MANCHESTER UNITED are about to launch one of the most potent attacks in the Premier League this season – how times have changed.
The Red Devils will splash over £200million for the third straight window as striker Benjamin Sesko looks set to join Bryan Mbeumo and Matheus Cunha at Old Trafford.
After it’s all confirmed, United’s new look front three can boast a staggering 48 goals between them last season.
Of course, it’s not always sensible to compare and time will tell, but Jurgen Klopp’s prolific front line of Roberto Firmino, Sadio Mane and Mo Salah netted 46 during their title-winning 2020 campaign.
While the ENTIRE United squad scored just 49 combined in the Prem last term as they recorded the club’s lowest ever Premier League finish from 15th in the table.
But Slovenian hotshot Sesko, 22, chose a move to Old Trafford before their offer of £65.1m plus a further £8.7m in add-ons even came in.
United’s approach followed a club-record bid from Newcastle, who have the richest owners in the world, were willing to pay more in wages and have Champions League football to look forward to this season.
But how has Ruben Amorim’s side, who aren’t in Europe at all, been able to splash the cash again months after part-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe claimed poverty?
Ratcliffe revealed that there was potential for the club to go “bust by Christmas” without massive cost-cutting measures as 450 staff were made redundant and fancy free lunches were scrapped.
SunSport explains how United can afford Sesko – who is set to become the club’s fourth most expensive signing ever.
Man Utd transfers
Mbeumo and Cunha joined in deals worth £62.5m and £71m respectively, but United’s summer spending will reach £207m with Sesko.
But the trio’s staggered payments will reduce the immediate financial impact on the balance sheets, allowing them to stay within the PSR limits that restrict losses to £105m over a three-year period.
Cunha was bought before PSR’s cut-off date on June 30, so the Brazilian’s arrival goes into the 2024/2025 financial year.
Marcus Rashford’s season-long loan move to Barcelona, which has an option to buy, has saved £14m in wages despite the lack of a transfer fee, having earned in excess of £325,000-a-week.
And the sales of former players Alvaro Carreras, Anthony Elanga and Maxi Oyedele have also banked United more than £20m in sell-on fees.
United also earned 100 per cent profit from the sales of Mason Greenwood and Scott McTominay last summer, and will aim to sell several other unwanted players before this window closes, including Alejandro Garnacho.
The club hopes Chelsea will pay at least £50million for the 21-year-old Argentine winger.
Meanwhile, Stamford Bridge chiefs owe United £5m for going back on their obligation to buy Jadon Sancho after his decent loan stint last season.
United are desperate to sell Sancho, 25, this summer, as they’re now back stuck with his full £300,000 wage packet.
The departures of other “Bomb Squad” members Antony and Tyrell Malacia will help balance the books even more.
In terms of outgoings, Christian Eriksen, Jonny Evans and Victor Lindelof have all been released for free.
Man Utd PSR pressure ‘exaggerated’?
Football finance expert Kieran Maguire told BBC Sport: “Some of the scare stories were perhaps a bit overblown.
“Man Utd are not as successful as a business as they would like to be, but they are still successful. For example, their wage bill is around half of their income, which is very good by Premier League standards.”
Manchester United PLC lost £131m in the 2023-24 financial year, with a lot coming in interest, and the costs of the Ineos takeover – which doesn’t count towards PSR.
United’s immense global brand and massive fanbase make it a commercial powerhouse, generating significant revenue from broadcasting, sponsorships, and merchandise sales.
In June, the club revealed an annual core profit forecast of £180m-£190m, up from an earlier projection of £145m-£160m and a £20m reduction in wages from the same point in 2024.
The total revenue was £160.5m, up from £136.7m in the same period, with matchday, commercial and Prem broadcast streams all rising.
According to The Athletic, United could lose an estimated £141m in 2025-26 without incurring a breach of PSR.
At the end of April, the club, who have angered fans by raising ticket prices, paid off £50m of their existing revolving credit facilities (RCFs).
That has given them extra £140m borrowing scope this summer – but in turn, extra interest costs could be a factor down the line.
The shock role of Red Football Ltd.
Red Football Ltd is a key subsidiary company within the United ownership structure.
The Glazer family used this UK-based company as their acquisition vehicle to purchase the club in 2005.
And according to The Athletic, United’s PSR is based on the accounts of Red Football Ltd rather than the publicly listed entity, Manchester United plc.
This distinction is huge because the accounts of Red Football Ltd often show smaller losses than those of the PLC, which is registered under the New York Stock Exchange.
These are all things from the past, whether we like it or not, we’ve inherited those things and have to sort that out.”
Sir Jim Ratcliffe
This is partly due to the way loans and costs are structured within the larger corporate group.
United’s pre-tax loss at plc-level was a whopping £130.7m during the 2023-24 season alone, but Red Football Ltd’s was just £36.2m.
According to Premier League’s rules, clubs can only submit the accounts of a UK-registered company for testing against PSR.
By using the accounts of the subsidiary for the PSR calculation, the club can have more “wiggle room” to spend on transfers and wages while staying within the Prem’s financial limits.
This accounting structure has been cited as one of the reasons the club has been able to secure new signings despite reported financial concerns.
Ratcliffe was talking about cash
A lack of free cash is what Ratcliffe was referring to in his bombshell “no money left” interview in March.
The Ineos chief revealed that United still owed transfer instalment money for Andre Onana, Sancho, Antony, Casemiro and Rasmus Hojlund.
The 72-year-old billionaire said: “These are all things from the past, whether we like it or not, we’ve inherited those things and have to sort that out.”
Cash flow needs to be more carefully managed at Old Trafford.
But a combination of recent cuts to staff and the club’s continued ability to borrow means there are avenues available to them.
The redundancies do look brutal, but that is part of the Ineos business model, they have done that at other companies.
United can spend without fear of PSR breaches, although the spending on talent now is designed to return them to Champions League football soon.
What about the new stadium?
United may struggle to fund their proposed new stadium, with the club responsible for paying the £2billion needed for the ground itself.
Although Ratcliffe has received government backing for the Regeneration Project surrounding the Trafford Park area, it is unclear how much funding they will provide.
But the stadium will likely end up costing more than £2billion by the end of the project and 100,000 seats seems ambitious.
While stadium redevelopment plans will involve taking on borrowed debt, this debt won’t be included in PSR calculations.
Read the full article here
