Jump to content

Schneiderlin Joins Manchester United (Official)


Bewildered

Recommended Posts

I'll take your word re' the Scott Trust, I know a few people that now work in their commercial department and they have a cushty life "profit seeking, not profit dependent". Guardian have, and have always had, a brilliant web strategy as well, Mail online the only UK site close to them in terms of traffic (as you know, mostly due to pay walls). The Guardian get some decent global ad' revenues as their site is extremely popular in the US.

 

As for broadsheet/ tabloid ad' revenues, that may have been the case a long way back but in my first hand knowledge going back to 2003 I know for a fact that page yields in the Sun are approx 3x the Times and their ad' revenues have been propping up the Times for at least the last 10 years internally at News Int'/ UK. I also know that (using a simple analogy) Vauxhall/ Ford pay a LOT more to advertise ROP in the Sun than Mercedes/ BMW do in the Times (as well at car brands this is true across Travel, FMCG, Finance any any other vertical)! Back in pre internet days when the Times had a huge classified section this may have been different, but print buying agencies see as much value in a Sun reader as a Times reader, just target the right product to hit their profile.

 

Desmond has taken the Express/ Star to pieces though, absolute rags these days. Heard some proper horror stories about him and his right hand man Stan from people that have worked at N&S!

 

I left The Guardian in 2000 and I know things have changed a lot since then. I was in the Circulation Dept and that was the beginning of moving the emphasis to online from print (hence why I and many of my sales team were moved out). We had worked hard to get the figures up from around 250k to approaching 500k just before The Independent was launched so as a print man it is sad to see the figures back around the 250k mark again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I left The Guardian in 2000 and I know things have changed a lot since then. I was in the Circulation Dept and that was the beginning of moving the emphasis to online from print (hence why I and many of my sales team were moved out). We had worked hard to get the figures up from around 250k to approaching 500k just before The Independent was launched so as a print man it is sad to see the figures back around the 250k mark again.

 

Do people still actually buy newspapers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I think we should have a campaign for responsible sports journalism. :uhoh:

It's all just about WI Coffee Morning gossip level now.

 

Given the amount of posts that the print media generates I think it is useful for people to know how it works. Also we are just filing in time as there is no transfer news worth talking about right now ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do people still actually buy newspapers?

 

Yeah but a lot fewer in the last few years. I don't buy papers anymore but will pick one up in a café where there are freebies around and read it. I have three kids, 18,17 and 16 years old and I don't think they have read a paper between them though sadly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is I can't see Schneiderlin being happy staying with us for another year. And we're potentially missing out on our first choice replacements for him. There'll come a point soon enough, we might have to lower our asking price.

 

Well, he will have to like it or lump it, really. If the top clubs won't offer a price we can accept he will just have to wait it out until his contract runs down. If he was that set on joining a Champions League club he should have insisted on appropriate release clauses before he signed his last contract.

 

I can't see him going on strike as that would send him out of the France squad pretty pronto, as would a bad drop in form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is I can't see Schneiderlin being happy staying with us for another year. And we're potentially missing out on our first choice replacements for him. There'll come a point soon enough, we might have to lower our asking price.

 

Do we know what the asking price is? Lots of people banding £25m around but has that figure come from the club or is it just conjecture?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is I can't see Schneiderlin being happy staying with us for another year. And we're potentially missing out on our first choice replacements for him. There'll come a point soon enough, we might have to lower our asking price.

Hopefully it's a case of making Man U come closer to 25m if we value him at 30m. They might have only offered 15-20m. It's all speculation though, hence we're writing it on a forum. If we get anything close to 30m we will have done well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the amount of posts that the print media generates I think it is useful for people to know how it works. Also we are just filing in time as there is no transfer news worth talking about right now ;)

 

Well there is transfer news but in Portugal and Italy where prices are seemingly reasonable and don't change every 30 seconds or so.

Take the case of Gervinho (same agent as Morgan incidentally). Set up a deal to go from AS Rome to Al Jazira or something, all going smoothly then the knob starts demanding a helicopter, unlimited tickets from wherever it is to Abidjan,a mansion and a private beach...to which the club replied with a resounding ferk off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully it's a case of making Man U come closer to 25m if we value him at 30m. They might have only offered 15-20m. It's all speculation though, hence we're writing it on a forum. If we get anything close to 30m we will have done well.

 

L'Equipe did seem to think they offered 30 million...euros, just over 20 million that would be then.

