL this will mean around a £30mil increase a year for top of the league(City going from around £60mil last year to just under £90mil in 13/14) and Wolves(who were bottom) would be expected in the same situation to go from £40mil to only £54mil in 13/14.

In other words, the 1.17billion deal is increasing to most likely around the 1.8billion mark and around 50% more money, distributed in roughly the same way(though a bit unevenly) means a give or take 50% increase in tv money.

Why you guys have added various guesses together and also misquoted Shine's link as a 30-60mil increase instead of 15-30mil I don't know, but its expected to be give or take 30mil for the biggest clubs and ultimately that will end up as wages. a 20 man squad 20k extra a week roughly equates to a mil a year and you can guess that the top players at a club end up on 30-40k more, the bottom rung players get not much if anything, and the middle guys end up on a mil more a year.

But a lot of this is simply done effectively already, with yearly wage rises being pretty common these days, Ronaldo supposedly was on a deal that started off at over 200k a week and would finish on closer to 500k a week

I'm fine with that, footie players waste money, buy big houses, cars, pee it all over the shop, get taxed heavily and pay tax on most of the stuff they buy. When it ends up with clubs and not being spent, meh.

Seriously though, anyone who would prefer to keep De Gea than get Ronaldo needs their head examined. You can't find other players as good as Ronaldo/Messi, there are other keepers as good as De Gea, simple. You get one chance to get a Ronaldo, theres a dozen keepers as good as De Gea, maybe more. De Gea won't be the difference between titles and not, Ronaldo can easily be the difference between champs league titles and no champs league titles.

Considering the costs though, why Fergie wouldn't wait an extra however long, year, and throw him 5-10mil more in wages a year instead of a huge huge transfer fee I don't know.

atpbx · 2 Jan 2013 at 06:43

cm1179 said:
heh.

anyway, we're apparently in talks over a lad called holtby? never heard of him but freund apparently worked with him in the german youth squad.

Lewis Holtby plays for schalke, and is one of anybody who knows what they are doing first FM buys.

DanH84 · 2 Jan 2013 at 07:31

drunkenmaster said:
Where are these numbers coming from? Shines link and quote basically says the current deal per year for ALL tv deals is 1.1billion or so and is going to end up between 1.7-2billion after the foreign rights are done and that OVERALL this will mean around a £30mil increase a year for top of the league(City going from around £60mil last year to just under £90mil in 13/14) and Wolves(who were bottom) would be expected in the same situation to go from £40mil to only £54mil in 13/14.

In other words, the 1.17billion deal is increasing to most likely around the 1.8billion mark and around 50% more money, distributed in roughly the same way(though a bit unevenly) means a give or take 50% increase in tv money.

Why you guys have added various guesses together and also misquoted Shine's link as a 30-60mil increase instead of 15-30mil I don't know, but its expected to be give or take 30mil for the biggest clubs and ultimately that will end up as wages. a 20 man squad 20k extra a week roughly equates to a mil a year and you can guess that the top players at a club end up on 30-40k more, the bottom rung players get not much if anything, and the middle guys end up on a mil more a year.

But a lot of this is simply done effectively already, with yearly wage rises being pretty common these days, Ronaldo supposedly was on a deal that started off at over 200k a week and would finish on closer to 500k a week

I'm fine with that, footie players waste money, buy big houses, cars, pee it all over the shop, get taxed heavily and pay tax on most of the stuff they buy. When it ends up with clubs and not being spent, meh.

Seriously though, anyone who would prefer to keep De Gea than get Ronaldo needs their head examined. You can't find other players as good as Ronaldo/Messi, there are other keepers as good as De Gea, simple. You get one chance to get a Ronaldo, theres a dozen keepers as good as De Gea, maybe more. De Gea won't be the difference between titles and not, Ronaldo can easily be the difference between champs league titles and no champs league titles.

Considering the costs though, why Fergie wouldn't wait an extra however long, year, and throw him 5-10mil more in wages a year instead of a huge huge transfer fee I don't know.

60% increase in domestic tv rights packages. Overseas will be on top of what's quoted.

shine · 2 Jan 2013 at 07:31

drunkenmaster said:
Where are these numbers coming from? Shines link and quote basically says the current deal per year for ALL tv deals is 1.1billion or so and is going to end up between 1.7-2billion after the foreign rights are done and that OVERALL this will mean around a £30mil increase a year for top of the league(City going from around £60mil last year to just under £90mil in 13/14) and Wolves(who were bottom) would be expected in the same situation to go from £40mil to only £54mil in 13/14.

The Utd fans were looking at the best overseas TV deal scenario plus their new sponsorship deals to get their figures. Also the largest increase scenario for the overseas deal could see the top club earn £50 million more than City got last year. However this is all speculation at this point.

Bigpig · 2 Jan 2013 at 07:52

cm1179 said:
sturridge to liverpool a done deal?

surely means andy carroll will move on now

Who's going to pay 10+ million for Carrol now?

His stock is falling fast. should have took Newcastle offer of 14 odd million.