City 4th On Transfer Deals Since 1992 (In Today's Money)

F F

Fiftyyearsandcounting

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 Oct 2009
Messages
1,915
According to this table, when you convert transfer fees paid into today's value, City are 4th in the expenditure list. This table runs from 1992 to present.
https://www.skysports.com/football/...sive-premier-league-transfers-in-todays-money

5tumMIa.jpg
 
Looks about right given the different periods involved, of course it's meaningless as only the last 10 years counts as that gives them another stick to beat us with.
 
It is quite interesting as you can almost see when clubs had their heyday, as i always said we are not the biggest spenders the big question is not how accurate this is as anything out of SKY is fraudulent but why did they not go back to their emergence? pretty sure that City would be a lot lower in that money league
 
Psychedelic Casual said:
It’s cost them £1.242bn to win one league title that the bottlers still might fuck up yet! A bit of a joke that to be honest.
Click to expand...
Net spend mate, net spend.

The funny thing was in the early stages of the Premier League, Liverpool regularly outspent the rags, they just did a really bad job of it. Utd bought Cantona, Liverpool bought Collymore.

Of course the major thing that's missing is expenditure on wages. Even BFS knew that, which is why when Bolton had that really great team and were praised for doing it all with free players, it wasn't really mentioned that they had one of the highest wage bills in the league. They'd just decided to spend their money on high wages rather than transfer fees. And wage bills have historically been a better indicator of success than transfer fees.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.