Angelo Henriquez Price-tag

Welbeck

comment by Reddevils double (U12215)
posted 2 hours, 1 minute ago
I think we need to consider the ability of the player when comparing fees though.

RVP at £24m is a much better player than welbeck at £16m so that doesn't look to bad a deal irrelevant f years soft on their deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have to consider the time in the window the transfers were made, the fact RVP's transfer was a couple of years ago, the length of contracts, their age, injury record and home grown status.

Berbatov.

comment by Reddevils double (U12215)
posted 4 hours, 10 minutes ago
I think we need to consider the ability of the player when comparing fees though.

RVP at £24m is a much better player than welbeck at £16m so that doesn't look to bad a deal irrelevant f years soft on their deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I disagree.

Welbeck has massive sell-on potential.

They could easily make a profit on him after having 3-4 years service from him.

Next to no chance we'll sell RvP for anything like what we paid after 3-4 years service.

And anyone saying we're not a selling club need to remember we're a business and making money is what the Glazers do. Saying we have no interest in excess, whatever that is, is a bit wrong for me.

They want to maximise all returns, just like any able-minded businessman would.

Both RVP wanted out, were on the last season of their contract and in RVP's case, selling to a rival. Welbeck went for less, was not in his last year of his contract and considering players have gone for a lot more than him this transfer window when they should be around the same price it was underselling him. Also we sold to a rival, Arsenal were willing to sell RVP to a non rival for £11m. We undersold him to a rival when it would have been the norm to charge extra to sell to a rival.

Sorry, but our team stick at getting the best for the club.

Both RVP and Young****

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 21 minutes ago
Shinjisshin (U1700)

Well you're wrong thenif the Glazers were so keen to make large sums of money from players that we sold, they would implement it in the business strategy. However, from our dealings it is clear, it is not a huge factor to them. Unlike Chelsea, we don't need to sell to balance our books or turn a profit. It is clear how the Glazers are running the club and turning a profit is key but not by selling players, as evidenced by us selling players on the cheap since they have become our owners, except Ronaldo who was an exception.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe you're right. Seems strange that millionaire businessmen knowingly just think, "ahh don't worry we make money from commercial deals, we'll just let Arsenal strim us of some of our hard earned cash by selling Welbeck on the cheap, because we're not that bothered".

Seems very strange to me. However, I can see where you get your conclusion from; we do sell cheap.

Kagawa being a brilliant example.

Chelsea sign these players, send them out on loan, they do well and they sell for a healthy profit.
__________________

But it's about timing as well. Chelsea sell their players when they have had a good season, on loan or whatever. When our players do well on loan we don't sell them - we bring them back into our squad...Then we try to sell them when their stock is low and we want to get rid.

If we had sold Cleverley after his spell at Wigan, for example, we would have got much more for him. If we had sold Nani after his impressive season we would have got £30m+ for him. If we had loaned out Welbeck and then sold him after a successful year on loan at Arsenal then we might have got £30m+ for him. If we had sold Ando two years ago we might have got at least something (anything) for him...One of our problems is that we have been keeping underperforming players for too long. E.g. Ashley Young signed for an over-inflated fee when his stock was highest and he will be sold in future when his stock is lowest and he can't get a game.

It's ironic how often people talked about "re-sale value" in Fergie's last 5 years when you consider we never got re-sale value for anyone apart from Ronaldo. None of Fergie's "value" signings is worth jack chit as we have just seen. Yet we steered clear of players over the age of 26 apparently due to lack of re-sale value!