👊🏽♥️

It's his salary . United can't sell players because they are on high wages other clubs can't match . Hopefully the club earns the 15M in add-ons

Have to cut our losses and move on

Sales and Klarna.

Greenwood - 25mill Casemiro- 25 mill Sancho - 35 mill Wan bissaka - 25 mill Maguire/lindelof 20 mill Transfer fund 130+50 mill =180 mill -de ligt - 35mill -zirkzee -35mill -yoro - 50 mill -Ugarte - 45mill Transfer funds 180mill - 165mill = +15 mill

Amortization

Transfer aren't funded the way many channels suggest. Players are bought on credit, be that installments agreed with the selling club or via your own credit facility. SJR has personally just cleared 120m off our 300m rolling credit facility, this is what we use finance player fees. There were reports that we only had 35m in "cash" for transfers a few weeks ago in the rags. However we don't need "cash" so that sounded like a BS story to me. That could have meant a couple of things, we were showing 35m cash in bank on last published figures, again irrelevant, as covered above. Secondly it could have been that we only had 35m left of our 23/24 PSR budget left until 30th June. I didn't look into it that deeply at the time as was happy it was BS. 1st July started a new PSR financial year, which works on a 3 year rolling calculation, that means the big losses we made 3 years ago have now dropped off the PSR radar. That is a big boost and why we only made low ball offers before 1st July. Also, as far as PSR and FFP goes, player fees are not accounted for as the top line full fee figure we see in the headlines. So a 50m fee doesn't come out of our 24/25 PSR/FFP budget, it is "amortised" ie spread out, over the length of the contract we give the new player, together with his wages. So if we give said player a 5 year deal, on 200k per week wages, that 50m fee and 10m per year wages is accounted for as 20m per year out of our PSR budget, NOT 60m in year one and 10m there after. So arguably, if your PSR/FFP budget allows you 100m to spend, that gives you scope to bring in five players on 200k per week costing 50m each, straight away. Obviously you need to be able to sustain your profits/income to levels that allow for that PSR/FFP allowance for each of those 4 following seasons too. So, the fact that we have got Varane's 340k per week and Martial's 250k wages off our 24/25 books, means we have, all things being equal, allowed ourselves a 30m per year budget to spend just from those two player departures alone. This is why we are pushing to get rid of Casemiro 350k per week, Sancho 295k, Eriksen 150k and maybe even Rashford on 325k+, as this would give us a much bigger allowance to go big. As for the fees we get for them, anything over what is left amortised on the books, ie what we technically have left to pay on them, is a profit, anything below is a loss and affects our PSR_FFP budget positively or negatively. So we need to get certain minimum fees for players if we are not to show losses, eg. 29m for Sancho, 30m for Casemiro etc. So for a club like us, as long as turnover/profit levels remain positive and our credit facility terms are reasonable and don't impact future PSR/FFP assessments, we can spend as much as we want to borrow. Obviously due to the Glazer damage that is still a balancing act for Ineos to manage, however we have far more spending capability than the club and the press let's on, hence all these targets and bids. I'm no accountant but this is my basic understanding. It is the reason Chelsea were giving out 8 year contracts until the regulations were changed to maximum amortisation being capped at 5 years. One extra point, the reason we have seen clubs selling no name players to each other for silly high fees before the 30th June PSR deadline is because unlike purchase fees that are amortised over the players contracts, selling fees go straight into your current PSR budget in full for the accounting period you make the deal in. So the loophole the clubs with PSR shortfalls were exploiting, was to say you sell us X player for 25m and we'll sell you Y player fir 25m. Both clubs then get 25m straight onto their current books, covering their current PSR shortfall, yet can account for it/pay for that 25m at 5m per year. It's basically like us borrowing cash on our credit card to get by today but the issue is, they still have to pay for it down the line. Fine if you stay successful, a Leeds Utd situation beckons if you don't, potential ticking time 💣 Hope that helps and isn't too far off for any real football accounting experts reading 😀

books don’t get counted again for 2 years, they will worry about that later

Of course, RMC would say that. Maybe something less bias?

@@sakshyamacharya5594 to be fair they were saying it from a PSG perspective. But they are pulling out because of madrid

@Giggsboson but I don't think the new structure people would waste their time on a player if there wasn't a chance. Glazers did it with FDJ, who didn't want to leave.

If those 11 start I think United is starting strong...what are you hoping for Mbappe and Haaland to start ahead of Saliba and Van Dijk for United!

@@arpitkulshreshtha3513dude is just negative With that 11 we good

I doubt Branflake if Everton doesn't bring price down. De Ligt yes

Wrong