Man Utd spending won't end with £41M trio
-
gp ah gp
ur plans to mock man u failed once more -
nah this is not mocking if u are too smart to understand thatOriginally posted by gigabyte14:gp ah gp
ur plans to mock man u failed once more -
that the agendaOriginally posted by stellazio:only arsenal and their fans got the right now.
Liverpool must see if they spend alot this year
man utd fans confirm lost the rights already and somemore they going to sign one extra striker
and zocoss how many flops @ man utd why u never state ? forlan Djemba Veron and many more
man utd also wasted alot of money on transfer funds not any lesser than chelsea over the past 5 years -
Oh man, if i am to just take the last 5 yrs... you will lose big time man... The one thing that you seem to forget also is the players united bought will most likely still have after sales value... The Rooney, the Ronaldo... Can sell for $80m today... But the Shev, the Ballack and the SWP... i am not too sure lah... seem to me like all lose money one... Big money somemore... And you mentioned Veron, you know who man u sold Veron to? Guess lah... and you know how much... At least when he was with man u, he played 51 matches for them and scored 14 goals, they also won the title... But when they sold him to the other club, he only played less than 8 matches and only score a single goal before they loan him out...
Know your football?
-
Alex stop dreaming abt Berbatov.. dont ruin another player
-
Well saidOriginally posted by zocoss:I think the thread starter missed a very important point here... Fergie is given a budget of $25m per season. Last season, they didn't use it cos the money spent on Carrick was generated by selling Rvn and thanks to Chelsea a John guy for a combine sum of $22.5m ($10.5 +$12).
Carrick cost $14m and will only reach $18.6 should Man u continue to win the EPL title and in Europe too over the duration of his present contract. Taking all this into account, United actually didn't use a cent from their last season's budget.
Profits from sales $22.5 - highest possible at $18.6 and a reserve keeper at $2.5... United still had a surplus of $1.4m and this also does not take into account that they sold some youth players too for a few hundred thousands...
So if it was base on this simple count, United actually will have $50+ millions for next season as they will have 2 seasons budgets... and also not taking into account the players they may sell during this transfer window.
The thread starter also fail to realise that while Chelsea reported a $80m lost recently and a $140m lost the year before, United still manage to post a high net profit gain during these periods... The Chelsea owner may be very rich but the United owners are not. The money spent must be earn from the sport itself just like the new Pool owners will do too and not some oil well in Russia. So in both cases there is a big difference... If you have work hard and earn from it, then no one can say you don't deserve it.
And if the Thread starter's intention is to count his chickens before his eggs again... He better pray that he won't have to eat humble pie like that Newcastle event...
Anyway, just for the TS info... no offence to all the other chelsea fans... The combine amount united spent for last season and the coming one is still much lesser than the $83 million chelsea spent just last season alone... or the $56m in 2005 and the $74m in 2004... TS, give it a thought before you start shooting your mouth again...
-
actually, GP, you got a good point.
MUFC was Chelsea-like in the past. They just over-power people, throw huge sums of money to get their targets...
But now, Chelsea is the one doing that.
As for 2007, spending so much, well, we got one title, went to FA Cup Finals, UCL Semi-finals, and with Chelsea paying us for Mikel, selling RVN, it gave us a bumper... And then on top of that, 50M was given. So we spend on Evra, Vidic, & Carrick. As for the recent buys, Anderson and Nani, well, they are investments, to replace Giggs and Scholes.
I did Zcoss did the numbers for you already.
Gunners won't need cause they are all young. Liverpool may want but they are replacing. Chelsea, may need cause their two recent buys are flops. Spurs are buying too.
I am trying to talk sense, but if you start flaming, then no point continuing.. -
if I were you, I will dig the dagger and mentioned the last 4 years cause MUFC won nothing while Chelsea won two titles. But seems you don't know your history too well.Originally posted by ghimpheng:that the agenda
Liverpool must see if they spend alot this year
man utd fans confirm lost the rights already and somemore they going to sign one extra striker
and zocoss how many flops @ man utd why u never state ? forlan Djemba Veron and many more
man utd also wasted alot of money on transfer funds not any lesser than chelsea over the past 5 years
MUFC did buy a lot of flops, but that's due to scouts' report. And it is a bit like gamble.
But for me, Forlan was never a flop, just ask Dudek, I bet he may piss in his pants, or that infamous goal when Veron pass to Forlan to stick it in Chelsea's net. Those were justifiable of their price..
one thing, don't be so bitter leh, open up and talk about soccer in general.
I think you may enjoy it, rather than keep getting whacked by others.
not tired meh?? -
and lastly, MUFC will stop liao lah..
I think old glacers in US is panting hard at the amount of greenbacks slipping thru his fingers... -
actually now that clubs are getting richer, epl clubs that is.
you gotta buy in order to survive and give urself a chance.
look at arsenal, sure they produce lotsa good young talents, but see how they're struggling.
if you can't beat them, join em!
the academies just don't produce enough nowadays, you gotta buy from all over the world. if you look at barcelona and real madrid, they've been buying all along.
