City paying £47 million for Tevez

thoward

It's not a lisp!
Joined
Nov 6, 2003
Messages
12,684
Location
Giggs, tearing teams apart since 1991
£47 million: the bill for Carlos Tevez to cross the Manchester divide | Manchester City - Times Online

Manchester City are paying an astonishing £47 million fee to Carlos Tévez’s private “owners” in a move that obliterates the British transfer record. The deal makes the Argentina striker the fifth most expensive footballer of all time.

City’s billionaire Arab owners have agreed to pay almost twice the £25.5 million fee widely reported to have changed hands, The Times can reveal. An initial £15 million payment is to be followed by two additional sums of £16 million.

Another £3.5 million will be paid if City win the Champions League while Tévez is at the club — an improbable scenario, but Sheikh Mansour has already shown the lengths to which he is prepared to go to transform the club from perennial underachievers into contenders for the biggest prizes.

One of the Sheikh’s first moves when he took over 12 months ago was to smash the British transfer record by paying Real Madrid £34.2 million for Robinho, the Brazil forward.


But that fee is dwarfed by the £47 million deal for Tévez, which ranks behind only the signings of Cristiano Ronaldo, Zlatan Ibrahimovic, Kaká, and Zinédine Zidane, for £80 million, £60.7 million, £56.1 million and £47.2 million respectively, as the most expensive.

The revelation is the latest twist in the extraordinary saga surrounding Tévez, whose name has rarely been out of the headlines since he arrived at West Ham United in August 2006 and sparked huge controversy about third-party ownership.

And it deepens the mystery about where the money is going.

The Times understands that it is paid to two offshore companies but Kia Joorabchian, the businessman who fronts the consortium that owned the rights to Tévez until City bought the player outright in July, has never explained who the beneficiaries are.

Nonetheless, Tévez has represented a handsome bit of business. The investors stand to make an estimated profit of at least £46.5 million from an assortment of fees received for a player whose “economic rights” they originally bought from Boca Juniors for £14 million in 2005.

They are understood to include a fee of £4.5 million from West Ham, where Tévez spent the 2006-07 season, a £9 million payment from Manchester United to cover the cost of the player’s two-year “loan” at Old Trafford and now the sum from City.

City’s outlay does not end there, though. On top of the £47 million fee, the club are paying Tévez a salary of £7.5 million a year, or just under £145,000 a week. His wages over a five-year contract take City’s total projected outlay on the striker to £84.5 million, a staggering sum even by City’s inflated standards.

In all, City’s billionaire owner has committed £770.986 million, which includes the £200 million it cost to buy the club, the £342.786 million committed on players’ contracts and £10 million spent on improving the Carrington training headquarters, City of Manchester Stadium and the club’s academy. Mark Hughes, the City manager, has spent £140 million on six leading players this summer and £218.2 million in transfer fees in total since Sheikh Mansour’s takeover, during which time City’s annual wage bill has more than doubled to just under £95 million.

Hughes has repeatedly insisted that City will walk away from deals they deem to be too expensive, but the figures involved for Tévez will doubtless lead some to question whether that is the case — and, moreover, whether the player is worth it. It is the inevitable reality of City’s position that they will face a premium on players but the sums paid for Tévez seem all the more mind-boggling given how reluctant United were to meet the £25.5 million asking price originally agreed with Joorabchian on top of the £9 million already paid.

Although the Barclays Premier League champions eventually agreed to do the deal, David Gill, the United chief executive, relented only after Ronaldo had been sold to Real Madrid. In the end, Tévez turned down their offer to stay at Old Trafford and joined City instead.

What Sir Alex Ferguson, the United manager, makes of the true figure paid for Tévez remains to be seen, given that he made a point of saying during the summer that the Argentinian was overpriced.

“In my opinion, I don’t think he was worth £25 million,” Ferguson has said. “He was popular with the supporters. The fans rightly have their heroes and I was happy to go along with the deal as it was the right one but, quite simply, he is not worth £25 million.”


City, of course, will not view it that way, even if the move is, in part, a reflection of their eagerness to land big-name signings in the wake of the failed pursuits of Kaká, Samuel Eto’o and John Terry. Joorabchian may also have argued that the fee agreed with United two years ago was no longer a fair valuation of a player who has subsequently won consecutive league championships and lifted the European Cup.

The problem for City is whether they have created a rod for their own back by paying such a sum for Tévez, who must now carry the tag of being the most expensive player in the Premier League as well as one of the highest paid.

The money may represent small change for the royal family of Abu Dhabi but £47 million on Tévez will still cause gasps among City’s fans.

