Manchester United are keen observers of the mad Premier League scramble. The June 30 ‘mini transfer deadline’ is fast approaching as clubs attempt to balance the books to ensure they do not fall foul of the division’s spending rules.
United are not one of those sides who need to sell to ensure they meet their profit and sustainability [PSR] obligations. They reputedly have a buffer of around £31million, according to some financial football oberervers.
In recent days many of United’s rivals have used unofficial ‘loopholes’ to try and skirt around the controversial rules, with the Premier League looking to further clamp down on clubs finding creative ways to buy and sell. Chelsea, for example, have sold hotels and properties they own to present a better balance sheet, while the Blues have also been involved in de facto swap deals with clubs such as Aston Villa just days before the deadline.
One more ‘loophole’ of sorts is the ‘pure profit’ stance, which sees teams sell their academy products and graduates to generate revenue. For United, it would involve selling someone like Mason Greenwood or Marcus Rashford, who were not signed for a transfer fee and can be registered as an entire profit upon their departure.
READ MORE: Man United FFP situation as £31m kitty revealed
READ MORE: ‘Our priority’ – United’s focus on youngsters as PSR transfer decisions loom
The aforementioned duo remain on United’s books, although Greenwood is almost certain to depart this summer. The forward is attracting interest from a host of European clubs, with United in talks with Marseille over a potential move.
Other clubs have benefitted from such deals in the past, no more than Aston Villa when they sold Jack Grealish for £100m after developing him into a Premier League-class England international. Chelsea too have made a habit of offloading their homegrown assets – getting £55m from United for Mason Mount, as an example, last summer.
Manchester City have also been brilliant at this in recent years. They received almost £47m from Chelsea for Cole Palmer and got more than £40m combined James Trafford, Tommy Doyle and Taylor Harwood-Bellis.
Football finance expert Kieran Maguire recently summarised the situation, explaining that while academies were once designed to develop players to enable their first-team rise, now clubs are seeking to improve their homegrown talent simply to sell on for big money.
“What we have seen is the commodification of academy players,” he told the Athletic. “You only have to sell one Mason Mount every four or five years to pay for your academy.
“In the case of Chelsea, they have done fantastically well. Mason Mount, Callum Hudson-Odoi, Tammy Abraham, Billy Gilmour… all of these (former academy) players have generated huge sums in transfer fees.”
United have received ‘pure profit’ recently from four noteworthy sales – James Garner’s £15m move to Everton and Andreas Pereira’s switch to Fulham for £10m in 2022, and last summer when Dean Henderson and Anthony Elanga joined Crystal Palace and Nottingham Forest respectively for around £30m combined.
Sir Jim Ratcliffe and Ineos strategists running the football operations will be aware of how this loophole can improve their spending power. If a fee of £30m can be achieved for Greenwood and a sizeable fee banked Hannibal Mejbri this summer, it will hand a significant FFP boost.
United will also have a number of players coming through their ranks that they will be able to potentially sell on. Omari Forson has gone but United are entitled to a “sizeable” training fee. That will also be the case when Shola Shoretire joins a new club.
Academy director Nick Cox revealed that the focus at Carrington will remain on developing players for football purposes, not financial, but admits that being able to sell them on is something the club has always done, ever since Sir Alex Ferguson recognised the importance.
“As long as there have been football clubs, they have taken that approach. It is nothing new,” he said of selling young players.
“Sir Alex Ferguson was a master at selling young players, usually for more than they were worth, if he could perceive they weren’t going to be part of his squad in the long term. Football clubs have always operated in that way.
“Yes, what you have discussed puts an emphasis on player development. But this club is about so much more than a business plan. We have a duty to ensure young players play in our first team.”
The ‘pure profit’ benefit, however, is something that Ineos will recognise as vitally important in the club’s transfer strategy moving forward, as other Premier League clubs have done.