United Forum
Go Back   United Forum > Manchester United > Football
Closed Thread
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 10:26 AM
S/Side.Red
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flixton
United's record of getting rid of shit players must be the worst in the league.
Because we have often had them on silly money at a point when their market value isn’t high. Whip mentions the signings 13-16 but at least the policy of buying fairly young and/or unestablished meant good resale potential for Di Maria, Memphis and Schneiderlin despite what disasters they were. Same would go for Darmian, Mata, Blind or Rojo if Mou had chosen to sell.

It’s giving out silly contracts to players without much resale value that usually £#%&!s us when it comes to sales.
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 10:29 AM
That Boy Ronaldo!
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flixton
United's record of getting rid of shit players must be the worst in the league.
High wages.

Although Mourinho & Ed have done well recouping some of the money recently.

It's impossible for a club like United to demand the level of players they do and run it for a profit. When we want rid of someone it's usually for a reason and clubs know that.
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 10:30 AM
S/Side.Red
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dunk
Lot's of smallish sales at a profit, I'd imagine.. Wimmer, NJie, that Dutch Striker, Bentaleb, Chadli, Mason etc..
Wimmer was a crazy one. Widely regarded as utter shite yet Hughes gave them £18m for him

Again, the benefit of buying young. You can convince someone that the potential will be realised elsewhere.
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 10:34 AM
atticusgrinch
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 20 times
It’s not. Our revenues are much higher than Everton’s
And this is why "net spend" is a laughable metric.
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 10:35 AM
That Boy Ronaldo!
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dunk
Lot's of smallish sales at a profit, I'd imagine.. Wimmer, NJie, that Dutch Striker, Bentaleb, Chadli, Mason etc..
Isn't he on loan?

Crazy the money they got for Mason, he's f***ing useless and ended up with £13m. Hull won't be seen in the PL for a long time and doing that sort of business it might be a blessing for them.
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 11:06 AM
andyroo
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whip Hubley
And our spending has been a reaction to the piss poor management and dross brought in between fergie and mourinho.

There's zero difference. You could argue the purchases of Bailly and Lindelof were to replace Vida and Rio, Pogba to replace Scholes, Lukaku Rooney, Sanchez (!) Giggs.... etc etc
Well Everton have had thirty years of chronic underinvestment

Quote:
Originally Posted by S/Side.Red
Wimmer was a crazy one. Widely regarded as utter shite yet Hughes gave them £18m for him

Again, the benefit of buying young. You can convince someone that the potential will be realised elsewhere.
What did we get back for Memphis?
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 03:53 PM
red in cumbria
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andyroo
Well Everton have had thirty years of chronic underinvestment
Yes, our blue scouse friend doesn't call themselves Kenwrights Wallet for nothing.
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 05:32 PM
20 times
 
Default

£20m

Utter turd of a player
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 05:44 PM
dunk
 
Default

 
Unread 17-01-2018, 06:28 PM
Tronics
 
Default

Quote:
"I'm very ambitious and I've come here because I want the club to push to the next level,"
Im pretty sure hanging around Arsenal like a bad smell hoping Wenger would play you as a striker, is the complete opposite of ambitious
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 06:39 PM
S/Side.Red
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by atticusgrinch
And this is why "net spend" is a laughable metric.
Nah, as much as that arsenal lad who coined it is a #@&%!, it’s clearly the biggest indication of the budget a club is working with. Which is the whole point of arguments over spending.

You’d think everyone already knows that, but then you get Sparks trying to suggest Everton spending the Lukaku, Stones and Barkley money should be mentioned alongside United and City being £200m out of pocket.
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 06:45 PM
Zorg
 
Default

Preferred my one :flounce:
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 06:50 PM
Sparky***
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S/Side.Red
Nah, as much as that arsenal lad who coined it is a #@&%!, it’s clearly the biggest indication of the budget a club is working with. Which is the whole point of arguments over spending.

You’d think everyone already knows that, but then you get Sparks trying to suggest Everton spending the Lukaku, Stones and Barkley money should be mentioned alongside United and City being £200m out of pocket.
Money spent on the team is money spent on the team regardless
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 07:12 PM
dunk
 
Thumbs up

Think yours was better tbf.
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 07:37 PM
atticusgrinch
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S/Side.Red
Nah, as much as that arsenal lad who coined it is a #@&%!, it’s clearly the biggest indication of the budget a club is working with. Which is the whole point of arguments over spending.

You’d think everyone already knows that, but then you get Sparks trying to suggest Everton spending the Lukaku, Stones and Barkley money should be mentioned alongside United and City being £200m out of pocket.
So why ignore other forms of income?
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 07:54 PM
redhegemony
 
Default

Soton must be in profit or at least owed a shedful by the scousers
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 08:01 PM
Zorg
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dunk
Think yours was better tbf.
Can’t believe I’m claiming credit for copying and pasting something
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 08:15 PM
redhegemony
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redhegemony
Soton must be in profit or at least owed a shedful by the scousers
+£90m over last 3 Years...
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 08:36 PM
sa7
 
Default

Racist
 
Unread 17-01-2018, 10:51 PM
S/Side.Red
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by atticusgrinch
So why ignore other forms of income?
The other forms of income are not being ignored. They are the very reason we have a financial advantage.

Complaining about City’s spending was bad enough. Now we are saying Everton are a financial rival
Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Similar Threads for: If Theo Walcott signs for Everton
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Everton negotiating Walcott transfer 20 times Football 21 12-01-2018 08:02 PM
Theo Walcott, cheeky bid? saffers Football 65 18-01-2013 11:42 PM
Theo walcott for £10million £#%&! KFC Football 132 12-12-2012 10:33 PM
Walcott's autobiography taff Football 26 17-08-2011 01:26 PM
Evra and Walcott wee man Football 16 26-04-2009 07:19 AM
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:47 PM.
Copyright ©2006 - 2024 utdforum.com. This site is in no way affiliated to Manchester United Football Club.