Man City's Insane Spending

MongeySpangle said:

Most of the signings you mentioned here are the kinds of signings that most big clubs make two or three times every year. How can you seriously say that most of these signings would have ruined most other clubs when all but five or six of them cost us less than 20 million? And even then a good proportion of them we went to sell on for a profit (including Negredo). So your point that we just shoot on a player and hope that it works and if it doesn’t we can go for someone else doesn’t make any sense, because the vast majority of players you’re mentioning here we got our money back from.

Click to expand...

The OP stated that you made al least 20 bad transfers in the first 8 years of the Abu Dhabi era. You laughed off the suggestion. I have then debunked your assertion & listed 24 bad tranfers. These were only the Multi Million transfers, i may have missed a few. You also have to take into account the free transfers you made with massive signing on fees & wages who also flopped.

Abu Dhabi have been proven to be untrustworthy & duplicitous. It's safe to say you didn't make a profit on any of your bad signings. The figures you are quoting for player sales are highly dubvious when taken in context.

You sold Iheanacho to Leicester for £25Mill & he can't even get a regular start. You are selling youth players with no first team experience in multi Million pound deals. In the last 18 Mths alone you sold Torres (who made a handful of starts) for double what you paid. You are selling Sterling (coming off 2 bad seasons) for what you paid 7 years ago. You are selling Jesus for double what you paid 6 years ago. This despite the fact that he was the only true striker at the club in the last 2 years & still couldn't get a regular game. You are selling Ake to Chelsea for more than you payed despite the fact that many people didn't even know he still existed.

There is a saying that ''There's a mug round every corner'' It seems highly convenient that every time you want a player out of the club 9 times out of 10 you bump into a mug to take them off your hands at a profit. We have multi Million players who we can't get rid of for free.

There was a report in The Sun (yes, I know it’s The Sun) about an unnamed club illegally circumventing FFP. To quote:

A LEADING Premier League club is being investigated by the FA and HMRC for making offshore payments to agents.

The outfit have been using some of their foreign ‘partner’ teams to disguise money paid for deals coming into their own playing squads in England.

The FA have been working with the taxman following checks on payments made through their own ‘clearing’ system and after complaints from other agents who knew of the practice.

The  club  have   been   paying agents fees from their European partners, often as scouting agreements.

This has seen large sums involved going to agencies rather than paying them here for their part in genuine transfers.

I understand as many as SIXTEEN deals are being scrutinised to check the money trails involved in moves that have been flagged up.

Many Premier League club owners have satellite teams.

And they are allowed to use this advantage to loan players or groom younger stars for a career in the top flight here.

However, in this case the rogue outfit have disguised the fees.

This means they have been keeping their Financial Fair Play costs and the tax bills of agents down in this country.

The club is unnamed, but clearly it is a club that must be concerned about breaching financial rules. The reference to FFP may be a case of loose language, and the author may actually mean the Premier League’s profit and sustainability rules. However, if it really is FFP, this must be a club in European competition because FFP only applies to UEFA competitions.

So we are looking for a club that:

1. is concerned about breaching financial rules,
2. likely is in European competition,
3. has satellite clubs, and
4. is prepared to undertake illegal activity.

On a completely separate note, I believe that Man City is the only club in the big six that has satellite clubs.

ExecutionerWasp001 said:

The figures you are quoting for player sales are highly dubvious when taken in context.
You sold Iheanacho to Leicester for £25Mill & he can't even get a regular start. You are selling youth players with no first team experience in multi Million pound deals. In the last 18 Mths alone you sold Torres (who made a handful of starts) for double what you paid. You are selling Sterling (coming off 2 bad seasons) for what you paid 7 years ago. You are selling Jesus for double what you paid 6 years ago. This despite the fact that he was the only true striker at the club in the last 2 years & still couldn't get a regular game. You are selling Ake to Chelsea for more than you payed despite the fact that many people didn't even know he still existed.

Click to expand...

It should be possible to criticize Manchester City without veering into conspiratorial nonsense.

Transfer fees have inflated considerably over the last decade and a half. That explains why a player who went for 50m seven years ago, can go for 50m now even though they are worse. It also explains why a club like Barcelona can be willing to spend more than was spent on Sterling 7 years ago on Raphinha, a less proven player. That would be the case Barcelona who spent stupid money on Ferran Torres; maybe they're just not great at transfers.

Iker Quesadillas said:

It should be possible to criticize Manchester City without veering into conspiratorial nonsense.

Transfer fees have inflated considerably over the last decade and a half. That explains why a player who went for 50m seven years ago, can go for 50m now even though they are worse. It also explains why a club like Barcelona can be willing to spend more than was spent on Sterling 7 years ago on Raphinha, a less proven player. That would be the case Barcelona who spent stupid money on Ferran Torres; maybe they're just not great at transfers.

Click to expand...

Liverpool sold Rhian Brewster for £23.5m. He has NEVER scored a top-flight goal. City, Liverpool and Chelsea (Lukaku excepted) are on a different level when it comes to selling their players. It's a case of success breeding success.

