MUFC BASE

30/07/2025

BREAKING NEWS: Leipzig’s asking price for Benjamin Šeško is £64 million, plus add-ons and a percentage of any future sale, as just reported by David Ornstein.

It was reported earlier this evening that RB Leipzig are also interested in Højlund in case Šeško leaves this summer. In my opinion, we should offer £35 million plus Højlund as part of the deal.

What do you think about RB Leipzig’s asking price for Benjamin Šeško?

30/07/2025

Don’t lie... did you forget we have a match tomorrow at 2:30 AM?

30/07/2025

TWO years ago, Benjamin Sesko was asked whether he could see himself at Manchester United.

He replied: 👇
"Honestly maybe in a few years, right now am not ready for that level. I still have so much to learn, so much room to improve."

"Let's say if my maximum is 100%, I'm currently at 60%"

"I'm still growing and improving year by year."

"And once I reach 100%. I'll be ready for anything."

"I think it's best to take that step by step when the time is right."

30/07/2025

𝘽𝙍𝙀𝘼𝙆𝙄𝙉𝙂: Manchester United have opened formal talks for Benjamin Šeško after sending a delegation to Germany to meet with RB Leipzig officials. (According to Alex Crook and Ben Jacobs of the Daily Mail)

When it comes to Šeško, I just don’t think Manchester United can afford to take a £65-70M gamble on another striker who’s still developing. It’s too much of a risk.

• Isak at Real Sociedad: 44 goals in 132 games
• Šeško at Leipzig: 39 goals in 87 games

Both are more than just goal scorers, and yes — Šeško’s numbers at this stage of his career are very promising compared to Isak’s. But let’s not forget: Newcastle gave Isak the ideal environment to thrive.

Now ask yourself — is Manchester United’s current situation anywhere close to being the kind of stable, well-structured setup where a striker like 22 years old Isak could thrive, say within six months? Probably not.

Some say Šeško is experienced and consistent. But in reality, he averages just 13–14 Bundesliga goals per season. He definitely has the physical attributes to become a top striker, no doubt about that.

But the bigger issue is this: when was the last time United provided the right conditions for a young, developing striker to actually reach their full potential? Not recently.

30/07/2025

This is exactly what I’m worried about if we sign Sesko, how patient can most United fans really be? How patient can the media be?

Because if we’re being realistic, the chances of Sesko starting slow in the Premier League that’s far more competitive and demanding than the Bundesliga are very high.

When he goes 7 to 10 games without truly hitting the ground running, how patient will we as United fans be with him?

One of the biggest issues with the United fanbase is that many of us struggle to be realistic. If you’re ready to accept that Sesko might struggle in his first season and you're still willing to back him all the way, then that’s fine. But if you're not... well, that’s where the problem starts.

30/07/2025

To those Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool fans in the comments section — cry all you want from now till tomorrow, the facts remain the same.

𝙏𝙍𝙊𝙋𝙃𝙄𝙀𝙎 say it all
𝙂𝙇𝙊𝘽𝘼𝙇 𝙍𝙀𝘾𝙊𝙂𝙉𝙄𝙏𝙄𝙊𝙉 says it all
𝙃𝙄𝙎𝙏𝙊𝙍𝙔 says it all
𝙀𝙓𝙋𝙀𝘾𝙏𝘼𝙏𝙄𝙊𝙉𝙎 say it all
𝙎𝙏𝘼𝙏𝙎 say it all

Manchester United will forever be the biggest club in England and arguably the biggest club in the world 🌍

No Premier League club has more head-to-head wins against Manchester United.

Manchester United isn’t arguably the biggest club in England... it IS the biggest club in England. 💯

30/07/2025

The only thing stopping Newcastle from finalizing this deal is Sesko waiting to see if United actually make a bid for him.

NUFC is ready for anything but the player wants United first, If Sesko wanted Newcastle they would have already signed him. He is waiting to see how serious Manchester United are.

Unfortunately United never acts quick

29/07/2025

Ollie Watkins, Rasmus Hojlund and Benjamin (Hmm...) Sesko compared. 🤔

29/07/2025

What are we really going to do with Mount? Our No.7 might end up behind Cunha, Mbeumo, Zirkzee and even Amad if he plays as the No.10 when Mbeumo isn’t available. Mount could realistically drop to third or even fourth choice in the pecking order.

Mason Mount is a decent player, no doubt, but I don’t see any reason why Ten Hag should have approved his signing in the first place. He doesn’t possess anything we needed during Ten Hag’s tenure and the same applies under Amorim.

Garnacho had every right to be frustrated about being benched in the Europa League final, the sad thing is, he just went about it the wrong way.

Mount may be a good player, but he’s not needed in this squad at all. He really doesn’t posses or offer anything we need, whether in midfield or attack.

29/07/2025

I understand the argument but £60 million for Watkins? Not even in euros — pounds?! 😳

29/07/2025

With Chelsea’s four owners — Clearlake, Todd Boehly, Hansjörg Wyss and Mark Walter — contributing £1,500,000,000 to Chelsea FC the last three years, a debt free club in 2022, it begs the question how United possibly could compete only getting $300m from Ineos and being 1bn in debt.

But while Ineos is the largest MUFC shareholder, the Glazer siblings combined for a bigger stake. Can Ineos or anyone else be expected to support the club financially under these circumstances?

I am an expert on one thing only, Public M&A. Pick up a Chambers or Legal 500 publication over top lawyers in Europe, I am in there (in this fairly narrow field).

Here are my comments:
🔺𝘽𝙞𝙜 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙞𝙚𝙨 𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙗𝙚𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙚, 𝙬𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙬𝙚 𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙡, “𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙘𝙖𝙥𝙞𝙩𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙯𝙚𝙙”. The Cambridge dictionary puts it perfectly: “If a business is undercapitalized, it has less money than it needs in order to work effectively or to grow.”

