[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]  The Swedish Rumble 🔰 [@SwedishRumble](/creator/twitter/SwedishRumble) on x 35.4K followers Created: 2025-07-28 15:32:43 UTC I get many questions on whether Manchester United can afford to sign Benjamin Sesko -- this is how I think it must be viewed! This analysis might seem like it is grim -- but the situation described is not unusual for big companies nor does it have to be grim at all (!). In a way, this is a positive view. But this is how I think it must be viewed: 🔺Manchester United is a club that can be compared to a fisherman sitting in a life raft in the middle of the Berring Sea after his boat has sunken. Can the fishermen get back to port in Dutch Harbor, Alaska? Of course he can. Commercial ships has what is called Emergency Position-Indicating Radio Beacons (EPIRBs). They are positioned so that if the boat sinks, it will float up to the surface and send out an emergency signal with its position. The life boat will probably also have some kind of tracking system. Give it a maximum XX hours and there should be a helicopter from the US coastguard in the air, lifting the fishermen to safety. So yes -- the fishermen should be able to get back home safely, with outside help. 🔺Can Manchester United afford Benjamin Sesko? Yes, with outside help. So that means that we can't get him because Ineos and the Glazers won't fund it? No, Sesko is not putting us in the life raft, we are already in it, and we have been in it since at least 2022. In the life raft, you can act like you know that help should be on the way or you can act like you know that help won't be coming. In the later case, you have to collect rainwater. Perhaps try to build a sail to get to land. We are not doing --anything -- indicating that we don't expect that help is on the way. We are long past the point where the club could afford to built a new OT or even refurbish OT -- without outside support. If Keir Starmer today announced that a new law had been adopted stipulating that all clubs must be fan owned and banning outside support -- we would immediately scrap Project XXX and any plans for a new OT and launch an optimistic "Plan 2035". Perhaps we in this scenario could sign one player like Cunha or Mbuemo -- but largely, we would look at players that are targets of Wolves, Everton and Bournemouth instead of the players we currently are looking at. We are indisputably 1bn in financial debt and about 2bn in debt to a fictionary 'Maintainance fund' for Old Trafford. If United is to service a 3bn debt, our resources on the transfer market is comparable to Everton. 🔺This is the reason for why the Glazers put Manchester United up for sale. MUFC is in significant need of outside support. If you got a fishermen in a life raft out at Bering Sea in January -- you are not leaning back counting on the currents to bring him to land. You will send the choppers. The X siblings cannot provide the outside support needed. The question is just -- how much support are the group of owners willing to accept? Because outside support comes at a cost. Either through dilution of the current owner's control of the club or through the current owners themselves providing the support. 🔺So can United afford to sign Sesko? If you want to say no, you could say that. If a XX y/o teenager of a middle class family, empties her bank account to afford a one-way ticket to Ayia Napa to party with her friends for a week without her parents permission -- she can de facto not afford a ticket home. So you could say that United can't afford Sesko. But with those glasses on we couldn't have afforded Lenny Yoro, Ugarte and both of Cunha and Mbuemo either. But we de facto could afford them. To continue the analogy above -- when we called our parents asking them to wire money for a return ticket from Ayia Napa -- they said 'Of course hon'. So the most correct answer is -- yes, if Ineos is willing to underwrite it, we can afford him (and allowed to do so by the Glazers). 🔺What about PSR and UEFA's FFP rules? We can tell for certain that Ùnited never really been close to breaching PSR after it was revealed that the club submits the Red Football Limited Inc financials for review and not the accounts for the listed parent. When like Ten Hag said that he had been told that "there is no space for FFP to do something about this lack of quantity in the striker position" -- it shows how the Glazers used the smoke and mirror approach not only towards fans, but also internally (no wonder they never brought in a football person to run these things, only their accountants). Like the club was already in the life raft -- but FFP did not prevent spending. United is also fine under UEFA's Squad Cost Rule. Remember that since we are not in Europe, we are not subject to this rule. "Worst case scenario" -- we qualify for the Europa Conference League next season, and get no real TV money but we still become subject to the Squad Cost Rule. In this scenario, we could spend about another £80m in transfer fees. If we qualify for the EL, we could spend about £150m and with the CL about £200m. This is assuming we basically only sell players for £30m this summer. So we are fine here too. The Europa Conference League Scenario:  XXXXXX engagements  **Related Topics** [sesko](/topic/sesko) [benjamin sesko](/topic/benjamin-sesko) [manchester united](/topic/manchester-united) [Post Link](https://x.com/SwedishRumble/status/1949855545243979934)
[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]
The Swedish Rumble 🔰 @SwedishRumble on x 35.4K followers
Created: 2025-07-28 15:32:43 UTC
I get many questions on whether Manchester United can afford to sign Benjamin Sesko -- this is how I think it must be viewed!