-
MUFC was doing well with their youth policy, but it seems to all, they are going to all parts and "capturing", so now only those who stay within certain distances, can be poached... So with that, most talented youngsters may not go into major clubs till later..Originally posted by stellazio:actually now that clubs are getting richer, epl clubs that is.
you gotta buy in order to survive and give urself a chance.
look at arsenal, sure they produce lotsa good young talents, but see how they're struggling.
if you can't beat them, join em!
the academies just don't produce enough nowadays, you gotta buy from all over the world. if you look at barcelona and real madrid, they've been buying all along.
And nowadays, results are expected to be immediate.. cause there are so many cash targets, and failure to meet them are disastrous..
imagine MUFC not winning anything... maybe one season, but if prolong, I bet the club may do a Leeds... -
x2. 50m is the budget given to fergie, he haven exceed, why you already kpkb so much?Originally posted by zocoss:I think the thread starter missed a very important point here... Fergie is given a budget of $25m per season. Last season, they didn't use it cos the money spent on Carrick was generated by selling Rvn and thanks to Chelsea a John guy for a combine sum of $22.5m ($10.5 +$12).
Carrick cost $14m and will only reach $18.6 should Man u continue to win the EPL title and in Europe too over the duration of his present contract. Taking all this into account, United actually didn't use a cent from their last season's budget.
Profits from sales $22.5 - highest possible at $18.6 and a reserve keeper at $2.5... United still had a surplus of $1.4m and this also does not take into account that they sold some youth players too for a few hundred thousands...
So if it was base on this simple count, United actually will have $50+ millions for next season as they will have 2 seasons budgets... and also not taking into account the players they may sell during this transfer window.
The thread starter also fail to realise that while Chelsea reported a $80m lost recently and a $140m lost the year before, United still manage to post a high net profit gain during these periods... The Chelsea owner may be very rich but the United owners are not. The money spent must be earn from the sport itself just like the new Pool owners will do too and not some oil well in Russia. So in both cases there is a big difference... If you have work hard and earn from it, then no one can say you don't deserve it.
And if the Thread starter's intention is to count his chickens before his eggs again... He better pray that he won't have to eat humble pie like that Newcastle event...
Anyway, just for the TS info... no offence to all the other chelsea fans... The combine amount united spent for last season and the coming one is still much lesser than the $83 million chelsea spent just last season alone... or the $56m in 2005 and the $74m in 2004... TS, give it a thought before you start shooting your mouth again...
and if man utd didn't win the EPL, you think we can get this amount of money to buy players? somemore scholes and giggs are getting old, don't tell me don't need find people to replace leh -
eh ghimpheng
ur source that man utd will continue to spend from where? tribalfootball.com?
i got another source:Gill: Spending may now stop
http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=469658&CPID=8&clid=1&lid=2&title=Gill:+Spending+may+now+stop&channel=football_home&
Manchester United chief executive David Gill has confirmed the club have done the majority of their summer spending in the past 24 hours.
The Premiership champions announced deals to sign youngsters Anderson and Nani on Wednesday evening before completing the capture of England midfielder Owen Hargreaves from Bayern Munich on Thursday.
Although United are sure to be linked with further summer signings, Gill insists that more arrivals at Old Trafford are unlikely, having already paid out in the region of £50million for the midfield trio.
"We will see what happens over the next two or three months but by and large that will be the major element of our business," Gill told MUTV.
"If a player comes up that Sir Alex (Ferguson) is convinced will make us better, I am sure we will find the funds but that is a major bit of business we have done this week."
Meanwhile, assistant manager Carlos Queiroz believes Nani and Anderson can link up with Cristiano Ronaldo and Wayne Rooney to form an unstoppable attacking force for years to come.
Both players still need to undergo medicals with The Red Devils, but Sky Sports News understands Anderson (pictured) is on his way to England to complete his switch.
"It is really worth stopping to imagine what an attack formed by Wayne Rooney, Cristiano Ronaldo, Nani and Anderson could do," Queiroz said.
"They are players who blend creativity and magic into football.
"It really is wonderful to be able to mould and enhance their capabilities.
"I have always worked with players in this formative process and this is a significant investment in Manchester United prospects for the next 10 years."
mine skysports leh! i don't know why but i like to suan you[/quote] -
-
Spending isn't a problem... As long as you earned it from the game, they are free to spend what. United have been profitable over the last few years and really, they still need a striker... that is a fact unless they decide to go with an injury prone Saha again for next season... i belief they may buy another. But i also belief they will also sell one or two players within this next 3 months to make up the difference...Originally posted by Dead_Man_Inc:eh ghimpheng
ur source that man utd will continue to spend from where? tribalfootball.com?
i got another source: -
good thing that man utd and arsenal fans can't kpkb about chelsea spendingOriginally posted by stellazio:actually now that clubs are getting richer, epl clubs that is.
you gotta buy in order to survive and give urself a chance.
look at arsenal, sure they produce lotsa good young talents, but see how they're struggling.
if you can't beat them, join em!
the academies just don't produce enough nowadays, you gotta buy from all over the world. if you look at barcelona and real madrid, they've been buying all along.
they expand stadium and buy expensive players
arsenal too the emirates stadium cost alot they choose not to spend it on players instead they spend in on emirates stadium
liverpool going to spend (maybe not) -
Anderson agent nets £4M from Man Utd move
Portuguese super agent Jorge Mendes has made a stunning £4 million from Manchester United's capture of Porto starlet Anderson.
