Harvz

Transfer Talk Topic

35,680 posts in this topic

3 hours ago, Martin1905 said:

Got United written all over it if indeed he does leave.

I do though suspect that we would be very interested and Roman may even go all out for him, whatever it costs.

Yup - back to MU, back to JM (if anything happens)

2 hours ago, Hugh Jars 99 said:

MLS even :)

I doubt MLS could tell the difference between Ronaldo and Nani.  There really doesn't seem to be that much money there anyway or Drogba would be employed by a club not owning one.

1 hour ago, Sleeping Dave said:

Hazard is 26, Ronaldo is 32 turning 33 in February! He's almost exactly 6 years older than Hazard. 6 years in football is a long, long time. 

Given that he very much lives on his pace and physique you'd have to be an absolute plonk to even consider swapping him for Eden AND £50m... Talk about value destruction! 

I wouldn't even consider a straight swap. 

I'm more mixed on this - as James suggests C Ronaldo is turning more and more into a conventional CF.  The next Ibrahimovic, and certainly has 3 or 4 more years to his game (he really is a complete player, not a pace specialist).

Not so sure though how the shirtless one will sell shirts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, PeteRobbo said:

Fair enough. Regarding Cahill, even if true he may well be simply moving house I reckon.

Ha ha!! Exactly!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Martin1905 said:

 

I very much doubt any announcements on big name signings will coincide with our kit lauch.

Bearing in mind we are switching suppliers, that's exactly how it would happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Bob Singleton said:

Again with this rubbish?? Time and again the argument that player x can cover the cost of his transfer in shirt sales has been blown out of the water, and yet you (in particular) keep repeating it. Please stop.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/the-set-pieces-blog/2016/aug/24/transfer-window-market-myths

 

Didn't Real actually say themselves they have made up the fee they paid United for Ronaldo in merchandise? I could be totally wrong of course, and happy to be proved so if that's the case.

Calm down. Honestly. You might be right. OK? Ego calmed down now? You also might also not be 100% right. I wasn't trying to start an argument just have healthy discussion.

Too many people here - and I have been guilty in the past - are more interested in being right and winning than having healthy discussion.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, James Prescott said:

Didn't Real actually say themselves they have made up the fee they paid United for Ronaldo in merchandise? I could be totally wrong of course, and happy to be proved so if that's the case.

I think the problem is that every time a player goes for a big fee, someone or other comes out with that excuse. I mean what else can one say if you buy a Pogba,   And as Bob says, Commercial income is important, but not that much.  The argument sometimes heard though that kit sponsors have a er.. vested-interest in some deals getting done though does seem to have some value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, James Prescott said:

Didn't Real actually say themselves they have made up the fee they paid United for Ronaldo in merchandise? I could be totally wrong of course, and happy to be proved so if that's the case.

Calm down. Honestly. You might be right. OK? Ego calmed down now? You also might also not be 100% right. I wasn't trying to start an argument just have healthy discussion.

Too many people here - and I have been guilty in the past - are more interested in being right and winning than having healthy discussion.

 

Did you actually read the article; or at least the part dealing with shirt sales?

I don't care what RM may or may not have claimed regarding Ronaldo merchandise, given the club tend to lie about most things. Just do the maths for yourself... or maybe read this post regarding Pogba to Man U

http://mufclatest.com/can-paul-pogbas-shirt-sales-pay-for-his-transfer-no-heres-why/

If you can't be bothered reading it all, here's the most salient paragraph:

To recoup the money spent for Pogba’s transfer fee from shirt sales, United would, of course, need to sell £89 million worth of Pogba shirts. But United’s figures don’t even come close to that. According to the club’s 2015 annual report, United made just £31.652.000 on “retail, merchandising, apparel & products licensing revenue”, which United would need to nearly triple just on Pogba shirts. Not likely.

The same applies to Ronaldo, be it at RM or any other club.

Look at the up-front payment as an advance on shirt sales, much in the same way an author gets an advance from a publisher. A club doesn't get £x million a season from a kit manufacturer and keep 100% of shirt sales.

This debunking of the shirt sales myth has been made time and again over the years by both myself and others and still you continue claiming we can spend some huge amount on whichever "marquee signing" happens to be on your radar because his shirt sales will pay for the transfer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not forgetting that he helped Real win 3 CL cups in 4 years. Quite alot of prize money there I would imagine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ham said:

Bearing in mind we are switching suppliers, that's exactly how it would happen. 

And I'm sure the club and Nike would love for it to happen, I just can't see any club we are buying from being happy to wait for us as it doesn't benefit them at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Martin1905 said:

And I'm sure the club and Nike would love for it to happen, I just can't see any club we are buying from being happy to wait for us as it doesn't benefit them at all.

It's not about "waiting for us" it's about waiting for a done deal to be revealed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PeteRobbo said:

Fair enough. Regarding Cahill, even if true he may well be simply moving house I reckon.

True. 

However, the source claims that he knows Conte wants to get rid/replace Cahill. Personally I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense. If that was indeed the case, why would he have been the VC over the past season? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now