Ed Woodward

Can someone explain to me what goes on in this £#%&!ers head?

https://www.football365.com/news/rep...r-deadline-day

Now I’m always reluctant to go balls out when we don’t really know what’s going on behind the scenes; for example we have no idea what authorisation he was given by the Glazers in the pursuit of Sancho, so it’s plausible that we might never have been able to bid the 108m no matter what. Of course that doesn’t excuse him from walking away sooner however. But this is different, and Romero (and his mrs) are right to be pissed off. It’s about common business sense and how we treat people.

Romero’s no spring chicken, and he won’t play here anymore. We got him for free and he’s done a good job for us. If this report is to be believed we would rather lose 7m+ by paying his wage to rot on the bench and missing out on a 2m loan fee in favour of holding out for an 8m transfer fee. In what world does this make financial sense? And that’s without even considering it might just be the right thing to £#%&!ing do, and the only way we’ll even get a fee is to let him play elsewhere first, ala Smalling.

Is it possible this guy is actually a moron masquerading as a financial whiz kid and that’s why we’re stuck with all this dead lumber?

Originally Posted by utd99

Can someone explain to me what goes on in this £#%&!ers head?

https://www.football365.com/news/rep...r-deadline-day

Now I’m always reluctant to go balls out when we don’t really know what’s going on behind the scenes; for example we have no idea what authorisation he was given by the Glazers in the pursuit of Sancho, so it’s plausible that we might never have been able to bid the 108m no matter what. Of course that doesn’t excuse him from walking away sooner however. But this is different, and Romero (and his mrs) are right to be pissed off. It’s about common business sense and how we treat people.

Romero’s no spring chicken, and he won’t play here anymore. We got him for free and he’s done a good job for us. If this report is to be believed we would rather lose 7m+ by paying his wage to rot on the bench and missing out on a 2m loan fee in favour of holding out for an 8m transfer fee. In what world does this make financial sense? And that’s without even considering it might just be the right thing to £#%&!ing do, and the only way we’ll even get a fee is to let him play elsewhere first, ala Smalling.

Is it possible this guy is actually a moron masquerading as a financial whiz kid and that’s why we’re stuck with all this dead lumber?

You think?

How are we losing out on £7m?

If you read the article, it says that part of the reason is that we were reluctant to strengthen a team which will likely compete with us for the CL spots, and also several clubs are still interested

Originally Posted by AK14

You think?

PS £#%&! Romero.

Originally Posted by utd99

Can someone explain to me what goes on in this £#%&!ers head?

https://www.football365.com/news/rep...r-deadline-day

Now I’m always reluctant to go balls out when we don’t really know what’s going on behind the scenes; for example we have no idea what authorisation he was given by the Glazers in the pursuit of Sancho, so it’s plausible that we might never have been able to bid the 108m no matter what. Of course that doesn’t excuse him from walking away sooner however. But this is different, and Romero (and his mrs) are right to be pissed off. It’s about common business sense and how we treat people.

Romero’s no spring chicken, and he won’t play here anymore. We got him for free and he’s done a good job for us. If this report is to be believed we would rather lose 7m+ by paying his wage to rot on the bench and missing out on a 2m loan fee in favour of holding out for an 8m transfer fee. In what world does this make financial sense? And that’s without even considering it might just be the right thing to £#%&!ing do, and the only way we’ll even get a fee is to let him play elsewhere first, ala Smalling.

Is it possible this guy is actually a moron masquerading as a financial whiz kid and that’s why we’re stuck with all this dead lumber?

He's more likely a financial whiz kid masquerading as a moron.

The Glazers aren't stupid. They want more money. All the time.

Originally Posted by utd99

Can someone explain to me what goes on in this £#%&!ers head?

https://www.football365.com/news/rep...r-deadline-day

Now I’m always reluctant to go balls out when we don’t really know what’s going on behind the scenes; for example we have no idea what authorisation he was given by the Glazers in the pursuit of Sancho, so it’s plausible that we might never have been able to bid the 108m no matter what. Of course that doesn’t excuse him from walking away sooner however. But this is different, and Romero (and his mrs) are right to be pissed off. It’s about common business sense and how we treat people.

Romero’s no spring chicken, and he won’t play here anymore. We got him for free and he’s done a good job for us. If this report is to be believed we would rather lose 7m+ by paying his wage to rot on the bench and missing out on a 2m loan fee in favour of holding out for an 8m transfer fee. In what world does this make financial sense? And that’s without even considering it might just be the right thing to £#%&!ing do, and the only way we’ll even get a fee is to let him play elsewhere first, ala Smalling.

