r0cafella

3 minutes ago, TheInfiniteOdyssey said:

It’s initially difficult to envisage who could readily pay the £100m, but if City could sell both Phillips and Nunes, that’s a decent chunk of the fee already paid for.

 

There’s persistent talk of De Bruyne to Saudi as well, so they could potentially be in a really strong position to actually buy both Paqueta and Bruno if they wanted to,

 City don’t need to do anything to create headroom to buy him. They make so much money. 

10 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I assume we have some master plan to increase revenues. Controlling wages tightly has helped Spurs tremendously and not controlling wages tightly killed Leicester. Ultimately, we need revenues though as you say.

Yeah, this has been repeated but I’m not seeing it, we’ve eaten the low hanging fruit the next phase of growth I imagine will be more difficult. 
 

Id love to know what the plan is, I’m really curious how they are going to do it. 

City don’t usually do transfer sagas so if they are in for him it should be swift. 

17 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Not sure I like the idea of increasing everyone's wages with us already having a high wages/turnover ratio.

 

We can only amortise 1 additional year of Isak's contract so we can't make much back in accounting.

 

I wouldn't be against the Levy tactic of "well you signed the contract, so we either get an exorbitant fee or you keep playing".

 

Unless we have good plans to actually increase revenues in line.

It’s interesting you mention this, I was having a similar thought, obviously it’s good to reward players for good performance and it’s good for morale, but the other side of the coin is a bit different. If we keep bumping up salaries then we are essentially strangling ourselves in FFP terms (this will be even more acute under the new rules). 
 

In the not too distant past, the club have spoken about player trading being needed to progress but we seem very reluctant to actually do it. 
 

in terms of future revenue, even if we have a plan it’s only sufficient if we are actually bridging the gap the mega clubs and I still don’t see how we are doing that unless something drastic occurs (new stadium which most are against :lol:)

I think ultimately a lot of hard decisions have to be made and soon, we can defer them sure but that’s ultimately going to cause stagnation. 

1 hour ago, Nine said:

Because we had a stable team selection last year, and he was well covered by Joelinton on that side. He is still capable of solid, consistent performances in a team that isn’t massacred by injuries leaving no mobility in midfield.

I wouldn’t put it down to just that personally, his limitations are obvious and clear to all, also he’s a year older, given his massive frame his drop off was always going to be significant, basically playing him wide means your always going to suffer defending fast transitions. 

1 minute ago, Jack27 said:

30m*

Castore paying 5 right? Adidas paying 30. 

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

Yeah I think we'll miss Castore with hindsight like. I'll definitely miss the stripes on the back and the red names and numbers. People talk about the quality as well but in my experience it's been really good, the main thing seems to have been their customer service and delivery time more than anything. 

The 25m per year we will be getting will make up for it. 

1 minute ago, et tu brute said:

I might be totally wrong, but I think it came down to the summer transfer window. I said after it had ended it had been a poor window. As I've said many times, in our current placement, we needed to concentrate on recruitment of 'first team' players. Players replaced then become squad players, which automatically improves the squad. This didn't happen, and my opinion is that this was down to Ashworth, and Howe wasn't happy.. 

not sure this adds up though, was Tonalis Howe dream signing which was deemed out of reach?

3 minutes ago, Matt1892 said:

No, he cannot buy himself out.

Ohhh that’s really interesting, in Singapore it’s common for employee to buy out notice periods to start a new job without delay. (Yes I realise it’s totally different). 

1 minute ago, Matt1892 said:

I work within employment law and it doesn’t work like that, the scope of an Employment Tribunal is limited and you cannot go there on the grounds of thinking it isn’t fair that your employer won’t let you leave without completing the notice period you are contractually committed to.

 

Even if he did raise it to an Employment Tribunal, it would never get as far as a full case hearing as he would have to set out what specific part of legislation his employer has broken and their isn’t any regarding him signing a notice that he no longer wants to work, which is why people can’t go purely on the grounds of thinking their employer isn’t being fair.

 

They would judge that his case has no reasonable prospects of being successful and the case would never be heard.

Matt, as this is your area of expertise is there anything stopping him buying up his contract at its face value? Say he’s paid a million a year if he stumps it up he can walk no?

1 minute ago, Jack27 said:

off to Japan it seems

I will also be in Japan in July is it fate?

1 minute ago, PauloGeordio said:

I have no doubt they are extremely ambitious. For me retaining a guy that wants away isn’t a measure. Slow builders. One aim. World domination.

