this probably the highest club he can manage in his career

Still got 10 more weeks of the window, if we can get Onana done by today and DDG let go, and then focus on sales of Henderson, Maguire, Elanga, Martial, Bailly, Telles, Williams, VdB, Fred, McT, Hannibal and get Kane or someone, hopefully promote some academy players to fill bench positions, i think it wont be too bad.

Yep which is ridiculous cuz you scroll randomly, all those counts as reads .... thank god this moron was just joking about buying United.

Well he is a generational player and he knows his worth, plus he is gonna get 150m from PSG if he decided to see out his contract

Actually right WHY the hell are we not selling anyone?

Surely larh some of our players will improve some teams, high salary or not we are not even hearing about low ball offers for any of our players. Sancho i will give him another season, he is still young, the rest man.

No way anyone will pay 10m for Bailly and Telles, i think even half of that also difficult, maybe Maguire and Henderson can go for 5-10m more, Elanga also idk

We only can afford ninja turtle action figure, no Mbappe

Well its still a contribution because whatever provider you use still has to buy whatever cable subscription for it, although it will be a lesser contribution, cant say 0.

I hope people are consistent when he makes a blunder and lets in an easy goal because he will.

Also got smacked by a lot of teams especially an embarrassing loss to LFC, won 1 trophy, disappear for the other final.

It is a net positive but i am not fully convinced by him yet, this season is crucial especially with him getting more of the type of players he wants, i really hope he gets a ST that he wants also larh then no excuses.

We have to offer huge wages because we are more desperate than the players we want to sign. What we really need is new owners and upper management, ifi Glazers stay there is 0 hope.

ETH is actually known to be someone who doesnt know how to talk properly, so maybe thats why Ronaldo all had disagreements etc. BUT we have to follow ETH's philosophy right now and build on it (i personally doubt he will be our manager super long term but we really need to stick to a certain kind of philosophy as a club, hire managers and buy players that only fit that ).

Manchester United completed their first signing of the summer transfer window last week, finalising the £55million ($71million) arrival of Mason Mount from Chelsea, and, some might say, not before time, too.

Despite qualifying for the Champions League, the clear progress made under Erik ten Hag and an outlay of more than £200m last summer, the consensus is that United need to spend — not least in their two priority positions of striker and goalkeeper.

Negotiations for Inter Milan goalkeeper Andre Onana and Atalanta striker Rasmus Hojlund are ongoing, though United cannot pursue primary targets at any price. Tottenham’s Harry Kane is currently being pursued by Bayern Munich but remains an attractive option for United too.

While the uncertainty created by the club’s drawn-out takeover process is not helpful, the biggest constraint is United’s compliance with financial fair play, which sources say has placed a cap on what the club are able to do this summer based on their historic spending.

.

Every prospective deal has to go through what one club figure calls the ‘financial sausage machine’. “Everything is being calculated. ‘Is that OK on FFP? Does it leave us enough room to do what we want this summer on players?’.”

United support strong FFP rules as a principle — both within the Premier League and UEFA — and are endeavouring to work within them.

As the regulations and calculations involved are complex, picking out the club’s FFP position from their public accounts is not an exact science.

However, a trawl through the numbers suggests the club has at least been skirting around the edges of the Premier League’s FFP limit, and the risk of a breach is real enough for caution to be required in the transfer market.


Mount was United’s first signing of the summer (Photo: Manchester United/Manchester United via Getty Images)
The Premier League’s profitability and sustainability rules (P&S) came into effect during the 2015-16 campaign.

The rules allow clubs to make a £15m loss over a three-year monitoring period, with losses of up to £105m permitted so long as the £90m difference is covered by secure funding from a club’s ownership — i.e. by buying up more shares, not simply giving their club a loan.

Unfortunately for United, the Glazer family are not exactly known for putting their hands in their pockets.

United’s owners have invested none of their own money into the club since their leveraged buy-out in 2005. For the purposes of P&S, that means United’s losses have not been able to exceed the standard £15m limit.

Yet this only became an issue when a miserable 2021-22 season on the pitch was just as miserable off it. United posted a pre-tax loss of £150m — by far their biggest over the preceding decade.

United nevertheless passed the Premier League’s P&S test that year as the three-year monitoring period included both a £27m pre-tax profit in 2019 and, more importantly, substantial adjustments for the effects of Covid-19.

