or to join or start a new Discussion

41 Comments
Article Rating     Not Rated Yet

Ed Woodward quotes

In today's Times Woodward was asked if United would pay £60m, £70m or more on a player.
He replied "Yes, absolutely"



Does anyone actually believe this? I am no LUHG/G&G brigade but this statement is absolutely ridiculous. If it was true then why were we blown out of the water for Hazard and Moura deals? In Hazards case it was just a matter of paying a few million more in the agent fees. Also if rumour are to be believed we are refusing to pay VAT on the Thiago deal.


How did things change suddenly in a year that we were unable to pay 35m for Hazard and now we are ready to pay 70m+ on any player?

posted on 14/7/13

Let's just face facts. We're a tight fisted club that has never nor will ever win anything.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------



Best response ever

posted on 14/7/13

We certainly should be in the market for
A couple of £30 million pound players if we have any European ambition.

posted on 14/7/13

The fact of the matter is, 30.75 our old record fee, will be surpassed soon enough. United are generating more revenue, so naturally the prices of signings will increase. Can we spend 70m? Of course we can. But it would have to be on a special player. With our revenue streams increasing every season, our ability to spend more does.

posted on 14/7/13

The morons on here actually use that fact the we "only" have a record spend of £31.5m on a single player as a bad thing?

I'm glad we have avoided the circus of the £50m+ player and still competed.

Of course, times are changing and prices keep going up, so we will break that record soon enough, for the right player... But we will also continue to look for young potential... and that is exciting.

posted on 14/7/13

Hopefully the young potential we will look for, will be of a much better standard than Zaha.

posted on 14/7/13

comment by RBW - I'll be the judge of that (U2335)
posted 2 hours, 5 minutes ago
If it was true then why were we blown out of the water for Hazard and Moura deals?
***
doesnt take a brain surgeon to work out what Ed means by his statement. Short of drawing pictures here goes...

Yes, United might pay 60-70m for a player.... but the ultimate criteria is that we get value for money... which narrows it down to exactly just 2 players in the world

=========

We should have thought about that before spending £24m on Anderson.

posted on 14/7/13

Of course, times are changing and prices keep going up, so we will break that record soon enough, for the right player... But we will also continue to look for young potential... and that is exciting.


Virtually every club does this. It's no exclusive to utd

posted on 14/7/13

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 14/7/13

"Don't you see that killing me is not going to bring back your apples?"

Edward Woodward as Sargeant Howie in the Wicker Man

comment by RB&W (U2335)

posted on 14/7/13

there is a big diff between 24m and 70m. Ok we paid 24 for Ando. but we wouldnt pay 70m for him nor would we have paid 70m for Hazard or Lucas whatsisname. We got off lightly with Hazard with Chelsea taking him away from us last year. Its as if some people think that Hazard was the difference between Chelsea and United last season?

I think Ed would pay 60-70m for Messi and maybe Ronaldo, but it stops there

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
0 Votes
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 0 from 0 votes

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available