But as L'Equipe have gone from being reliable purveyors of sports information to big time gossip mongers who knows what's what really.

Edited by Window Cleaner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that quite a few people on here are ready to castigate journos like Alex Crook as being peddlers of lies, half-truths and mischievous mis-information as it appears in a tabloid newspaper like The Star, but are quite happy to accept a punted story from Sky Sports News.

 

Sky Sports News - along with BBC Sport - relies largely on the same sources for their stories as tabloid newspapers, freelances, agency copy and the wire services provided by the Press Association, Reuters and Associated Press, among others.

 

The difference is how they use the information.

 

It's part of the BBC ethos to check stories for their veracity and reliability and they do this for the vast majority of stories (I won't say all stories, because the Beeb has been caught out like any media organisation could be).

 

The BBC would rather be second with a story and accurate, whereas SSN's ethos is always to be first with the story, and as a result are quite happy to have a punt on a story.

 

Anybody who works in the industry knows that SSN are not 100% reliable, but because they are big and shout the loudest, the public tend to overlook this.

 

That affects the journalists who work for SSN. A lot of people have jaundiced views of them but no journalist (certainly none that I know) wants to publish an inaccurate or untrue story, and will always try and verify their story if they can.

 

Very often, because of their employer's desire to be first, they are not given the scope to do this.

 

If the roles were reversed and The Star has the story that Man Utd could be turning their attentions away from Morgan, and SSN ran the story about him training with U21s, which one would you find more credible?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that quite a few people on here are ready to castigate journos like Alex Crook as being peddlers of lies, half-truths and mischievous mis-information as it appears in a tabloid newspaper like The Star, but are quite happy to accept a punted story from Sky Sports News.

 

Sky Sports News - along with BBC Sport - relies largely on the same sources for their stories as tabloid newspapers, freelances, agency copy and the wire services provided by the Press Association, Reuters and Associated Press, among others.

 

The difference is how they use the information.

 

It's part of the BBC ethos to check stories for their veracity and reliability and they do this for the vast majority of stories (I won't say all stories, because the Beeb has been caught out like any media organisation could be).

 

The BBC would rather be second with a story and accurate, whereas SSN's ethos is always to be first with the story, and as a result are quite happy to have a punt on a story.

 

Anybody who works in the industry knows that SSN are not 100% reliable, but because they are big and shout the loudest, the public tend to overlook this.

 

That affects the journalists who work for SSN. A lot of people have jaundiced views of them but no journalist (certainly none that I know) wants to publish an inaccurate or untrue story, and will always try and verify their story if they can.

 

Very often, because of their employer's desire to be first, they are not given the scope to do this.

 

If the roles were reversed and The Star has the story that Man Utd could be turning their attentions away from Morgan, and SSN ran the story about him training with U21s, which one would you find more credible?

 

Nevertheless Sky amongst others have persuaded gullible idiots to part with real money in wagers on the deal being done, some of which they have recolted through what I presume is a subsidiary..Sky Bet. That's what I find incoherent about it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could those of you want to discuss "how newspapers work" please take it offline.

 

Back to Morgan, as above, one offer under £25M declined. ManYou not back with second offer, so now a stalemate. Poker face time. Problem is with no money in from this sale yet, and not being 100% certain it will go through after all, it may be considered unwise to bring in replacements. There are no other bidders so we can accept Man U offer now, accept whatever they offer on transfer deadline day (may be less then), or negotiate now for an immediate agreement to bring cash in. I favour option 3.

Edited by the saint in winchester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could those of you want to discuss "how newspapers work" please take it offline.

 

Back to Morgan, as above, one offer under £25M declined. ManYou not back with second offer, so now a stalemate. Poker face time. Probably is with no money in yet, we can't bring in replacements. There are no other bidders so we can fold now, fold on transfer deadline day, or negotiate now for an early settlement. I favour option 3.

 

Why would we have no money then. We've got (or will be getting) some from the PL, we've sold season tickets and spent a

few measly million, Clyne is on the point of going to Liverpool and I don't think they've got a hope in hell of getting a slate from us..so we should in theory have at least some money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to Morgan, as above, one offer under £25M declined. ManYou not back with second offer, so now a stalemate. Poker face time. Problem is with no money in yet, we can't bring in replacements. There are no other bidders so we can fold now, fold on transfer deadline day, or negotiate now for an early settlement. I favour option 3.

 

What do your three options mean exactly?