Is it possible this guy is actually a moron masquerading as a financial whiz kid and that’s why we’re stuck with all this dead lumber?

Shock horror, rich kid who went to private school probably wasn’t intelligent enough but still graduated because his parents paid the money, then gets jobs in the financial sector even though hes staggeringly staggeringly incompetent. It’s a familiar tale.

Originally Posted by Ethers

How are we losing out on £7m?

If you read the article, it says that part of the reason is that we were reluctant to strengthen a team which will likely compete with us for the CL spots, and also several clubs are still interested

Because we pay him 100,000 a week to not play and miss out on a 2m loan fee.

Originally Posted by Switching Off

PS £#%&! Romero.

Why?

Originally Posted by utd99

Because we pay him 100,000 a week to not play and miss out on a 2m loan fee.



Why?

But that would mean him staying here for the rest of his contract, which clearly isn’t going to happen. Worst case scenario is he gets shifted at the next window.

Originally Posted by programmes?

He's more likely a financial whiz kid masquerading as a moron.

The Glazers aren't stupid. They want more money. All the time.

He may make them more money on the commercial side but he’s hemorrhaging dough on the football side while turning us into a laughing stock. Surely even Darcy Glazer understands this.

Originally Posted by utd99

Because we pay him 100,000 a week to not play and miss out on a 2m loan fee.



Why?

Must have one eye on January, because as you say, his wages are too high for a reserve keeper. Is he 3rd choice now that Henderson is back?

Grant still here??

4 keepers.

Originally Posted by Ethers

But that would mean him staying here for the rest of his contract, which clearly isn’t going to happen. Worst case scenario is he gets shifted at the next window.

Those numbers were just for this year. Why talk about what might happen in the future when it could, and should, have happened now? It’s not even as though he could have played against us.

Anyway, the Romero situation is just one example. How much money are we going to lose just this year on players who have no hope of actually playing?

Originally Posted by Cream

Must have one eye on January, because as you say, his wages are too high for a reserve keeper. Is he 3rd choice now that Henderson is back?

Grant still here??

4 keepers.

Mad.

Originally Posted by Sparky***

Shock horror, rich kid who went to private school probably wasn’t intelligent enough but still graduated because his parents paid the money, then gets jobs in the financial sector even though hes staggeringly staggeringly incompetent. It’s a familiar tale.

shots fired at city boy winthorpe

Originally Posted by Jack Duckworth

shots fired at city boy winthorpe

Ed Windthorpe.

Might have a sticker there Jack.

Originally Posted by Ethers

How are we losing out on £7m?

If you read the article, it says that part of the reason is that we were reluctant to strengthen a team which will likely compete with us for the CL spots, and also several clubs are still interested

This is it on the Everton deal.

He'll go to MLS in the next week or 2 and we'll make a small loss instead.

Woodward is still a #@&%!, however.

Originally Posted by Sparky***

Shock horror, rich kid who went to private school probably wasn’t intelligent enough but still graduated because his parents paid the money, then gets jobs in the financial sector even though hes staggeringly staggeringly incompetent. It’s a familiar tale.

it is. you need to get a new act, really.

Originally Posted by utd99

Because we pay him 100,000 a week

How do you know we actually pay him £100k a week?

I expect thats a reported amount from the media but I doubt that will be his basic wage.

We will pay him a basic amount but he's then likely to get appearence money, win bonus, TV money and a number of others which he won't get if he not in the match day squad. So he won't be on anything like £100k although he will be on a high very good wage.

I'd also expect that his wages will be offset against the tax United pay as they would be classed as a business but i'm not an accountant so i'm flying a bit of a kyte there.

Originally Posted by LaPaz

How do you know we actually pay him £100k a week?

I expect thats a reported amount from the media but I doubt that will be his basic wage.

We will pay him a basic amount but he's then likely to get appearence money, win bonus, TV money and a number of others which he won't get if he not in the match day squad. So he won't be on anything like £100k although he will be on a high very good wage.

I'd also expect that his wages will be offset against the tax United pay as they would be classed as a business but i'm not an accountant so i'm flying a bit of a kyte there.

Hi Ed.

Originally Posted by AK14

Hi Ed.

Originally Posted by AK14

You think?

If only there were years of corroborating evidence.

Originally Posted by jem

it is. you need to get a new act, really.

Hit a nerve there did I Jeremy?