The Daily Mail says Mendes flew to England last night with his 19-year-old client, who has a medical at Old Trafford today following a deal now known to be worth £20.4m.
Portuguese sources say Mendes has been paid 20 per cent of the fee after originally helping Porto buy the "new Ronaldinho" from Brazilian club Gremio in 2006.
It is understood that Mendes contributed 20 per cent of the £3.75m Porto paid Gremio and until recently still effectively "owned" a fifth of the player.
But Anderson's switch to United - still to be ratified by the Home Office and subject to the medical - has seen that arrangement come to an end with Mendes now being paid by Porto in full.
spendings increaese by 4. million which means 47 million in total -
Man Utd approach Bolton for striker Anelka
Manchester United have made an approach to Bolton Wanderers for striker Nicolas Anelka.
Despite splashing out over £40 million this week on midfield trio Owen Hargreaves, Anderson and Nani, United boss Sir Alex Ferguson remains in the market for a quality goalscorer.
The Daily Mail says United have made discreet enquiries to Bolton about Anelka but also have Barcelona's Samuel Eto'o and Tottenham's Dimitar Berbatov And Ajax striker Klaas Jan Huntelaar on their list of targets.
none of them is cheap -
the emirates stadium was needed to make arsenal bigger.Originally posted by ghimpheng:good thing that man utd and arsenal fans can't kpkb about chelsea spending
they expand stadium and buy expensive players
arsenal too the emirates stadium cost alot they choose not to spend it on players instead they spend in on emirates stadium
liverpool going to spend (maybe not)
plus the increased in revenue from gate receipts will recover back in the long long run. -
WOW! that's some group of prime-time divers ManU just got there! Guess EPL gonna overtake Serie A in those dubious acts.....Originally posted by ghimpheng:Man Utd spending won't end with £43.3M trio
Manchester United boss Sir Alex Ferguson's spending won't end at the combined fee of £43.3 million for midfield trio Owen Hargreaves £18m, Nani £14.5m and Anderson £17.8m
Fergie still wants one, or possibly two, new strikers and the likes of Barcelona's Samuel Eto'o and Tottenham's Dimitar Berbatov are still high on his agenda, says the Daily Mail.
United's massive outlay will also silence doubters over the Glazer family's commitment to the club, which was questioned last week.
Who is Spending The Money Now ? Manchester United And Ferguson is going to make more big money signings - cannot kpkb about chelsea spending liao right ? We so far spend much lesser than you all but our big name signing will arrive soon =D
Liverpool yet to spend
-
u buy what u need, nowadays there're very few cheap transfers left. with the inflated market rate and big clubs getting richer. the smaller clubs will naturally wana milk them as much as possible.Originally posted by ghimpheng:Man Utd approach Bolton for striker Anelka
Manchester United have made an approach to Bolton Wanderers for striker Nicolas Anelka.
Despite splashing out over £40 million this week on midfield trio Owen Hargreaves, Anderson and Nani, United boss Sir Alex Ferguson remains in the market for a quality goalscorer.
The Daily Mail says United have made discreet enquiries to Bolton about Anelka but also have Barcelona's Samuel Eto'o and Tottenham's Dimitar Berbatov And Ajax striker Klaas Jan Huntelaar on their list of targets.
none of them is cheap
thats why u see chelsea paying so much for a player, because they know chelsea can afford, and chelsea will pay. -
yep, it's official, the Portugal diving team - Ronaldo and Nani..Originally posted by gangsterkillar:WOW! that's some group of prime-time divers ManU just got there! Guess EPL gonna overtake Serie A in those dubious acts.....
Ace Divers.. -
Wenger knows wat Arsenal wants.. Arsenal rather focus on the youngsters (as you all knows that Arsenal ain't that rich) and make full use of them.. As you all can see, Cesc Fabregas was 1 of the youngsters that Wenger has bought and look, he's playing in regular basis..Originally posted by ghimpheng:good thing that man utd and arsenal fans can't kpkb about chelsea spending
they expand stadium and buy expensive players
arsenal too the emirates stadium cost alot they choose not to spend it on players instead they spend in on emirates stadium
liverpool going to spend (maybe not)
Just my 2 cent worth of post..
Cheers.. -
no it wasn't really necessaryOriginally posted by stellazio:the emirates stadium was needed to make arsenal bigger.
plus the increased in revenue from gate receipts will recover back in the long long run.
what they really need to bring in is quality players
they choose to spend it on stadium and not players so arsenal fans also had no right to say that chelsea use massive amount of money while their own club don't -
u think ferguson not going to bring in a striker ?Originally posted by Dead_Man_Inc:eh ghimpheng
ur source that man utd will continue to spend from where? tribalfootball.com?
i got another source:
the man utd epl hope will go burst in bubble
if they bring in a quality striker more chances of winning the epl