Inflationary moves

£47m

The fee Manchester City are paying for Carlos Tévez, an English record

£34.2m

The previous English record, paid by City to Real Madrid for Robinho

£80m

The world-record fee for Cristiano Ronaldo, when he moved from Manchester United to Real Madrid.

Zlatan Ibrahimovic went from Inter Milan to Barcelona for a package worth £60.7 million
 

OneUnited24

Full Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
9,867
£80m for the worlds best player and £40m for Tevez... Makes Ribery at £60m a steal!
 

OneUnited24

Full Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
9,867
Goes to show why Kia was never going to let him stay with us.

Shouldn't Platini be focusing on this?
:nono: Didnt stop the player from saying how the United fans never loved him and that he never felt respected by the club. Also Tevez probably got a nice huge pay rise anyway
 

rednev

There is non worthy of worship except God
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Messages
24,305
Why the feck would they pay that much for him?

It doesn't make any sense.

Tevez is such a Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime. The amount of money that is being made from him by MSI and its investors is astounding. He could/should be pocketing some of that in wages/sign on fees if he wasn't such a retard.
 

Devil_forever

You're only young once, you can be immature f'ever
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
11,009
Location
Head of the naval division of lolibfascon
The world's gone mad.
You believe that City would pay £47 million for Tevez? If that's the case then they would have offered around £70 mill for Terry, Chelsea would have accepted and then offered Terry a bumper contract and he would have moved but they didn't. How the hell would the times know and not a single quote either. Sorry but what pathetic journalism:lol::lol:
 

Spoony

The People's President
Joined
Oct 27, 2001
Messages
63,185
Location
Leve Palestina.
You believe that City would pay £47 million for Tevez? If that's the case then they would have offered around £70 mill for Terry, Chelsea would have accepted and then offered Terry a bumper contract and he would have moved but they didn't. How the hell would the times know and not a single quote either. Sorry but what pathetic journalism:lol::lol:
They paid over the odds. Otherwise Tevez would still've been at United.

Surely you can see this.
 

B Cantona

Desperate
Newbie
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
40,116
Location
Hated, Adored, Never Ignored
You believe that City would pay £47 million for Tevez? If that's the case then they would have offered around £70 mill for Terry, Chelsea would have accepted and then offered Terry a bumper contract and he would have moved but they didn't. How the hell would the times know and not a single quote either. Sorry but what pathetic journalism:lol::lol:
At least there's a chance they've done some investigating to come to their conclusion

To come to yours you're just trying to be a know it all prick

If they had offered £70million for Terry, what makes you think Chelsea will still accept? Are they desperate for money or something? How would the Chelsea fans react to losing their captain and, erm, Mr...

And to jump from the conclusion that they didn't offer that (when in fact you don't know if behind the scenes they did or not) means they didn't spend what's been claimed on Tevez... demented. Well done
 

pillory

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
8,449
Location
Symptomless coma
The signing of Tevez to The Manchester Football Club was a powerfull statement from the owners to the fans far beyond the fee paid.
This underlying factor cannot be understood by London based journalists but the fact and reasons are clearly understood in Manchester.
We paid a price for a player we are comfortable with and in many ways it is a powerfull statement of intent.
Yes.
 

Devil_forever

You're only young once, you can be immature f'ever
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
11,009
Location
Head of the naval division of lolibfascon
They paid over the odds. Otherwise Tevez would still've been at United.

Surely you can see this.
Had Tevez accepted our contract he'd have been ours regardless of what they offered. When he turned us down, city were pretty much the only team in contention (as he supposedly turned down Liverpool too), I don't buy that Chelsea would go after a player of Tevez's quality after they've established themselves. City's owners didn't become that rich by over paying, especially not that price for a hard worker like Tevez. Lets face it, had that report said united had paid that much for him, everyone would have laughed it off and pointed to the sheer lack of evidence.
 

Devil_forever

You're only young once, you can be immature f'ever
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
11,009
Location
Head of the naval division of lolibfascon
At least there's a chance they've done some investigating to come to their conclusion

To come to yours you're just trying to be a know it all prick

If they had offered £70million for Terry, what makes you think Chelsea will still accept? Are they desperate for money or something? How would the Chelsea fans react to losing their captain and, erm, Mr...

And to jump from the conclusion that they didn't offer that (when in fact you don't know if behind the scenes they did or not) means they didn't spend what's been claimed on Tevez... demented. Well done
Wow you really can be such a twat can't you? What fecking investigating could they have done to find out info such as money being deposited to two offshore accounts, you think that they can get such sensitive information? Especially about a group as murky as MSI or a man powerful and rich as the city owner? Riiiiiight/

Chelsea's reluctancy to spend in recent summers and their reluctancy to pay over the odds this summer suggests they're more money wise.