 

Also what makes you think we have no money to spend unless we sell players? We've already signed three players this summer and the club has posted large profits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would we have no money then. We've got (or will be getting) some from the PL, we've sold season tickets and spent a

few measly million, Clyne is on the point of going to Liverpool and I don't think they've got a hope in hell of getting a slate from us..so we should in theory have at least some money.

same as last season. we never dipped into the premier league money at all really.

Les Reed told us not expect big signings this summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also what makes you think we have no money to spend unless we sell players? We've already signed three players this summer and the club has posted large profits.

 

Posting profits does not equate to money in the bank, there is no evidence to suggest there is a lot of money to spend whatsoever. I said at the start of the summer I could only see us spending £15m or so independent of sales and I still think that is true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posting profits does not equate to money in the bank' date=' there is no evidence to suggest there is a lot of money to spend whatsoever. I said at the start of the summer I could only see us spending £15m or so independent of sales and I still think that is true.[/quote']

 

the profits posted in June 2014 were also almost totally from the sales of Lambert and Shaw. At that time there were only outs and no ins. We should have some money though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is I can't see Schneiderlin being happy staying with us for another year. And we're potentially missing out on our first choice replacements for him. There'll come a point soon enough, we might have to lower our asking price.

 

Good point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that quite a few people on here are ready to castigate journos like Alex Crook as being peddlers of lies, half-truths and mischievous mis-information as it appears in a tabloid newspaper like The Star, but are quite happy to accept a punted story from Sky Sports News.

 

Sky Sports News - along with BBC Sport - relies largely on the same sources for their stories as tabloid newspapers, freelances, agency copy and the wire services provided by the Press Association, Reuters and Associated Press, among others.

 

The difference is how they use the information.

 

It's part of the BBC ethos to check stories for their veracity and reliability and they do this for the vast majority of stories (I won't say all stories, because the Beeb has been caught out like any media organisation could be).

 

The BBC would rather be second with a story and accurate, whereas SSN's ethos is always to be first with the story, and as a result are quite happy to have a punt on a story.

 

Anybody who works in the industry knows that SSN are not 100% reliable, but because they are big and shout the loudest, the public tend to overlook this.

 

That affects the journalists who work for SSN. A lot of people have jaundiced views of them but no journalist (certainly none that I know) wants to publish an inaccurate or untrue story, and will always try and verify their story if they can.

 

Very often, because of their employer's desire to be first, they are not given the scope to do this.

 

If the roles were reversed and The Star has the story that Man Utd could be turning their attentions away from Morgan, and SSN ran the story about him training with U21s, which one would you find more credible?

The same BBC that ran a Newsnight special dismissing claims of Qatari corruption in the 2022 bid after sending a team to Qatar to ask the Qataris if they bribed anybody, and the Qataris replied " No, definitely not".

 

That BBC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I am sure you will know, circulation isn't the main driver for nationals, it is the readership profile. The "broadsheet" papers have never sold anywhere near the red tops but don't need to because they make more money from advertising. The Guardian's circulation figures have fallen back to what they used to be some time ago but the Scott Trust don't bail them out, the Trust is there to ensure that The Guardian remains to paper that CP Scott wanted it to be. The sole purpose of the Trust is to secure the financial and editorial independence of The Guardian. There is no Murdoch looking over the shoulder of the Editor telling them which Party to support. Long may that continue.

I'm sure the Trust must be very busy these days, now that the Guardian accepts "sponsorship" for running news articles.

 

All without any conflict of interest whatsoever, obviously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sky are a ****ing embarassment. So their 'sources' have suddenly fed different info. They also had it as breaking news. It was essentially no news, more a breaking 'we've been feeding our readers/viewers/listeners bullsh1t for a week'. Still, nice to see we are standing firm and demanding a big fee.

 

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure the Trust must be very busy these days, now that the Guardian accepts "sponsorship" for running news articles.

 

All without any conflict of interest whatsoever, obviously.

 

They also don't have any of their finances in offshore accounts. Oh no, not at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO man U playing hard ball. they will use delaying tactics to reduce the price as we will become increasingly desparate to start sourcing replacements. i reckon he will go for circa 22mill in late july

 

You think its Manyoo playing hardball rather than Saints? Why would we be desperate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think its Manyoo playing hardball rather than Saints? Why would we be desperate?
Because if we are to lose Schneiderlin, we'll need to bring in a top class replacement and the longer the summer goes on for, the harder it might be to bring our first choice in.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because if we are to lose Schneiderlin, we'll need to bring in a top class replacement and the longer the summer goes on for, the harder it might be to bring our first choice in.

