Good couldn't care any less, building for the future happy how ineos are already doing business would never seen this with previous regime
Summer Transfer Thread 24/25
- Thread starter Bigpig
- Start date
Good couldn't care any less, building for the future happy how ineos are already doing business would never seen this with previous regime
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 25,167
If he's going I'm gonna have massive **** at 23:01
Genuine question, what business have they done that the Glazers didn't do?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 25,167
Sell players?
Last edited:
Not over paying and finally starting to get rid of players, still need to get others out which isn't easy task when the people under the glazers gave out silly contracts
Come on Baz, Ineos FTW, United r the best, Jim's at the wheel
He's not better than Martinelli regardless of stats and Saka never gets subbed. Yes it's a loan but even still it's not inspiring at all.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 25,167
Likewise Sancho!
he's also cover for havertz as a false 9
i think its a clever bit of business, its a loan its a win win
Soldato
I wasn't panicking at all!Ugarte deal done. Happy with that.
Transfer news: United sign Ugarte
It's official! The highly-rated Uruguay international has joined from Paris Saint-Germain.www.manutd.com
Seems Utd weren't too bothered about completing the signing in time for Ugarte to be registered for the Liverpool game as he wasn't 100% match fit?Any goss on the likely future fee? Will be peanuts compared to what we gave Dortmund for him but hopefully a decent amount back. Shame it didn't work out but Sancho leaving permanently (eventually) is best for him and Utd.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 25,167
£35mI wasn't panicking at all!
Any goss on the likely future fee? Will be peanuts compared to what we gave Dortmund for him but hopefully a decent amount back. Shame it didn't work out but Sancho leaving permanently (eventually) is best for him and Utd.
Soldato
Hopefully it’s that the taxi is just pulling up.
I kind of mentioned this the other day but isn't it a bit early to say you've not paid over the odds (I'm not saying you have btw) on x, y or z? You've gave PSG their money back on a player that flopped for them and paid a fee (and contract) for Yoro that other interested clubs wouldn't. Whether what you've paid is good or bad value will become clear over time but as manic hints at it seems because it's not the Glazers you're automatically saying it's great.
Regarding sales, I really don't see it. Selling players in isolation isn't a challenge (you sold players before), it's selling the ones you want or need to that's the challenge and or getting good fees for those that do leave. Other than Sancho Utd haven't really moved on anybody you'd say they really needed to move on* and the reported future fee of £20m odd isn't a good deal (that's before any possible pay-off to Sancho). And the fees for the easier sales? You hardly cashed in.
*As you say that's not easy given their contracts.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 25,167
Don't care, the fact that we got rid is good enough. More to go of course but usually they stick around for way too long.
I'm not blown away by Ineos, time will tell.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 25,167
Taaaxi for Sancho!
It could be an obligation to buy in the event that Chelsea qualify for x or he plays x games. I'm not saying that is the case and I've not seen any terms mentioned however not all loans + obligations are straight forward, some do have targets that need to be hit. I don't believe it was 100% confirmed what the terms were but there was talk that Hall's loan + obligation from Chelsea to Newcastle had some sort of performance target before the obligation kicked in.