Where Manchester City’s ‘Inflated’ Money Went In Transfers

Between 2009 and 2018, Manchester City spent more than £1 billion on players, and that money did not stay within the club. A fresh examination of the club’s transfer dealings reveals it flowed to 46 different clubs across 19 national league systems. Some of those clubs saw their fortunes rise, while others saw them sink.

A review that follows every senior transfer fee paid by City between summer 2009 and winter 2018 shows the money was spent across many leagues. A little more than a quarter of the total transfer spending went to teams in the English top division. The club brought in players from eight Premier League sides and the same number from La Liga.

Wolfsburg And Monaco

Wolfsburg was the recipient of Manchester City’s largest payment. The German club got roughly half the money City spent on Kevin de Bruyne in 2016, along with the experienced defender Dante. Before narrowly avoiding relegation in the following two seasons, Wolfsburg fell from second to eighth in the Bundesliga.

Monaco was the second-biggest recipient. The sale of Benjamin Mendy and Bernardo Silva to City that same summer funded the signings of Terence Kongolo and Keita Balde. Neither signing lasted. Within two years, Monaco went from winning Ligue 1 and reaching the Champions League semi-finals to nearly being relegated.

Arsenal’s Four Sales

Of all the clubs from which City made purchases during that stretch, Arsenal provided the largest number — four in total. Yet the club never came close to mounting a serious Premier League title challenge during that time.

Clubs That Missed Out

Not every club gained from the arrangement. Clubs that received no payments from City complained that the spending of funds from their “inflated” accounts undermined their own positions.

Porto and Benfica both took money from City during that period, but Sporting got nothing. The Portuguese club is part of the country’s big three, yet it came away empty-handed. Between 2009 and 2018, Sporting failed to take home a single title.

Many explanations exist for that outcome. One possibility is that their competitors got funds from City that might not have been available had they followed football’s financial rules.

Sell-On Clauses

Some of City’s spending found its way to clubs that never did business with them directly. When players were subject to sell-on clauses, the prior club retained ownership of the player, and so received a portion of the proceeds from the sale.

Queens Park Rangers earned roughly £9m from Raheem Sterling’s move to City from Liverpool in 2015. Barnsley took about £7m of the transfer fee paid to Everton for John Stones in 2016. The Toffees also had to pass on about £2.5m to Wolves when Joleon Lescott moved to Manchester in 2009.

Queens Park Rangers and Barnsley both gained stronger financial standing from the Sterling and Stones clauses, which carried a value greater than that of most players competing in the English Football League at the time.

The Spread Of Spending

The distribution of City’s spending on transfers is roughly equal across several of the most prominent European leagues. The Premier League accounts for just over a quarter of the total expenditure, the largest share of any single league.

At the time, the money handed over by City to certain sides stood as the largest amount those clubs had ever taken home.

What The Spending Actually Did

The club’s spending transformed the world football transfer market entirely. By being willing to pay higher fees and wages, they forced prices up across the board for everyone else.

After word gets out that a club has a wedge of cash burning a hole in its pocket thanks to City, spending it becomes a hard task. Asking prices may rise, and simply having an influx of money does not guarantee it will be well spent.

The report details how funds circulated through football, enriching many other clubs along the way, with particular benefit to teams across the Premier League.

Since the verdicts handed down against the club and the announcement of an appeal, supporters of Manchester City have been making the same case in the media and online.

Not all clubs benefited from the spending. Several teams that were not paid by City claimed that money being spent from their “inflated” accounts harmed their position. Sporting’s situation in Portugal stands out as the clearest illustration.

Football’s revenue spread wealth across the game. Other clubs grew richer because of it. The Premier League benefited most, along with teams throughout the sport.

The debate over whether that amounted to a net gain for the game as a whole remains unresolved. What is resolved is that the funds did not remain in Manchester. They moved, and they passed from hand to hand.

It changed hands with consequences.

Source material: “Which clubs did Man City's 'inflated' money flow to in transfer market?,” the BBC.

football finance · Manchester City · Monaco · Premier League · transfer fees · wolfsburg