 

we don't have to agree to a transfer you know. If the fee comes too late to replace him we could turn it down. We could also be saying to united we want £30m and we need a decision by X date. Take it or leave it. Who knows. I doubt we are desperate at this point and from what I read the united bid is miles off what we want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we don't have to agree to a transfer you know. If the fee comes too late to replace him we could turn it down. We could also be saying to united we want £30m and we need a decision by X date. Take it or leave it. Who knows. I doubt we are desperate at this point and from what I read the united bid is miles off what we want.
Yeah, we don't have to agree to a transfer. But I'm just reading between the lines and assuming we've made some kind of agreement with Schneiderlin that he'll be off for his Champions League football - who knows, hopefully I'm wrong and he'll be happily playing for us this season.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone told Morgan by leaving Saints he'll never end up having a Testimonial.

 

By remaining with the club 3 more seasons till he's 28, he still has time to play Champions League for a bigger club and will become a Saints legend, get a Testimonial and eternal thanks from Saints and our supporters..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, we don't have to agree to a transfer. But I'm just reading between the lines and assuming we've made some kind of agreement with Schneiderlin that he'll be off for his Champions League football - who knows, hopefully I'm wrong and he'll be happily playing for us this season.

 

I don't buy to much into this agreement thing. He has a contract. We didn't change the contract last summer. He therefore is our player until we get a bid we like. Simple as.

 

I suspect they said to him last summer that we are not selling you because too many players have left. Next summer (ie this) the pressure will be off us, so we can consider offers. Whether they mentioned a set fee at that point who knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone told Morgan by leaving Saints he'll never end up having a Testimonial.

 

By remaining with the club 3 more seasons till he's 28, he still has time to play Champions League for a bigger club and will become a Saints legend, get a Testimonial and eternal thanks from Saints and our supporters..

 

We could also buy him a Morgan. Car.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we don't have to agree to a transfer you know. If the fee comes too late to replace him we could turn it down. We could also be saying to united we want £30m and we need a decision by X date. Take it or leave it. Who knows. I doubt we are desperate at this point and from what I read the united bid is miles off what we want.

 

We didn't have to agree to sell lambert or Lallana or shaw or Lovren or chambers......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't buy to much into this agreement thing. He has a contract. We didn't change the contract last summer. He therefore is our player until we get a bid we like. Simple as.

 

I suspect they said to him last summer that we are not selling you because too many players have left. Next summer (ie this) the pressure will be off us, so we can consider offers. Whether they mentioned a set fee at that point who knows.

Yeah, who knows. But we have been linked with a load of central midfielders (even taking the media summer over-drive into account) and Schneiderlin has spoken very openly about what he wants to be doing with his future. Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

 

But, whilst speculating, would we rather take £24m now, than £28m on the last day of the transfer window for example?

Edited by Sour Mash
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, we don't have to agree to a transfer. But I'm just reading between the lines and assuming we've made some kind of agreement with Schneiderlin that he'll be off for his Champions League football - who knows, hopefully I'm wrong and he'll be happily playing for us this season.

Reading between the lines a bit, I'm sure things were said last year along the lines of "sure, if a Champions League side comes in for you and matches our valuation of you, we'll let you leave, but you're not going to Spurs this summer". As things stand, none of the 4 clubs who qualified for the Champions League have made an offer that matches our valuation (whether that's £25m, £30m or somewhere in between, depending on who you believe) - hopefully he is a bit more measured dealing with the situation this summer, as I don't expect Man United to just hand over the asking price immediately. He's probably going to have to be very patient.

 

In the meantime, I'd be very surprised if we weren't already setting up deals elsewhere - with the club's cashflow boosted in May with the PL prize money, it shouldn't be a case of not having the cash to do deals until we sell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading between the lines a bit, I'm sure things were said last year along the lines of "sure, if a Champions League side comes in for you and matches our valuation of you, we'll let you leave, but you're not going to Spurs this summer". As things stand, none of the 4 clubs who qualified for the Champions League have made an offer that matches our valuation (whether that's £25m, £30m or somewhere in between, depending on who you believe) - hopefully he is a bit more measured dealing with the situation this summer, as I don't expect Man United to just hand over the asking price immediately. He's probably going to have to be very patient.

 

Agree with this. This is pretty much what he said in that French interview a couple of weeks ago (Minus the Spurs bit :))

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})