27 May 2026 06:38:03
Once it was “no value in the market”, now despite saying we want “best in class”, we are now “unwilling to overpay”.
I get it, we don’t want to be in a bidding war for Anderson. However, we tried that with last year's intake and paid what the clubs wanted in the end.
Anderson is the stand out player, if he isn’t in the shirt next season then I think it’s a mistake. No doubt people will say it’s too much but are likely to be the same ones saying it’s not our money.
27 May 2026 07:18:02
Red Man,
Egikdt, u agree with you. I think he wants City.
27 May 2026 07:42:52
MH
I know. If he wants City, ok, he may underestimate us.
However, we have had, what, 25 years of excuses under the Glazers. The latest "unwilling to overpay" just annoys me to hear. Why not just say "protect our dividends".
27 May 2026 08:59:28
What's your reliable source for this story, Red Man.
I've read the same article, you don't mention that he gave the ball away 17 times per game last season on average. You berate Bruno for giving it away less.
There were several stories this morning. Another saying we are calling him continuously, trying to convince him to join, but you don't quote that as it doesn't show bias against the ownership.
You are so transparent, we can see through your bias.
You have no idea what's true, so you quote random stories but don't quote the random stories that say the opposite.
You are biased and have a completely biased view, everybody here can see it.
Every single respectable news outlet is reporting that answers on has agreed terms with City. If that's the case, we need to move on. Let him go there and give the ball away 17 times a game in a position much deeper where you didn't like Bruno giving it away. Perhaps him losing possession so often in bad areas is why Forest struggled so much this season.
27 May 2026 09:01:22
How can you say you know he wants City, but also say it’s a mistake from us if we don’t get him? How much would you be willing to pay for him then?! City go in at £100M. He wants them. What do we offer? £110, £120, £150M?! For a player who doesn’t want to come to us? Then his wages?
We’ve spent over a decade getting mugged off by clubs, players and agents, and I think there is still an element of that that we are trying to undo. Everyone on here, I suspect, wants Anderson as the number 1 signing, but sometimes it’s just unrealistic. I don’t think we paid what Wolves or Brentford wanted last year for Cunha and Mbuemo.
I think we did better, and I believe at the time reports of their valuation and what we paid were different in our favour.
What we all don’t know for sure at the moment is whether we have a chance or not of getting Anderson. It’s only reports that he wants City; I don’t believe anything concrete from his side has come out stating this?! We also don’t know his feelings on United, and whether Guardiola leaving changes things for him. If there’s a chance and United say they won’t match the offer, then fair enough, we can be critical. If there is no chance of getting him, then you’re creating something out of nothing.
27 May 2026 09:31:17
Bruno in CM gave it away in dangerous areas. Anderson passed his audition at OT with flying colours. Superb player.
If he wants City that's fine, but what I rail about is the language around it as explained.
Yes, I am totally biased against the Glazers. I made absolutely no secret of it, even when people on here told me they were ok. I understand the financial implications, and understood it at the time they arrived and said so.
Poor things have had to do without dividends for a couple of years. I also am not impressed with Ratcliffe for enabling the Glazers to stay. So yes, Glazers out, Ratcliffe out.
If he wants City, say so, walk away, but don't give us a new saying "unwilling to overpay".
27 May 2026 12:25:14
Red Man, you and we all have been in the game for a long time, so we know that teams don't pay what they are asked to. You forget that some reports say that City only wants to pay 80 million, instead of Forest's 105 million asking price. It's negotiations, you can't just go and pay what they want.
City don't pay, and sometimes walk away from deals if the price is too big and not fair, like with Maguire.
Furthermore, we will always have the "unwilling to overpay" excuse for players that reportedly prefer other teams, to save face.
27 May 2026 13:06:22
RedMan, the challenge, especially for a club like United, is that you don't want to publicly go around saying we wanted X but he chose to go to Y. Better to say we wanted X, but under certain conditions which didn't work out.
27 May 2026 13:42:15
The club have said nothing. No comment at all, but you still quote like they have said something when they haven't.
