That is the price though to be fair, when you buy a new TV on 0% finance you don't say it cost only the price of the initial deposit.
What winds me up is when they add on wages or (accidentally on purpose) quote the euro fee as GBP!
Like others have said - that's kind of missing the point, which is that the way fees are reported isn't applied consistently.
Look at the Sancho deal as an example. It's highly likely the Rags will have to pay Dortmund the full asking price - which amounts to £108m - but that Dortmund are open to negotiating on the payment structure.
So the Rags put out a briefing that they 'won't be bullied into overpaying for the player', then agree an initial payment of - say - £80m. This will be then be reported as the fee thay've paid, when the remainder will be paid in full through instalments and a few easily achieved add-ons.
Fans will read the headlines, and then it becomes fact that Sancho cost £80m, and the Rags stood up to Dortmund - successfully negotiating them down on their price. The reality is they did as they were told, and paid up in full.
Same happened with Lukaku, who 'cost them' £75m - when in reality that was the initial payment, with add-ons up to £90m - plus Rooney for free. In reality, he cost over £100m, but you won't find that anywhere on Sky/Daily Hate/Guardian.
Meanwhile, Torres cost City £37m. Fact. With every conceivable add-on factored in - but who cares?
That's the point.