Under P&S, due to the financial losses suffered across football during the 2019-20 and 2020-21 seasons, the corresponding fiscal years are combined and averaged out. Clubs can also write off losses suffered due to the pandemic during those two years.

As a result, United’s 2021-22 accounts confirmed the P&S “break-even test result submitted in March 2022 was positive”.

What about last season, though? Without 2019’s profit included in the monitoring period, United were always at risk of skirting closer to their limit than they did in 2021-22.

Judging by United’s recent third-quarter results, their pre-tax loss over the last three P&S years currently stands at £203m.

That figure comes with a health warning. It is not final and a strong end to the 2022-23 financial year might have helped bring it down by the 30 June cut-off, but it is clearly a long way off the £15m loss allowed.

Whether United will come in under that limit or not depends on the size of the deductions the club can claim back under the P&S rules, particularly the amount of Covid-related losses written off in 2019-20 and 2020-21.

United estimate the pandemic cost them £190m in 2019-20 and 2020-21 combined — which averages out to £95m over the two years for P&S purposes.

Further deductions can be made for investment in areas considered beneficial to the long-term benefit of the game — for example, youth development, women’s football and community work.


Investment in women’s football can be deducted from a club’s losses under Premier League rules (Photo by Naomi Baker/Getty Images)
United do not disclose exact figures on academy spending, though as one of the biggest academies in the Premier League, it is certainly significant. Together with the expenses included in accounts for the women’s team and the Manchester United Foundation, the club can deduct between £50m and £60m over the three-year period in these three areas.

In their latest set of financial results, the club also increased their projected revenue guidance for the full year to between £630m and £640m. If realised, that would be a club record and would further help ease FFP concerns.

These factors and more will help bring United’s three-year pre-tax loss closer to the £15m limit and perhaps safely under it.

Time will tell whether or not all this was enough to avoid exceeding a breach, with the publication of the club’s full-year accounts expected in the autumn, but United will already have a reasonable idea.

The club had to submit their most recent P&S assessment by the beginning of March this year, based on an average of Covid-hit 2019-20 and 2020-21, full accounts for 2021-22 and projections for 2022-23.

The Premier League’s rules state that if a P&S assessment records a loss in excess of the £15m limit over three years, clubs must provide future financial information for the next two seasons by 31 March, before submitting their evidence of secure funding to cover the losses.

If they were at risk of breaching the P&S rules, United would therefore have received an indication from the Premier League around four months ago.

But even if United have successfully avoided a breach for 2022-23, the club still faces a challenge to stay on the right side of the limit this season.

Crucially, the next three-year monitoring period will not include the Covid-19 adjustments, but United’s huge 2021-22 pre-tax loss will still be part of the equation. Hence the need to tread carefully in the market this summer.

As for potential punishments, clubs who exceed the lower £15m P&S limit without secure funding to cover their losses can have their budgets limited and transfer spending restricted by the league’s board to ensure they meet their financial obligations.

Only those who break the higher £105m limit — as Everton are alleged to have done — are referred to an independent commission, where more severe punishments such as points deductions can be administered.

The fine balance United need to strike is neatly reflected in the financial give-and-take that comes with their qualification for this season’s Champions League.

Returning to European football’s elite club competition will provide a renewed source of valuable revenue, but it is also likely to bring a hike in the club’s wage bill. Many players saw a 25 per cent reduction in their salary for failing to finish in the top four in 2021-22. That will now be lifted.

And of course, competing in European competitions means United must comply with UEFA’s financial fair play regulations, too, although recent changes to these rules mean they are not as pressing a concern at Old Trafford.

Introduced in 2009 to promote greater sustainability across European football, UEFA’s FFP rules were updated and strengthened last year. The new regulations have three key pillars: solvency, stability and cost control.

Fortunately for United, due to these changes, 2021-22 was a good year to have a bad year.

Although that financial year was included in last season’s UEFA test, United’s £150m loss is likely to have been cancelled out with the help of Covid adjustments.

And this season, as UEFA migrates to the new regulations, there is no test to pass. Clubs will only be required to submit their full audited accounts for 2022-23. Assessments under the new ‘football earnings’ rule will resume next season, based on 2022-23 and 2023-24’s accounts.

United will therefore not be burdened by that miserable 2021-22 under UEFA’s FFP regulations in the future, but they still need to be careful going forward.

UEFA’s rules only allow for a loss of €5m (£4m, $5m) over three years, which is not covered by secure funding — an even tougher bar to clear than the Premier League’s.

