THE PROFIT: Manchester United Will Save Around £3.7M in Salary Payments With André Onana’s Departure to Trabzonspor
When Manchester United confirmed that André Onana would leave on loan to Trabzonspor, the focus immediately turned to footballing reasons: the goalkeeper’s patchy form, his troubled relationship with Old Trafford supporters, and what the move meant for new head coach Rúben Amorim. But beyond the tactical shuffle and emotional noise, one figure has grabbed the attention of financial analysts and fans alike — United will reportedly save around £3.7 million in salary commitments over the duration of Onana’s absence.
This saving, though modest in comparison to United’s annual wage bill, still represents an important financial reprieve at a time when the club is trying to cut costs, comply with financial fair play (FFP) regulations, and balance the books under INEOS’s more disciplined stewardship.
—
Breaking Down the £3.7M Saving
Onana signed from Inter Milan in the summer of 2023 for a fee of £47.2 million, replacing long-serving David de Gea. At the time, United handed him a lucrative contract worth approximately £195,000 per week. For a player expected to be the long-term solution in goal, that figure was seen as an investment.
However, his struggles — high-profile errors in the Champions League, questionable decision-making, and inconsistencies in the Premier League — turned the spotlight harshly onto him. The loan move to Trabzonspor removes his wages, or at least a substantial portion of them, from United’s books.
Over the span of his loan, which runs for around 18–20 weeks of the season, the savings add up to about £3.7 million. That’s not enough to transform the club’s financial standing overnight, but it’s a meaningful dent, especially when considered alongside other recent wage offloads such as Jadon Sancho, Donny van de Beek, and Mason Greenwood leaving temporarily.
—
Why Every Penny Matters
Manchester United’s wage bill is consistently among the highest in Europe, hovering around the £215–230 million per year mark. While their commercial income remains enormous, the post-Sir Alex Ferguson era has been marked by bloated contracts handed to underperforming players.
From Alexis Sánchez to Phil Jones, the club has often been guilty of overpaying talent that offered little return on the pitch. The INEOS era, spearheaded by Sir Jim Ratcliffe, has promised a cultural reset: no more reckless spending, tighter controls on wages, and a focus on sustainable squad building.
In this climate, the £3.7 million saved from Onana’s loan departure is not just a small relief — it is a statement. It demonstrates the willingness of the club’s new leadership to move quickly when a deal is not working, and to prioritize financial responsibility alongside footballing ambition.
—
The Wider Wage Strategy
Onana is far from the only player whose exit has eased the wage burden. In recent months:
Jadon Sancho (loan to Borussia Dortmund) took a significant portion of his £350,000-per-week salary off the books.
Mason Greenwood (loan to Marseille) saw United save around £2.5 million in wages across the season.
Donny van de Beek (loan to Girona) shaved off another sizeable amount.
When combined with Onana’s £3.7 million saving, the club has trimmed more than £15–20 million in annualized salary costs across several moves.
For perspective, that figure could cover the wages of a new world-class signing in January or allow United to reinvest in long-term infrastructure such as Carrington upgrades without pushing against FFP boundaries.
—
The Footballing Context
Of course, the financial benefit doesn’t erase the footballing gamble. United now enter a stretch of the season with a reshaped goalkeeping department. With Onana out, the club will rely more heavily on Altay Bayındır — ironically, a former Fenerbahçe goalkeeper who knows Turkish football well — alongside veteran backup Tom Heaton.
Amorim is believed to have sanctioned Onana’s loan in part to reduce dressing-room tensions and give Bayındır the platform to prove himself. If the Turkish international seizes his chance, United could emerge with both a leaner wage bill and a new first-choice keeper who costs less in wages.
But if Bayındır struggles, Amorim will face criticism for sending away a goalkeeper signed only a year ago at enormous expense.
—
What £3.7M Really Means
To the average fan, £3.7 million may sound like a drop in the ocean for a club of United’s stature. After all, they are the self-styled “biggest club in the world,” with revenues regularly surpassing £600 million annually.
Yet, in football accounting terms, savings like these have an outsized impact. UEFA’s financial regulations mean that clubs must balance transfer spending with wage commitments and revenue streams. By trimming £3.7 million here, £5 million there, United create breathing room to make bigger moves without breaching compliance.
It also signals a new philosophy: marginal gains. For years, United threw money at problems, only to find themselves hamstrung by an inflexible wage structure. Now, by shedding unnecessary costs piece by piece, they position themselves for smarter squad planning.
—
Fans’ Mixed Reaction
Supporters are divided over the news. Some see Onana’s departure, and the associated savings, as proof of a smarter, ruthless Manchester United finally learning from past mistakes.
“It’s not about the £3.7M — it’s about finally being pragmatic. No more protecting expensive flops.” tweeted one fan.
Others, however, view it as an embarrassment that a £47m signing is already being offloaded to Turkey only a year after his arrival.
“We’re saving money, sure, but look at the bigger picture — this is still a disaster. Another expensive failure.” argued another.
This tension captures the current mood at Old Trafford: cautious optimism that INEOS are steering the club toward fiscal discipline, but frustration that the mistakes of past regimes are still being paid for.
—
Pundits and Analysts Chime In
Financial analysts have praised the decision. Football finance expert Kieran Maguire noted:
> “The £3.7 million saving may look small, but when you add up these moves across a squad, it makes a massive difference to flexibility in the transfer market. United are finally behaving like a properly run football club.”
Meanwhile, pundits like Gary Neville and Roy Keane have struck a more football-centric tone, focusing on whether Onana’s exit destabilizes the team rather than the financial upside. Keane bluntly remarked:
> “I don’t care if they save £3.7m. What matters is who’s in goal, who’s performing, and whether the team wins games.”
—
Looking Ahead
The £3.7 million salary saving is only part of the story. Come summer, United must decide whether Onana has a future at Old Trafford or whether a permanent exit is the best course. If Bayındır impresses and Onana flourishes in Turkey, the goalkeeper could attract offers that allow United to recoup part of their transfer outlay.
In the meantime, the financial breathing room created by his departure could strengthen Amorim’s hand in the January transfer market, where midfield reinforcements remain the priority. Every pound saved on wages increases the likelihood that United can strike decisively for a top target without triggering another round of FFP scrutiny.
—
Conclusion
André Onana’s loan departure to Trabzonspor may be remembered by fans primarily as a footballing misstep — a £47 million investment that failed to deliver. But in financial terms, the deal provides Manchester United with a £3.7 million salary reprieve that fits neatly into the new INEOS blueprint: cut waste, streamline costs, and build a leaner, smarter squad.
In a season where every decision will be scrutinized, this saving is a reminder that even small margins matter. The true profit may not just be in the money saved, but in the shift toward a culture where Manchester United finally behave like a modern football club — financially astute, strategically ruthless, and always with an eye on the bigger picture.
Leave a Reply