Murtough & Arnold Legacy

Didn't the Marseille owner claim they were willing to pay for Greenwood last season?

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 6 minutes ago
Didn't the Marseille owner claim they were willing to pay for Greenwood last season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Likely to be a substantially lower fee than they did this summer, given that in August 2023 Greenwood hadn't played for over a year and the levels of negative attention would have been both greater and more unpredictable than they are now. I'd be surprised if we've ended up worse off financially from the current deal (with Getafe taking their cut) than what we could have got from a direct sale last summer.

comment by FFS Mike. (U1170)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian
posted 39 seconds ago
Devil's advocate opinion: none of us know how much resistance there was on the part of other clubs to taking on Greenwood, and therefore how much additional incentive was "the market rate" to resolve the reputational crisis. Last summer it looked quite plausible that we would end up getting no transfer fee for Greenwood, and perhaps paying out the rest of his contract. Now we're at a point where he's not our problem and we've generated welcome revenue from his sale, together with the prospect of further revenue in the future.

There's plenty to condemn the previous leadership for, but it doesn't necessarily follow that every decision they made / every negotiation they concluded was moronic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's unique so we have no reference point but ceding 20% of future sale on him is not great. If this is true then the deal struck with Marseille will generate only 30% in future revenue, which is still better than nothing on top of the transfer fee, something, you rightly allude, we thought we'd never receive at the height and immediate aftermath of the scandal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They don’t get 20% of the total sell on fee, just 20% of whatever the 50% sell on fee is that we get.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

👍

comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 2 hours, 23 minutes ago

This is not news. It was mentioned at the time and is true.

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

Yeah, I thought this was common knowledge.

Obviously not.

comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 18 hours, 27 minutes ago
comment by FFS Mike. (U1170)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian
posted 39 seconds ago
Devil's advocate opinion: none of us know how much resistance there was on the part of other clubs to taking on Greenwood, and therefore how much additional incentive was "the market rate" to resolve the reputational crisis. Last summer it looked quite plausible that we would end up getting no transfer fee for Greenwood, and perhaps paying out the rest of his contract. Now we're at a point where he's not our problem and we've generated welcome revenue from his sale, together with the prospect of further revenue in the future.

There's plenty to condemn the previous leadership for, but it doesn't necessarily follow that every decision they made / every negotiation they concluded was moronic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's unique so we have no reference point but ceding 20% of future sale on him is not great. If this is true then the deal struck with Marseille will generate only 30% in future revenue, which is still better than nothing on top of the transfer fee, something, you rightly allude, we thought we'd never receive at the height and immediate aftermath of the scandal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They don’t get 20% of the total sell on fee, just 20% of whatever the 50% sell on fee is that we get.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if Marseille sell for £10m, Utd get £5m and Getafe get £1m of that.
Nice chunk of change for nothing.

comment by פlǝuƃɥᴉs (U19365)
posted 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 18 hours, 27 minutes ago
comment by FFS Mike. (U1170)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian
posted 39 seconds ago
Devil's advocate opinion: none of us know how much resistance there was on the part of other clubs to taking on Greenwood, and therefore how much additional incentive was "the market rate" to resolve the reputational crisis. Last summer it looked quite plausible that we would end up getting no transfer fee for Greenwood, and perhaps paying out the rest of his contract. Now we're at a point where he's not our problem and we've generated welcome revenue from his sale, together with the prospect of further revenue in the future.

There's plenty to condemn the previous leadership for, but it doesn't necessarily follow that every decision they made / every negotiation they concluded was moronic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's unique so we have no reference point but ceding 20% of future sale on him is not great. If this is true then the deal struck with Marseille will generate only 30% in future revenue, which is still better than nothing on top of the transfer fee, something, you rightly allude, we thought we'd never receive at the height and immediate aftermath of the scandal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They don’t get 20% of the total sell on fee, just 20% of whatever the 50% sell on fee is that we get.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if Marseille sell for £10m, Utd get £5m and Getafe get £1m of that.
Nice chunk of change for nothing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The sell on clause is a % of the profit on Greenwood, not a % of Greenwood's future sale price.

So Marseille would have to sell for more than what they paid for him for United and Getafe to receive any more money.

Let's just hope he does well, gets a mega move, and we see some more money.

comment by Ruud (U23185)
posted 4 hours, 28 minutes ago
Let's just hope he does well, gets a mega move, and we see some more money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello RDD!

comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Ruud (U23185)
posted 4 hours, 28 minutes ago
Let's just hope he does well, gets a mega move, and we see some more money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello RDD!
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Exactly what I thought

comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 6 days, 3 hours ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Ruud (U23185)
posted 4 hours, 28 minutes ago
Let's just hope he does well, gets a mega move, and we see some more money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello RDD!
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Exactly what I thought

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

🤣