Figures at Old Trafford also need to be wary of the new squad cost control rules, too, which have only been gradually implemented to allow clubs time to get their finances in order.

This season, clubs can spend 90 per cent of their revenues and profits from player sales on men’s player and head coach wages, transfer fees and payments to agents. Next season, the limit will be 80 per cent. From 2025-26 and then onwards, it will be 70 per cent.

Estimating United’s squad cost ratio is not straightforward unless you are part of Old Trafford’s financial department, as UEFA will assess this on a calendar year basis (e.g. 2023, 2024 etc) rather than against financial years.

United are nevertheless confident their squad cost ratio will fall below the required threshold this season and claim it has done so historically due to their high revenues.

United do not appear to be at risk of breaking UEFA’s rules for the moment, and though the club could be sailing closer to the wind with the Premier League, it is still too early to say whether they will tip over into a breach.

In any case, there is one simple trick United can do this summer to improve their chances of complying with both sets of financial regulations in the future — they can start selling players.

Senior figures at Old Trafford know selling those on the fringes of Ten Hag’s squad would offer them more flexibility under FFP and therefore in the transfer market. Traditionally, this has been something United have struggled to do, particularly when compared to their rivals.

There is an acceptance among key decision makers that this has to change and, despite the noise surrounding incomings, United consider themselves ‘a selling club’ this summer. Even players who are not actively being touted on the market have their price.

Harry Maguire and Scott McTominay both fall into that category and, if either were to secure a move away from Old Trafford for a price commensurate to their market value, it would change United’s FFP equations considerably.

Others are closer to the exit door, though. Fred is of interest to Fulham. Dean Henderson is expected to join Nottingham Forest once a new goalkeeper is signed to replace David de Gea, whose departure — like Cristiano Ronaldo’s before him — will significantly cut the wage burden.

In some cases, United simply want to get deals done regardless of price. Moving both Eric Bailly and Alex Telles on is, for example, seen as more important than receiving substantial fees for either player.

Two potential departures seen as tests of United’s sales acumen are those of Anthony Elanga — who is expected to leave this summer — and Hannibal Mejbri, who United may keep but are willing to listen to offers for.


Anthony Elanga is a likely departure this summer (Photo: Jose Breton/Pics Action/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Both are young talents on the fringes of Ten Hag’s first-team squad, with enough time left on their respective contracts to command a fee close to or above their true market value. United are conscious that, in the past, they have held onto talents from their academy for too long and seen their value depreciate as a result.

In Elanga’s case, as an academy graduate without an amortised transfer fee listed in the accounting books, any sale would represent pure profit and would help ease FFP concerns.

The same would, of course, apply to McTominay and is also true of the only two players United have successfully sold for a fee so far this summer: Zidane Iqbal, who has joined FC Utrecht in an £850,000 deal, and Ethan Laird, who moved to Birmingham City for a fee of £750,000.

Iqbal’s move, viewed as a glorified loan, includes a 40 per cent sell-on clause and a buyback option, while Laird’s deal included a 30 per cent sell-on clause. One day, United could receive a sudden, healthy windfall if both enjoy successful careers away from Old Trafford, as many other Carrington graduates have.

Yet if United want to ease any concerns around FFP and give themselves more room to manoeuvre in the transfer market, they need to secure bigger fees than those for Iqbal and Laird and they need them this summer.

If Ronaldo was like 5 years younger and ETH was 1/2 more seasons with us and that same situation had happened, i would have been on Ronaldo side, but despite what Ronaldo contributed in his first season back which was good, he was always on a downward trend and ETH was brand new, no brainer which side to pick, would have loved it if Ronaldo had just found a way to work with ETH, he clearly still has the finishing even now, but i guess he is Ronaldo and he surely feels he is bigger than everyone else in his mind at least, either way glad he came back anyway, too bad it wasnt a fairy tale ending.

I feel ppl are overplaying the ruthlessness, the guy's contract was up. If he is really ruthless he tells Maguire to fuck off, really ruthless last season it self give the armband to Bruno.

I dont think the board is sentimental, they are just thinking from the money sense; for me i want to see the tactics next season especially with him getting a ball playing GK.

BTW that ST is already a million times better than Weghorst

Henderson is defo going, and I feel someone like Williams might go for some small amount, tbh get rid of McSauce also larh, give bigger role to mainoo.