A sale of Alejandro Garnacho would normally be unthinkable for Manchester United.
But cashing in on the Academy graduate could go a long way towards solving United's problems both on and off the pitch.
In many ways, lashing a young talent to a rival club like Chelsea for £60 million would be a blunt admission of how bad things are at Old Trafford.
But if the proceeds were used to fund a £300m sum to strengthen what boss Ruben Amorim has called 'the worst team' in the club's history, it could be worth it.
If Amorim could bring in a left wing-back, a forward and a midfielder in return for sacrificing Garnacho, it could be worth doing business.
And with United's owners also admitting the club is at risk of breaching Premier League financial rules, the money would also help avoid points deductions.
Like wanton striker Marcus Rashford, Garnacho is a goldmine when it comes to winning and sustainability rules.
A product of United's youth development system, the Argentine winger's current value on the club's books is £0, nothing, nada.
If United were to book £60m for Garnacho this month, it would immediately be recorded as £60m in pure profit on this season's accounts.
And it would, in theory at least, free up enormous spending power for Amorim as he tries to shape the roster to his system.
CASINO SPECIAL – BEST CASINO BONUSES FROM £10 DEPOSITS
That's because when clubs buy players, transfer fees are amortized for accounting purposes over the life of the contract, effectively spreading the cost.
So if United were to spend £100 million to sign striker Viktor Gyokeres on a five-year deal from Amorim's former club Sportling Lisbon, the annual cost of the deal would be £20 million.
Therefore, a £60m fee for Garnacho would see a three-year write-off on a Gyokeres deal.
Or a one-year write-off on £300m of spending for players signing a five-year contract at Old Trafford.
Ironically, it is Garnacho's biggest suitor Chelsea who have recently taken the lead in selling homegrown players to fund expenses.
Academy poster boy Mason Mount was sold to United for £60m in 2023, while former trainees Ruben Loftus-Cheek, Ethan Ampadu and Callum Hudson-Odoi pocketed £20m in pure PSF profits.
Chelsea used it to fund £400m of spending in 23/24.
Last summer the Blues cashed in Academy graduates Ian Maatsen, Conot Gallagher and Lewis Hall, allowing them to spend a further £200m on new signings.
Chelsea have had to find other creative ways to stay within the £105 million in losses allowed under PSR rules for each three-year period.
In 2022/2023 the club raised more than £70 million by selling hotels to a separate company also controlled by the owners. In 2023/24, the women's team was sold for an undisclosed sum in a similar deal.
Yet Chelsea have avoided charges for PSR breaches for the 2022/23 and 2023/24 seasons.
United have done that too, but only by the skin of their teeth.
And that is one of the reasons why Amorim is unlikely to have a 'full' £300m to spend if Garnacho is sold.
It is believed that United's PSR calculation for the three-year period ending 2023/24 included huge “add-backs” of around £40m related to losses in 2021/22 due to the Covid pandemic.
United claimed that the structure of some of their commercial deals, especially in China, and other factors caused them to suffer significantly greater losses than any other Premier League club, even though 2021/22 was the first season without Covid restrictions was played.
The club also appears to have been successful in arguing that around £35m of costs associated with INEOS' purchase of the club in February 2024 could also be disregarded for PSR purposes.
But United will not have the Covid-get-out-of-jail card for the three-year review period running until the end of this season, which will be the last under current financial regulations.
And in a letter to a fan group, club chiefs made it clear that the club could not continue to make losses at the current rate – more than £300 million in the past three seasons.
TRANSFER NEWS LIVE: STAY UP TO DATE WITH ALL THE LATEST MOVES FROM THE JANUARY WINDOW
The letter said: “This is not sustainable and if we do not act now we risk non-compliance with PSR/FFP. [financial fair play] demands in the coming years and will have a significant impact on our ability to compete on the field.”
INEOS has imposed major cost-cutting measures on the club, laying off a number of staff and cutting benefits, while ticket prices have also risen.
But the real impact of such measures will only become clear in the medium and long term.
The sale of Garnacho would immediately net United £60 million in cash.
How much would be used to bring in new players and how much would stabilize the club's financial position would be an argument for Amorim at INEOS.
However, it is clear that something needs to be done to address both situations quickly.
And if United can only secure a loan deal for Rashford in this window, then selling Garnacho seems the best – perhaps only – option.
Comments