manchester united

[The College Dropout]

On 25/10/2025 at 21:17, gdm said:

I said they did good business in the summer and would be up in the European spots and got slaughtered for it 

It's an excellent squad imo. With no European football they should qualify for the CL with ease. EH would have these right up there.

[Lish007]

On 25/10/2025 at 21:16, Froggy said:

 

Not as easy as that is it? You've spent £250m and are worse. 

Wouldnt say worse mate, thank you very much. Just few injuries. 

[Crimson Cardigan]

They’re on a decent run but there’s still no athleticism in midfield and they remain slow and ponderous at the back. I’d be gutted if we finish below them. But Obviously when you combine Mbeumo’s talent with his fanatical zeal for all things Man Utd, they will be better. 

[Geogaddi]

They were always going to improve eventually with PSR the way it is. It's pretty much impossible to be bad every season when you can spend what they can on transfers and wages . Still not sure they are any better than us mind despite the huge advantages they have . No Europe might be the difference though .

 

 

Edited October 29, 2025 by Geogaddi

[McCormick]

Even with PSR, it feels like we’re playing a different sport. Manchester United could spend half a billion on mistakes and still walk away fine because their global reach just keeps refilling the coffers. You could mismanage them for a decade and they’d still have fans all over the world buying shirts. Meanwhile, we’re stuck counting every penny to stay within the rules, trying to crack the top 50 in global support.
 

We can outplay them some seasons, but catching them? That would take years of trophies and a serious rethink of the financial rules governing football. Spurs we can catch; Manchester United though are on a different planet, and PSR just keeps them there.

[Froggy]

31 minutes ago, Geogaddi said:

They were always going to improve eventually with PSR the way it is. It's pretty much impossible to be bad every season when you can spend what they can on transfers and wages . Still not sure they are any better than us mind despite the huge advantages they have . No Europe might be the difference though .

 

We have to sell well to balance the books, same as you. McTominay, Garnacho etc. 

 

Our wage bill is getting closer as well, and next summer I would guess it will be quite similar when there's a strong chance Casemiro and Bruno will both go. Our financial situation isn't as good as people seem to think.

[Erikse]

6 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

We have to sell well to balance the books, same as you. McTominay, Garnacho etc. 

 

Our wage bill is getting closer as well, and next summer I would guess it will be quite similar when there's a strong chance Casemiro and Bruno will both go. Our financial situation isn't as good as people seem to think.

 

Anthony, Sancho, Højlund etc. Some really good PSR/financial work. We just need to buy high and sell low like you.

 

If your financial situation isn't great, you should probably slow down the transfer spending? This summer didn't exactly look like a club that was about to go bust by christmas (your owners words).

 

 

Edited October 29, 2025 by Erikse

[The Fountain]

On 25/10/2025 at 21:16, Froggy said:

 

Not as easy as that is it? You've spent £250m and are worse. 

After 9 games we've won 3 drew 3 and lost 3. Exactly the same as after 9 games last season.

[Dr Venkman]

14 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

We have to sell well to balance the books, same as you. McTominay, Garnacho etc. 

 

Our wage bill is getting closer as well, and next summer I would guess it will be quite similar when there's a strong chance Casemiro and Bruno will both go. Our financial situation isn't as good as people seem to think.

But you have loads more to play with to build your squad, so selling well is easier. As for your financial situation, see the point above. Loads more to play with, therefore everything is easier for you. Not sure it’s even debatable.

[Froggy]

18 minutes ago, Erikse said:

 

Anthony, Sancho, Højlund etc. Some really good PSR/financial work. We just need to buy high and sell low like you.

 

If your financial situation isn't great, you should probably slow down the transfer spending? This summer didn't exactly look like a club that was about to go bust by christmas (your owners words).

 

Antony and Sancho are two horrible signings and arguably the worst in our history. Agreed. 

 

We paid £64m for Hojlund, and Napoli have an obligation to buy him for £38m after paying a £6m loan fee. He will be a PSR gain. 

 

If we go by transfer market we spent £220m this summer. We've sold Garnacho and Antony for around £60m. We've made £20m+ from sell on clauses and Sancho's penalty fee from Chelsea and we removed huge wages from the books with Rashford, Sancho, Hojlund, Lindelof, Onana, Evans, Eriksen, Garnacho and Antony all leaving the club. You've also got the almost certain future fees of Hojlund and Rashford for a further £65m to come in. 

 

If you work out the total transfers in + wages vs. the tranfers out + wages, it's actually a fairly modest spend for such a big club.

 

He didn't say we'd go bust by the way, he said we'd run out of cash. Huge difference.

 

 

Edited October 29, 2025 by Froggy

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, Dr Venkman said:

But you have loads more to play with to build your squad, so selling well is easier. As for your financial situation, see the point above. Loads more to play with, therefore everything is easier for you. Not sure it’s even debatable.

 

Of course it's not debatable.

 

I'm just making the point that people think we can spend what we like with no consequences when it isn't the case. We've sold players we've wanted to keep, and we borrow for cash flow. 

[Dr Venkman]

37 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Of course it's not debatable.

 

I'm just making the point that people think we can spend what we like with no consequences when it isn't the case. We've sold players we've wanted to keep, and we borrow for cash flow. 

Only very, very stupid people. We certainly don’t have any of them on this forum.

[bobbydazzla]

1 hour ago, Froggy said:

 

Antony and Sancho are two horrible signings and arguably the worst in our history. Agreed. 

 

We paid £64m for Hojlund, and Napoli have an obligation to buy him for £38m after paying a £6m loan fee. He will be a PSR gain. 