Even if we wouldn’t use the word regularly — we all to a certain degree think that Manchester United is “undercapitalized”.

United is not alone in that. An Airline company like British Airways or Lufthansa can find themselves undercapitalized after having its fleet parked on the ground during Covid. A car manufacturer like Tesla can find itself undercapitalized when it needs to ramp-up Model Y production and the building of gigafactories, or a Nokia can suddenly find its mobile phone business being hopelessly behind iPhone.

🔺𝙒𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙙𝙤𝙚𝙨 𝙖 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙮 𝙙𝙤, 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙘𝙖𝙥𝙞𝙩𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙯𝙚𝙙? It is not uncommon for companies to issue new shares to strengthen the financials — even if they have a diverse ownership (more than one owner).

Both British Airways and Lufthansa issued new shares during 2020, for about a total of £4bn, for the above reason. Tesla issued shares for the above reasons for $12 billion. Nokia issued shares for a billion.

🔺𝙒𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙙𝙤𝙚𝙨 𝙞𝙩 𝙩𝙖𝙠𝙚 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙖 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙮 𝙩𝙤 𝙞𝙨𝙨𝙪𝙚 𝙢𝙤𝙧𝙚 𝙨𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙨? It is a resolution that the shareholders of the company must make.

🔺𝘽𝙪𝙩 𝙬𝙖𝙞𝙩 — 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙬𝙤𝙧𝙠𝙨 𝙛𝙞𝙣𝙚 𝙞𝙛 𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙨𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙝𝙤𝙡𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙢𝙤𝙣𝙚𝙮, 𝙗𝙪𝙩 𝙞𝙛 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙮 𝙙𝙤𝙣’𝙩 — 𝙬𝙝𝙮 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙨𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙝𝙤𝙡𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧 𝙖𝙜𝙧𝙚𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙨𝙚𝙡𝙡 𝙣𝙚𝙬 𝙨𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙨 𝙩𝙤 𝙨𝙤𝙢𝙚𝙤𝙣𝙚 𝙚𝙡𝙨𝙚?

In relation to new share issues by companies to raise capital, we talk about the “dilutive effect”.

A share issue has — no — financial dilutive effect if the shares are issued at market value. Let’s say you and me own 50 shares each in the Swedish Rumble X conglomerate (very generously) valued to £100. Why should I agree to issue 50 more shares to you for £50? My ownership would be diluted from 50% to 33% (I would own 50 of 150 votes instead of 50 of 100 votes, with 1 vote per share). Because financially, I am not diluted. I go from owning 50% of something worth 100 to owning 33% of something worth 150. If I think the Swedish Rumble X conglomerate could grow faster with a fresh £50 burning a hole in my pocket that I could use to boost posts — it’s beneficial for me too!

🔺𝙎𝙤 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙨𝙖𝙮𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙬𝙚 𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙖𝙨𝙨𝙪𝙢𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙂𝙡𝙖𝙯𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙝𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙞𝙡𝙮 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙤𝙬 𝙄𝙣𝙚𝙤𝙨 𝙩𝙤 𝙗𝙪𝙮 𝙣𝙚𝙬 𝙨𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙨 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙖𝙣𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧 £1𝙗𝙣? No, I can’t say that they would, nor that they wouldn’t. Nor can anyone else going on the information we have.

The Glazers own 69% of the votes and Ineos own 29% of the votes. If Ineos subscribe for more shares, the Glazers might fall under the 69% threshold. This might be important for them. Or not. We don’t know.

🔺𝙎𝙤 𝙞𝙛 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙙𝙤𝙣’𝙩 𝙠𝙣𝙤𝙬, 𝙖𝙣𝙮𝙤𝙣𝙚 𝙚𝙡𝙨𝙚 𝙙𝙤𝙚𝙨𝙣’𝙩 𝙠𝙣𝙤𝙬 — 𝙬𝙝𝙮 𝙞𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙖𝙣 𝙞𝙨𝙨𝙪𝙚?

That is just it — this should be the first thing the club’s representatives should be asked. Omar Berrada and Jim Ratcliffe are giving interviews.

Chelsea has spent £1,6bn on transfers the last 3 years while United has spent £730m. Clubs like Liverpool and City have wage bills that are £150-200m more expansive than United’s — per season. The differences between United and these clubs in this regard is in absolute terms as big as the difference between Norwich and Manchester United.

What is the plan? How can they not be asked this? ?

🔺𝘽𝙪𝙩 𝙨𝙝𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙𝙣’𝙩 𝙬𝙚 𝙜𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙄𝙣𝙚𝙤𝙨 𝙩𝙞𝙢𝙚? Sure — if they have a plan that sounds reasonable. But while cutting costs of £50-60m per is certainly helpful — it would take 10 years for that to add up to the difference between what we have spent the last 3 years and what Chelsea has spent the last 3 years.

And since Chelsea, Liverpool, City and Arsenal are able to invest more in their squad than we are in ours — because Manchester United is very under-capitalized — THEY end up earning more and more money each season, while we end up earning less money.

And we still haven’t talked about the 1bn in debt that United has. Ratcliffe is complaining on having to pay 80m for past signing this summer. But after 18 months of being owned by Ineos, our debt is just growing. In 2029, we will on July 1 pay cash for signing Cunha.

The stadium? It won’t be finished before 2030 — in the best of worlds.

What is the plan?

29/07/2025

Looking at this picture, I’m honestly starting to feel bad for Wolves and Brentford, it really seems like we’ve ripped them off with the fees we paid for Cunha and Mbeumo.

Omar Berrada you're too heartless... 😢😭