So you take the fee for Tevez reported by one newspaper as correct (after their investigation into private money transfers:rolleyes:) but you choose to ignore the fee touted for Terry by many different papers (which was around the £35 mill-£40 mill mark)?

You saying that I'm trying to look like a know it all prick is ironic and it'd be as stupid as me calling you a "top red" prick.
 

UBERScholes

I'd find it flattering if someone hard rubbed agai
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
16,196
That £47m allowed them to put up the Tevez poster and kick off a cultural phenomenon, making City the only team in Manchester if the eyes of the entire world. Where's that Youtube video?
 

B Cantona

Desperate
Newbie
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
40,116
Location
Hated, Adored, Never Ignored
Wow you really can be such a twat can't you? What fecking investigating could they have done to find out info such as money being deposited to two offshore accounts, you think that they can get such sensitive information? Especially about a group as murky as MSI or a man powerful and rich as the city owner? Riiiiiight/

So you take the fee for Tevez reported by one newspaper as correct (after their investigation into private money transfers:rolleyes:) but you choose to ignore the fee touted for Terry by many different papers (which was around the £35 mill-£40 mill mark)?

You saying that I'm trying to look like a know it all prick is ironic and it'd be as stupid as me calling you a "top red" prick.
Newspapers in sometimes being right, sometimes being wrong, not always acting as one great homogeneous being shocker

How about if some fecker leaked it to them Mr Clever Bollocks? You think newspapers haven't revealed private info those involved didn't want released before?! :lol:

Maybe this fee and story is right, maybe it's wrong. Whichever, your reasoning for poo pooing it is naive and ridiculous
 

Devil_forever

You're only young once, you can be immature f'ever
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
11,009
Location
Head of the naval division of lolibfascon
Newspapers in sometimes being right, sometimes being wrong, not always acting as one great homogeneous being shocker

How about if some fecker leaked it to them Mr Clever Bollocks? You think newspapers haven't revealed private info those involved didn't want released before?! :lol:

Maybe this fee and story is right, maybe it's wrong. Whichever, your reasoning for poo pooing it is naive and ridiculous
Let me get this right, you think that a sensitive money transfer to offshore accounts which would have been to the knowledge of only a very very few people (to whom it would have been best to keep it a secret) got leaked to the times? Funny that the times don't even quote a "source", given that papers make up sources for fun nowadays. Also given that city were pretty much the only option he had (i got that from the newspapers that you say are right), the city owners would agree to pay such a fee for him? Yeah makes sense alright.
 

F-Red

Full Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
10,908
Location
Cheshire
Overpriced & they certainly fleeced City into paying over the odds for a striker they didn't really need.

Robinho looks like a snip at £32.5m now :lol:
 

B Cantona

Desperate
Newbie
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
40,116
Location
Hated, Adored, Never Ignored
Let me get this right, you think that a sensitive money transfer to offshore accounts which would have been to the knowledge of only a very very few people (to whom it would have been best to keep it a secret) got leaked to the times? Funny that the times don't even quote a "source", given that papers make up sources for fun nowadays. Also given that city were pretty much the only option he had (i got that from the newspapers that you say are right), the city owners would agree to pay such a fee for him? Yeah makes sense alright.
I'm saying I don't know if it's true or not

But to deny it any credibility whatsoever on the basis of your half hearted, flimsy rebuttal... no I'm not prepared to go with that
 

Devil_forever

You're only young once, you can be immature f'ever
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
11,009
Location
Head of the naval division of lolibfascon
I'm saying I don't know if it's true or not

But to deny it any credibility whatsoever on the basis of your half hearted, flimsy rebuttal... no I'm not prepared to go with that
Common sense given the circumstances suggests it's not true. In life Brad people draw conclusions, I'm sorry I'm not a person like you who reads a rumour and doesn't make a judgement about it. You either believe it's more likely to be true or less likely. Carlos Tevez going to city (when they were the only club interested with MSI having already admitted that £25 million would be enough for him) for £47 mill makes me come to the conclusion that it's most likely complete BS (if not definitely). Not to mention that the theory against my belief centers on a newspaper getting that type of sensitive info about those types of guys.:lol:

It's the same way how spoony has concluded that Brown faked the Lottery prediction, yes there's a very small chance he actually didn't but only a retard would believe that to be the case. My bad, you were inclined to believe Brown too:p;)