Fuck me do we really care. The subject has been argued to death.
Twiggie19 on
The reason they’ve spent less the last 5 years is becasue of the billions they’d spent in the 10 years prior.
You dont need to spend as much when you’ve already stacked your squad in every position with £50 mill plus players.
Own_Deer431 on
you could back and forwards all day on this, doesn’t really matter
ScrumNause24 on
Yes hes right about net spend. Just exposed why its a useless metric though. Include wage bill and agent fees. Now we’re closer to the actual picture.
Loud_Ad_7678 on
Honestly, his point wasn’t about how much money they spend. He was being sarcastic. Let’s be real: the gap in spending between the top five teams isn’t *massive*, yet he won six league titles out of eight. I don’t like Pep or City, and I don’t enjoy the way they play or how they operate in the market. They don’t always pay huge transfer fees, many of their deals are actually very smart, but they offer high wages to convince players.
Still, you have to be honest: they’ve dominated the league over the last decade, and their spending isn’t absurdly higher than clubs like United, Arsenal, or Chelsea. How many Premier League titles did those teams win in that period? None. And that’s exactly the point Pep was making. Yes, City spend a lot, but so did the others, and they won nothing. Give City some credit.
Oopasnoop on
When are we going to stop solely relying on ‘net spend’? You need to include player salaries, bonuses and agent fees. Wages are a much better indicator of expected performance, and you can combine it with actual spend and net spend to add to the analysis.
City’s wages are (without bonuses and other payments) £248,835,600 per year as of 2025.
Arsenal are 2nd highest with – £189,956,000
Then liverpool at £176,800,000
City not running away with the league despite having 1.3x the wage bill of their closest competitor is really poor. They have had the highest wage bill every year since 2021 (according to https://www.spotrac.com/) their dominance over the past few years was on the pitch and still is off the pitch. Pretending like City deserve any sympathy at all is a fallacy
OptimisticRealist__ on
Yes he is, but people arent ready for this conversation.
PennyWhyte on
It is simple really. Spend millions to stack up quality players for every position in your starting XI including subs, still spend millions for their replacements but now you can sell them for profit because well, they are valuable assets that you are trying to move on.
Other clubs have to buy premium players while moving on squad level or mid level players because they do not have the option or 2 quality players per position. Same thing with Chelsea except they buy in bulk and hoarded a lot of home grown players that they sold at premiums.
Arsenal and to a certain extent Liverpool are the only ones that have done it organically, with the latter greatly benefitting heavily from the Coutinho sale to Barcelona. Once you game the system, then you are able to spend more because you have generated more revenue over the years from winning silverware and qualifying for Europe consequitively because well…you had a stacked squad to begin with.
Keelan_____ on
He was being fucking sarcastic 🤦♂️
Glad to see jokes aren’t lost on anyone.
AtomWorker on
Manchester City is actually second in outgoing spending. The fact that incoming is so high is just a consequence of them being a big, successful club with a lot of players to shift. Also, you’d expect a well run org to bring in more money than they spend.
Arguing that net spend is a problem reminds me of idiots who end up deeper in debt because they spent their small pay raise on a new car.
wonwonfive on
Another post of people crying about city. I love Reddit
11 Comments
Fuck me do we really care. The subject has been argued to death.
The reason they’ve spent less the last 5 years is becasue of the billions they’d spent in the 10 years prior.
You dont need to spend as much when you’ve already stacked your squad in every position with £50 mill plus players.
you could back and forwards all day on this, doesn’t really matter
Yes hes right about net spend. Just exposed why its a useless metric though. Include wage bill and agent fees. Now we’re closer to the actual picture.
Honestly, his point wasn’t about how much money they spend. He was being sarcastic. Let’s be real: the gap in spending between the top five teams isn’t *massive*, yet he won six league titles out of eight. I don’t like Pep or City, and I don’t enjoy the way they play or how they operate in the market. They don’t always pay huge transfer fees, many of their deals are actually very smart, but they offer high wages to convince players.
Still, you have to be honest: they’ve dominated the league over the last decade, and their spending isn’t absurdly higher than clubs like United, Arsenal, or Chelsea. How many Premier League titles did those teams win in that period? None. And that’s exactly the point Pep was making. Yes, City spend a lot, but so did the others, and they won nothing. Give City some credit.
When are we going to stop solely relying on ‘net spend’? You need to include player salaries, bonuses and agent fees. Wages are a much better indicator of expected performance, and you can combine it with actual spend and net spend to add to the analysis.
City’s wages are (without bonuses and other payments) £248,835,600 per year as of 2025.
Arsenal are 2nd highest with – £189,956,000
Then liverpool at £176,800,000
City not running away with the league despite having 1.3x the wage bill of their closest competitor is really poor. They have had the highest wage bill every year since 2021 (according to https://www.spotrac.com/) their dominance over the past few years was on the pitch and still is off the pitch. Pretending like City deserve any sympathy at all is a fallacy
Yes he is, but people arent ready for this conversation.
It is simple really. Spend millions to stack up quality players for every position in your starting XI including subs, still spend millions for their replacements but now you can sell them for profit because well, they are valuable assets that you are trying to move on.
Other clubs have to buy premium players while moving on squad level or mid level players because they do not have the option or 2 quality players per position. Same thing with Chelsea except they buy in bulk and hoarded a lot of home grown players that they sold at premiums.
Arsenal and to a certain extent Liverpool are the only ones that have done it organically, with the latter greatly benefitting heavily from the Coutinho sale to Barcelona. Once you game the system, then you are able to spend more because you have generated more revenue over the years from winning silverware and qualifying for Europe consequitively because well…you had a stacked squad to begin with.
He was being fucking sarcastic 🤦♂️
Glad to see jokes aren’t lost on anyone.
Manchester City is actually second in outgoing spending. The fact that incoming is so high is just a consequence of them being a big, successful club with a lot of players to shift. Also, you’d expect a well run org to bring in more money than they spend.
Arguing that net spend is a problem reminds me of idiots who end up deeper in debt because they spent their small pay raise on a new car.
Another post of people crying about city. I love Reddit