Makis

2 hours ago, MikeO said:

Leighton Baines is 5'7" (two inches smaller) and you couldn't describe him as "strong" I don't think but he's managed OK in the PL (and for England) for the last decade plus. Wing back has no need to be big and strong, needs to be quick and clever. Not saying Jonjoe is necessarily the man for the job but your reasons for writing him off are wide of the mark imo.

He has struggled defensively in the BL, tho. Decent going forward but not so when defending. 

Probably yeah, but it would mean not strenghtening in other areas. I think we defo need another defensive midfielder and a right midfielder as priority. Also a CB. These three would cost 100 million. That plus at least 50 million for Grealish isn't happening.

Neither is very good on the right. Buying Grealish is like when Walsh & Co bought all those #10s. Just because you can, you shouldn't. There are at least six positions that need strengthening before LM. 

We already have Bernard & Iwobi for that position so rather spend that money on a right winger. Brands won't have hundreds of millions to spend and LM is way down in the priority list.

I would argue that it's no worse than the other big leagues. There are duds from every one of them.

Apparently we are signing a Brazilian centre-back from Lille called Gabriel. 22 years, left-sided.

Wow. So Tosun, who is basically useless and Brands has trouble getting rid of solved something? He cost, what, 25 million and plus probably around 20 more million in wages.Walcott cost 20 million and about 100kpw or 5 million per year. So those two cost the club in the region of 100 million pounds. Great solution.

19 minutes ago, pete0 said:

Not much choice given the squad he inherited. Silva got Richarlison, Bernard, Tosun, Gomes, Zouma and Digne. Given those players to you not think Alladyce could have done better? 

No, considering his history for the past ten years. And it was he who got Tosun and Walcott. If he had been at the heml we woud never have gotten those players.

Yeah, I couldn't really watch us properly under Allardyce. I had the game on in the background in case something happens which rarely did.

8 hours ago, pete0 said:

He got us 8th with a much worse squad. We'd be in a much better position had we kept him. Much rather we kept him until Ancelotti was available than endure the absolute fraud that is Marco Silva. 

Some people have short memories. You really rather watch the team get about one shot on goal per match?

Traore is ridiculously good at the moment and would cost way over 50 million. More like 80 I would guess. He would sort out the right side but don't think he is in our price range.

We defo should want Europe. Even a modest success is worth easily over 10 million. Consider that people wishing a 60000 seater stadium, that 8k seats would bring 2-3 million extra per year so getting through the group stages in Europe would be worth several years income from that big stadium (assuming it's sold out every match).

Plus there's the prestige and extra pulling power both for players and new sponsorships.

36 minutes ago, Aidan said:

Literally anybody would improve us right now. Even if it isn't a loan signing at least a rotation player we can have for a few years. 

Christ our Midfield is championship level. Davies, Morgan and delph... and Siggy doesn't even fit into our system. 

Why do you keep assuming I want us to spend 100m and 250k a week on a player? 

That's exactly the reasoning why Tosun and Walcott were signed. I'm pretty sure there would have been better players to be had for the 50 million spent on transfers plus around 200k per week on wages than those two.

Evans has left for Paderborn on a permanent transfer.

So you would have said no to Beardsley and Watson?

Think he had three available midfielders and the third was Schneiderlin.

3 hours ago, pete0 said:

I used to sit by corporation tax inspectors. (That said I can't remember for sure what happens with the transfer fees, sure they see them as one off costs but depends on the accountant as ultimately they could pick either way or both). 

Edit: thinking about the bookkeeping side if player costs were seen as an asset then we wouldn't see a loss in the accounts as there'd be an equal value asset to balance the cost of buying him. 

Edit 2: page 21 of Man U's most recent accounts advise they use the "fair value" of the player and contact costs initially, and then the contract costs on renewal. 

Note fair value is ambiguous, it's not necessarily what they paid. It can be quite complex and well beyond my very limited knowledge of accounting. 

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00095489/filing-history

Well, you have to take deprecation into account in any business. If you as a business owner buy a machine you might consider it takes 5 years before you have to replace it. So 20% if its value is deprecated every year.

This is also what it says in Everton's financial statement:

Under FRS 102, the Club is required to
capitalise the cost of acquiring a player’s
registration (transfer fee) and then
amortise it over the length of the player’s
contract, effectively reducing the balance
sheet value of a player over that time.
No increase in the valuation of a player is
permitted until that player is sold and a
revised value is crystallised in the profit
and loss account through a one-off profit
or loss on disposal.

3 hours ago, Matt said:

The point about wages is that the owning club has to take it into account when selling - you pay the end of the contract to the employee (I’m basing this on sacked managers being paid off, not fact)

I don't think it works like that. If that was the case the club should have already kicked out some of the wasters.

32 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Would that be because they weren’t purchased. 

That would be if it works as I have read but not if they work like Pete explained.

Pete,  do you have some sources for that? I've read differently. For instance, home-grown players are worth nothing in the books as far as I know.

Player's value is very simply the price bought versus how long he has in his contract left. So for a 30 million pound player on a five year contract value drops by six million each year. And players who go beyond that original contract (sign a new one) are AFAIK considered to have no value. They don't really try to guess what players are worth in the accounts.

Chelsea did the same with Abrahimovic. They own way more than that to him. Giving money directly to a club is not exactly simple so that's why they do it like this.

It also wouldn't make much sense if they called the loans in. They wouldn't get more than scrapes. A player firesale would bring only a fraction of their real value and apart from that there isn't that many saleable assets. If they wanted to recoup their money they would rather sell the club to someone else because the rest of the value is in intangible assets, i.e. Premier League status and sponsorship deals.

Why not a 50-goal striker while we are at it?

Walsh may have framed that to put him into a good light. For instance, how many other players that weren't signed did he suggest? Did he really suggest Maguire and someone else at the club bought Keane or did he actually suggest both?

How many training sessions has Ancelotti had so far? Five? No wonder they haven't picked up the tactics yet.