Auditions are more than 1 game long, don't be so knee-jerk. The fact that he averages losing possession 17 times in a game can't be lost on you.
More than Bruno when he was playing deeper. So, please compare apples with apples, and stop extracting bits that suit you.
I like Anderson a lot, but there are 2 sides to every story, we can't just stamp our feet and talk about only 1 of those sides.
27 May 2026 17:52:00
TW,
Someone is feeding lines to the press.
I will talk about what the owners have done, we watched City buy players like Aguero whilst saying no value in the market. We saw what replaced Ronaldo when they got their £80m to hold up the financial accounts.
If a football decision was made because of someone losing the ball, that's one thing. However, we all know United decisions are not made on that alone, and I do think this overpay rubbish is an underlying issue. Rice went to Arsenal, where were we?
There are two sides to every story, the football side and the financial one.
AM2,
I understand the dynamics and am acutely aware of how to negotiate. Yes, there are challenges, but spinning it as they have done for a long time should be seen straight through.
Heaven,
Agree, but on Maguire I wonder if City played us a bit. Yes, I understand negotiations and have that in my skill set, yet did we not end up paying what clubs wanted for MBueno, Sesko and Cunha anyway? Just wasted weeks.
27 May 2026 21:18:34
Redman there are reports from Romano or whatever he calls himself that's we have been pestering Anderson to sign continously calling him. But you don't like that story so don't mention it. Who is feeding those lines. Time to stop making assumptions because they suit you.
I think Anderson is top target but if we can't convince him then so be it we need to move on.
Its a much better story from the club that we opted out instead of saying he chose city. Your bias as you say and will find fault with everything they do or don't do. Its hard to have a proper discussion when you live in your own echo chamber.
27 May 2026 21:23:00
Our owners, Redman, are one of the biggest spenders. It's not what they spend, it's who they spend it on. When Arsenal paid 95m for Rice, we were busy spending on Eth's love children, like Onana and the other little twerp on the left wing. So it's not a lack of spending, it's a lack of spending wisely.
Hopefully your ego will let you admit that.
27 May 2026 21:47:25
TW
Not getting into a deep discussion on our owners at this time of evening. Look at the costs of the debt & the debt still remaining, and the issues it causes us. Over a billion in costs. That could have gone towards building a stadium.
More difficult to borrow with existing debt.
No excuse for what they have done, none.
If Anderson doesn't want us, then I agree, move on. However, let's not give out the messaging that is out there.
27 May 2026 22:46:35
Red Man, even if you end up paying what they asked (Mpuemo, for example), you have to negotiate and not be taken for granted. Sometimes you will lower the price, sometimes you simply wont, but as you know, you must negotiate and I think you disagree because you are biased.
I dont think money will be a problem if Eliot chooses us, we will negotiate and find a solution with Forest.
But until he chooses us, we must save face, saying that we cant pay the price. The only way we cant compete with City is if they give him double our wages, but I dont think thats the case.
28 May 2026 06:51:59
Heaven
Negotiations are part of my business skill set, so I understand. SAF wasn't able to pay the price because of Glazernomics; they said there was no value in the market. Now we can't pay the price, and it's unwilling to overpay. Can't pay, don't want to pay, because dividends and profit are at stake, which drives these things.
I would be surprised if he hasn't made his mind up already, and City are waiting to see the price drop. I want to be his first choice, but top players like that have choices.
28 May 2026 12:59:05
I don't think it's about dividends. I think it's a strategic decision by Beralda. At City they used to buy players at a 60-70 million rate, so if, in 2 years' time, the transfers didn't work, they could sell. City could make a lot of 60 million transfers instead of fewer 100 million.
Of course you understand negotiations, but the problem is you think it's all about dividends if we don't pay the asking price for a player. What if we don't, but then go and pay more, as a sum, for other players and spend, say, 300+ million? At the end of the day, you forget that we are the biggest spenders, and that doesn't suit your opinion about only caring about dividends and not spending.
And, of course, the problem is that if you overpay once or twice, then you will always overpay and go back to the period we paid the biggest transfer fee for a defender that cost 20 million, Maguire.