 

That isn’t the point I was making, the point being that it are so ambitious why are our staff being poached so easily. 
 

I think it’s pretty clear that the appointment of Ashworth was a huge mistake and a poor choice (20:20 hindsight of course). 

5 minutes ago, Cf said:

Us: You signed a contract until 2026. 

 

Him: But you didn't really mean that did you?

 

I think is probably the extent of his argument. 

If his claim is groundless as your suggest he’s clearly trying to fight in the court of public opinion as well, basically trying to put more pressure on us to lessen our demands. 
 

We can imagine Sir Jim has no intentions of paying what we are demanding. 

1 minute ago, joeyt said:

 

That looks completely unrealistic to me

Because it is. 

Just now, Cf said:

 

It's pretty schoolboy stuff. 

 

If you try and tempt an employee from a rival you make sure you're in a position to actually get them. Either because you know their contract is shortly over or because you've agreed terms to release them early. 

 

Or you do whatever it is Man Utd are doing. 

The funniest thing is a cursory email to one of our directors from Sir rat before he got carried away would have established all of this in advance. He decided to basically tell us to fuck off instead . 

1 minute ago, NSG said:

Horrible photoshop/ai generated image mind.

Just now, Froggy said:

 

You're 71 years of age, patience is no longer a virtue. Cut the old guy some slack.

 he had patience to campaign and support Brexit whilst being a tax exile so he does have some patience. 

1 minute ago, Froggy said:

 

What if you had to just wait a little while longer and get a full Harrod's shop for the price of a Tesco one, and in the meantime you'd get Waitrose and M&S helping you out until the Harrod's order arrived?

Then I wouldn’t go on tv and fucking Moan about having to wait. 

Just now, Froggy said:

 

It's exactly where I was going with this. We were hammered for what we paid for Antony, and rightly so. It's even worse now because he's absolutely shite.

 

 

Not a huge fan of how he does public interviews throwing shade at other clubs. Hate it actually.

 

However, he has hired or is hiring Omar Berrada, Jason Wilcox and Dan Ashworth. There's already a stadium task force set up and plans starting to be drawn up. He's already pumped £200m into the club of his own money and has cleared £120m straight off the debt, and is obliged to increase his stake further by the 31st of December.

 

Whatever negatives he has brought so far, the positives are massively outweighing them.

But this is the point Froggy, if you don’t want overpay then you shouldn’t shop at that super market, it’s why I don’t buy my groceries from Harrods. 

Just now, Matt1892 said:

Why?

It doesn’t benefit us, we are happy with the impasse hence our lack of negotiation. 

Just now, Froggy said:

 

By doing the same thing we've done for years and paying well over the odds? I don't think so.

The odds are what’s decided by us though, at least until his contract expires as is industry standard, you can ask Ajax about Anthony for further reference. 
 

I know you love to troll every now and again, but I’m sure you know the way this has been handled has reflect poorly on your new minority owner.  

Just now, PauloGeordio said:

It’s Man United innit! Isn’t he m8’s with Ratcliffe? He’s a job hopper too. Good riddance I say. Looking forward to the new guy. 

He’s friends with Brailsford. It might be Manchester red but if our ambition is to be bigger than them it’s not a relevant point. Job hopper? Yeah maybe him leaving flys in the face of all his public statements mind. 
 

Anyways, I think it will be easier to make more definitive statements about the clubs ambitions once to hear more about the future of the stadium. 

This whole saga does make me wonder though, what does it say for our future? If we are supposed to be competing with them and have backers with much deeper pockets does this speak to that at all?

Notwithstanding he’s turned out to be absolute horrible appointment, he cost a fortune, was paid a fortune, achieved absolutely nothing and ran at the first opportunity. 

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Adjudicators don’t normally look kindly upon parties who refuse arbitration tbf - I agree the club may view delays as being of benefit to us and detrimental to Man Ure.  But the whole ‘demand £20m or tell them to get fucked’ has now gone for a Burton. 

Yeah, but they can’t force us if I’m my understanding is correct and if it’s a matter of timing I’d imagine any legal action which followed would drag on past this summer window which seems to be one of our sources of ire. 

1 minute ago, Froggy said:

 

Genuine question, would you be calling us a joke if we had just paid £20m straight up?

I wouldn’t have, it would have been a signal of a new professional Manchester United, a realisation that something has changed, instead we’ve got more of the same entitled behaviour. How’s the super league coming along btw?