 

If we go by transfer market we spent £220m this summer. We've sold Garnacho and Antony for around £60m. We've made £20m+ from sell on clauses and Sancho's penalty fee from Chelsea and we removed huge wages from the books with Rashford, Sancho, Hojlund, Lindelof, Onana, Evans, Eriksen, Garnacho and Antony all leaving the club. You've also got the almost certain future fees of Hojlund and Rashford for a further £65m to come in. 

 

If you work out the total transfers in + wages vs. the tranfers out + wages, it's actually a fairly modest spend for such a big club.

 

He didn't say we'd go bust by the way, he said we'd run out of cash. Huge difference.

 

 

 

 

 

Just as a very simple litmus test on how good / bad your recent transfer activity and player development has been....

 

Which established players have you bought that you've then sold on for a profit versus the price you paid for them ? 

 

 

 

Edited October 29, 2025 by bobbydazzla

[Erikse]

1 hour ago, Froggy said:

 

Antony and Sancho are two horrible signings and arguably the worst in our history. Agreed. 

 

We paid £64m for Hojlund, and Napoli have an obligation to buy him for £38m after paying a £6m loan fee. He will be a PSR gain. 

 

If we go by transfer market we spent £220m this summer. We've sold Garnacho and Antony for around £60m. We've made £20m+ from sell on clauses and Sancho's penalty fee from Chelsea and we removed huge wages from the books with Rashford, Sancho, Hojlund, Lindelof, Onana, Evans, Eriksen, Garnacho and Antony all leaving the club. You've also got the almost certain future fees of Hojlund and Rashford for a further £65m to come in. 

 

If you work out the total transfers in + wages vs. the tranfers out + wages, it's actually a fairly modest spend for such a big club.

 

He didn't say we'd go bust by the way, he said we'd run out of cash. Huge difference.

 

 

 

 

“The alternative isn’t very tenable, is it? Which is the club goes bust at Christmas. We don’t want that. We don’t want that."

 

A huge difference that not even your owner understands? Literally says that he means going bust.

 

It gets better:

“Manchester United would have run out of cash (aka by his definition: go bust) by the end of this year - by the end of 2025 - after having me put $300m in and if we buy no new players in the summer."

 

Apparently the cost cutting measures has meant that a club about to go bust even with 0 signings could go on a spending spree instead (third highest net spend in the league in the summer).

 

 

Edited October 29, 2025 by Erikse

[Erikse]

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/GB1

 

Even after you subtract the fees from sales, Man Utds net spend on transfer fees is the highest in the Prem over the last 5 years. That's before you consider their massive wage spending.

 

 

Edited October 29, 2025 by Erikse

[Joe1984]

1 hour ago, Froggy said:

 Our financial situation isn't as good as people seem to think.

 

Don't let Sir Rat read this... 🤣

[Froggy]

1 hour ago, Erikse said:

 

“The alternative isn’t very tenable, is it? Which is the club goes bust at Christmas. We don’t want that. We don’t want that."

 

A huge difference that not even your owner understands? Literally says that he means going bust.

 

It gets better:

“Manchester United would have run out of cash (aka by his definition: go bust) by the end of this year - by the end of 2025 - after having me put $300m in and if we buy no new players in the summer."

 

Apparently the cost cutting measures has meant that a club about to go bust even with 0 signings could go on a spending spree instead (third highest net spend in the league in the summer).

 

He did clarify. Obviously Man United aren't going bust. We were in danger of running out of cash though, as he clarified.

 

And yes, the biggest club in the league had the third highest net spend*

 

*that's if you don't include the sell-on fees for Elanga, Carreras etc. The Sancho fee from Chelsea, the £38m obligation for Hojlund and the almost certain £26m incoming for Rashford, which would bring the net spend down to £80m, less than Newcastle, Forest, Leeds, Sunderland, Everton etc.

 

Again, our window was very modest.

[SteV]

2 hours ago, Froggy said:

and next summer I would guess it will be quite similar

Howay man

[Froggy]

1 hour ago, Erikse said:

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/GB1

 

Even after you subtract the fees from sales, Man Utds net spend on transfer fees is the highest in the Prem over the last 5 years. That's before you consider their massive wage spending.

 

Why 5 years? Why not just under INEOS? Wouldn't that be more fair? 

 

When I bring up your spend since Saudi bought you, you all talk about Ashley and Bruce to justify it. So why the hypocrisy?

[Froggy]

Just now, SteV said:

Howay man

 

I mean, have a look. The difference in our reported weekly payroll has halved over the last season or two and our two biggest earners are likely to leave the club next summer. 

[Joe1984]

1 minute ago, Froggy said:

 

Why 5 years? Why not just under INEOS? Wouldn't that be more fair? 

 

When I bring up your spend since Saudi bought you, you all talk about Ashley and Bruce to justify it. So why the hypocrisy?

Why the hypocrisy?

 

You do realise this is a football.fan forum right..? 😉

[SteV]

Just now, Froggy said:

 

I mean, have a look. The difference in our reported weekly payroll has halved over the last season or two and our two biggest earners are likely to leave the club next summer. 

It’s halved and is still roughly 40% more than ours.

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, Joe1984 said:

Why the hypocrisy?

 

You do realise this is a football.fan forum right..? 😉

 

The greatest one in all the land. 

 

Think INEOS/Amorim are doing a pretty good job in fixing the wages and getting rid of the arseholes from the club is all I'm saying. I don't know why we have to go back to horrific mistakes from previous management.

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, SteV said:

It’s halved and is still roughly 40% more than ours.

 

And it will be less again next summer, feel free to quote and revisit.

[SteV]

Just now, Froggy said:

 

And it will be less again next summer, feel free to quote and revisit.

We obviously have wildly different interpretations of “quite similar”.