Erling Haaland

[Sir peace frog]

That'll be gross. its about £405k a week. Net. (if its bang on €50m)

he won't be earning anywhere near 1m a week at city, before or after tax

 

[FMwkdsoul]

he won't be earning anywhere near 1m a week at city, before or after tax

Agreed,
gonna have to sack it off,
Puma to take a split if they land him, or
convince him to take a bonus heavy packet (and sell a hell of a project).

Or bite the bullet and just pay him

 

[Lkzerinho]

so he wants nearly E1,000,000 a week , yeah i can see that happening

The money in football is getting bigger and bigger year in year out, I would guess that the 50M number is exaggerated quite a bit.

However he is being considered as one of the "Messi/Ronaldo's" of this generation, the fact of the matter is he is going to probably get paid big money and will want to be the highest-paid player wherever he goes, I would guess he will be looking for around 500-600K a week, which would be more reasonable.

It should be noted that Messi is making around 35M Euros at PSG, 50M for Haaland may not be as insane as we are making it out to be, especially with a new TV deal right around the corner, which will be higher than ever due to the new fans that were introduced to the game during the pandemic.

 

[Deleted member 87819]

Lol, all it took was one harmless and meaningless quote by Tuchel that any manager could give for some of the usual suspects to go off the rails.

To those, after I just watched the Leicester game...

Peace ;)

 

[Jordie]

That'll be gross. its about £405k a week. Net. (if its bang on €50m)

That is gross!

 

[Dobsy]

It's likely a debate to be rendered moot.

If Haaland agrees to join City next year, Pep will be here for at least another five years.

He will know there are some serious swings at a couple of Champions League wins.

God, I can only dream of this scenario. I do hope Pep fancies pushing to the 10 year threshold to get his statue.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Chelsea wanted him in the summer but were put off by his wage demands and the whole package of how much it would cost to sign Haaland now if he does sign with Puma that adds another obstacle to Chelsea being able to sign him. It’s why they went for Lukaku,

Madrid want Mbappe there was also a case where they wanted both Haaland and Mbappe, but some Madrid journalists who are top tier have started to feed out into the press that Madrid are distancing themselves from a Haaland deal due to the costs involved. There are some Madrid fans and sites that were saying that Haalands ”demands” are ridiculous. Wage wise and contract wise Also that Mino is asking way way to much.

City are an anomaly in any Haaland deal. We don’t have a striker, Agueros wages are off the wage bill also any bonuses that were in Agueros contract. We also just signed a massive deal with Puma, who are desperate for Haaland to be their poster boy. The chairman of Puma is very good friends with Haalands family so much that he helped facilitate Haalands move to Dortmund. Now who’s saying that he doesn’t do the same again, the Puma poster boy playing at one of the biggest clubs with the Puma kit it’s money from a business point of view. For everyone involved. There’s also a Norwegian reporter/Journalist that has said Haaland wants to play in the premier league. It’s adding up to City having a huge advantage over other clubs for Haaland.

I also don’t think we will have a problem giving the boy what he wants. As Haaland is seen as the next massive superstar.

The financials would stack up even more when we do sell Raheem for £50m and lose his £300k a week.

Granted, Sergio's wages were absorbed by Grealish, but £14.4m per year freed up on Sterling is not to be sniffed at.

We were going to hand Kane £300k a week and also pay a £100m transfer, so even my fag packet maths, says we can do £600k a week wages no problem, whatsoever.

Add the circa £50m Sterling fee to the supposed £100m saved on not signing Kane, and even Haaland's £65m release leaves us the best part of another £85m to play with.

That's more than enough to absorb the related costs and massive signing wedge on top of Haaland's weekly £600k.

Even reading that back has convinced me the finances give us a real fighting chance!!!!

 

[bluemonkey71]

Wouldn’t we get improved sponsorships similar to the Messi finance deal that was mooted to assist offset the huge salary?

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Wouldn’t we get improved sponsorships similar to the Messi finance deal that was mooted to assist offset the huge salary?

It doesn't need to be complicated in the first instance. Sign the boy and the sponsorships will come as a matter of his global following and City winning trophies all over the shop.

It's time to stop fucking about, forget holistic.

The time is now. Time to leave our morals at the bank vault door and get this deal sealed whatever it takes.

Failure is not an option.

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

The financials would stack up even more when we do sell Raheem for £50m and lose his £300k a week.

Granted, Sergio's wages were absorbed by Grealish, but £14.4m per year freed up on Sterling is not to be sniffed at.

We were going to hand Kane £300k a week and also pay a £100m transfer, so even my fag packet maths, says we can do £600k a week wages no problem, whatsoever.

Add the circa £50m Sterling fee to the supposed £100m saved on not signing Kane, and even Haaland's £65m release leaves us the best part of another £85m to play with.

That's more than enough to absorb the related costs and massive signing wedge on top of Haaland's weekly £600k.

Even reading that back has convinced me the finances give us a real fighting chance!!!!

Haaland would be a dream signing but paying him 600k pw might have a negative effect on the dressing room. Much rather pay him 300k pw, but give him a huge signing on fee.