This analysis might seem like it is grim -- but the situation described is not unusual for big companies nor does it have to be grim at all (!). In a way, this is a positive view.
But this is how I think it must be viewed:
🔺Manchester United is a club that can be compared to a fisherman sitting in a life raft in the middle of the Berring Sea after his boat has sunken. Can the fishermen get back to port in Dutch Harbor, Alaska?
Of course he can. Commercial ships has what is called Emergency Position-Indicating Radio Beacons (EPIRBs). They are positioned so that if the boat sinks, it will float up to the surface and send out an emergency signal with its position. The life boat will probably also have some kind of tracking system. Give it a maximum XX hours and there should be a helicopter from the US coastguard in the air, lifting the fishermen to safety.
So yes -- the fishermen should be able to get back home safely, with outside help.
🔺Can Manchester United afford Benjamin Sesko? Yes, with outside help.
So that means that we can't get him because Ineos and the Glazers won't fund it? No, Sesko is not putting us in the life raft, we are already in it, and we have been in it since at least 2022.
In the life raft, you can act like you know that help should be on the way or you can act like you know that help won't be coming. In the later case, you have to collect rainwater. Perhaps try to build a sail to get to land.
We are not doing --anything -- indicating that we don't expect that help is on the way. We are long past the point where the club could afford to built a new OT or even refurbish OT -- without outside support. If Keir Starmer today announced that a new law had been adopted stipulating that all clubs must be fan owned and banning outside support -- we would immediately scrap Project XXX and any plans for a new OT and launch an optimistic "Plan 2035". Perhaps we in this scenario could sign one player like Cunha or Mbuemo -- but largely, we would look at players that are targets of Wolves, Everton and Bournemouth instead of the players we currently are looking at.
We are indisputably 1bn in financial debt and about 2bn in debt to a fictionary 'Maintainance fund' for Old Trafford. If United is to service a 3bn debt, our resources on the transfer market is comparable to Everton.
🔺This is the reason for why the Glazers put Manchester United up for sale. MUFC is in significant need of outside support. If you got a fishermen in a life raft out at Bering Sea in January -- you are not leaning back counting on the currents to bring him to land. You will send the choppers. The X siblings cannot provide the outside support needed.
The question is just -- how much support are the group of owners willing to accept? Because outside support comes at a cost. Either through dilution of the current owner's control of the club or through the current owners themselves providing the support.
🔺So can United afford to sign Sesko? If you want to say no, you could say that. If a XX y/o teenager of a middle class family, empties her bank account to afford a one-way ticket to Ayia Napa to party with her friends for a week without her parents permission -- she can de facto not afford a ticket home. So you could say that United can't afford Sesko. But with those glasses on we couldn't have afforded Lenny Yoro, Ugarte and both of Cunha and Mbuemo either.
But we de facto could afford them. To continue the analogy above -- when we called our parents asking them to wire money for a return ticket from Ayia Napa -- they said 'Of course hon'. So the most correct answer is -- yes, if Ineos is willing to underwrite it, we can afford him (and allowed to do so by the Glazers).
🔺What about PSR and UEFA's FFP rules? We can tell for certain that Ùnited never really been close to breaching PSR after it was revealed that the club submits the Red Football Limited Inc financials for review and not the accounts for the listed parent. When like Ten Hag said that he had been told that "there is no space for FFP to do something about this lack of quantity in the striker position" -- it shows how the Glazers used the smoke and mirror approach not only towards fans, but also internally (no wonder they never brought in a football person to run these things, only their accountants). Like the club was already in the life raft -- but FFP did not prevent spending. United is also fine under UEFA's Squad Cost Rule. Remember that since we are not in Europe, we are not subject to this rule. "Worst case scenario" -- we qualify for the Europa Conference League next season, and get no real TV money but we still become subject to the Squad Cost Rule. In this scenario, we could spend about another £80m in transfer fees. If we qualify for the EL, we could spend about £150m and with the CL about £200m. This is assuming we basically only sell players for £30m this summer. So we are fine here too.
The Europa Conference League Scenario:
XXXXXX engagements
Related Topics sesko benjamin sesko manchester united