@Iker Quesadillas it might be considered "conspiratorial nonsense" if Der Spiegel hadn't literally uncovered a project to do just what op is implying called "project longbow" and if, you know, City hadn't had to spend millions on lawyers to get such claims thrown out on a technicality (i.e. they were absolutely guilty and that was never in doubt but the emails etc could be inadmissible and it was outside of UEFA's 5 year limit on court actions, statute of limitations stuff)

There's no limit to the amount Manchester City are willing to cheat, and their fans in this thread defending them are proof that honestly means nothing in sport or business anymore as long as you win.

GazTheLegend said:

@Iker Quesadillas it might be considered "conspiratorial nonsense" if Der Spiegel hadn't literally uncovered a project to do just what op is implying called "project longbow"

Click to expand...

I just read the Der Spiegel article about Project Longbow. It is about a scheme to remove image/marketing rights from the books by transfering them to an external company associated with City. It has nothing to do with player transfers to other clubs.

ExecutionerWasp001 said:

You've made more than 20 bad transfers since the takeover.

2008/9 - Robinho, Jo, Ben Haim
2009/10 - Roque Santa Cruz, Adam Johnson
2010/11 - Balotelli
2011/12 - Nasri, Savic, Pantilimon
2012/13 - Garcia, Nastasic, Rodwell, Sinclair, Maicon
2013/14 - Jovetic, Negredo, Navas
2014/15 - Mangala, Bony, Fernando, Caballero, Zuculini
2015/16 - Roberts, Onal
2016/17 - Bravo, Nolito, Moreno, Rulli

These are only the multi million signings. You signed many more players for less than a million who vanished without trace. You also signed many players on free's who had done well at previous clubs. Many of these players would have been on massive wages. They also flopped. You were able to move them on but you had to pay them off or contribute towards their wages.

There are players in the 08/17 list, Negredo, Bravo that won a title in ther spells with you. These players have to be considered flops also. Bravo was a terrible keeper full stop. Negredo was a good striker but only stayed 1 season. No clubs buy players in their prime in the expectation that they will only be at the club for 1 season.

Click to expand...

Can't believe I'm doing this but the ones in bold I'd argue about being bad transfers

Johnson - played 97 times, scoring 14 assisting 25 - sold for profit was a decent player for us a the time
Balotelli - played 80 times scored 30 assisted 6 - not great but by no means a bad transfer
Nasri - played 176 times 27 goals 40 assists - absolutely nothing wrong with Nasri for us
Negredo - was great for us for half a season then was allegedly caught balls deep in someone else's missus and he moved back to Spain for his marriage
Caballero - absolutely fine backup keeper was never purchased as a #1 keeper
Navas - played 183 times for us, never world class but an integral part of the squad for 4 season

And being picky could say Jo and Ben Haim we're signed before the current owners, it was in that window but from memory they signed before the deal was done.

Iker Quesadillas said:

I just read the Der Spiegel article about Project Longbow. It is about a scheme to remove image/marketing rights from the books by transfering them to an external company associated with City. It has nothing to do with player transfers to other clubs.

Click to expand...

I think there may be confusion over the this and the inflating of transfer fees that Italian clubs seem to have been up to. The Melo / Pjanjic deal was particularly egregious.

When you buy a player, the cost from an accounting point of view is spread across the length of their contract. So if you buy a player for £50m on a 5 year contract, he "costs" the club £10m that year. This has nothing to do with paying the selling club in instalments, it applies even if you the entire transfer fee was paid upfront. (That would impact cashflow of course).

However, when you sell a player, from an accounting (and FFP) perspective - that money comes in all at once. So if you sell a £50m player, you can count all of that "income" in that year. Once again, this applies even if the buying club is paying instalments.

Where this becomes dicey is with "swap" deals. They are actually nothing of the sort. They are just two deals that are negotiated separately. If Club A and Club B both have players with a market value of £50m, they are now incentivised to inflate those values in order to "book" more income in the current year. This can be handy for skirting FFP, or if - like Juve - you are publicly listed company and you need some "profit" to satisfy stock market analysts. Both clubs could arbitrarily decide that each player is worth £100m and that would make the figures for the current year look a lot better (+£80m instead of +£40m).

Of course, this only works in the short term as you have now incurred £40m of extra amortisation in the coming years. So it can become a vicious cycle, as the only way to dig yourself out of that hole is more accounting tricks. Plus - like Juve - you may end up being raided by the authorities.

Anyway, City don't seem to be doing that. They can nearly double their money on Jesus because they bought him when he was 19, kept him on relatively sensible wages, and are selling him as he enters his peak with 6 years of PL experience and countless medals. In that aspect of City's conduct, no conspiracy theory is needed.

Doesn't mean they haven't fudged a ton of figures relating to sponsorship deals and wages over the years. But their player sales just seems like a well-run club.

ExecutionerWasp001 said:

The OP stated that you made al least 20 bad transfers in the first 8 years of the Abu Dhabi era. You laughed off the suggestion. I have then debunked your assertion & listed 24 bad tranfers. These were only the Multi Million transfers, i may have missed a few. You also have to take into account the free transfers you made with massive signing on fees & wages who also flopped.

Abu Dhabi have been proven to be untrustworthy & duplicitous. It's safe to say you didn't make a profit on any of your bad signings. The figures you are quoting for player sales are highly dubvious when taken in context.

You sold Iheanacho to Leicester for £25Mill & he can't even get a regular start. You are selling youth players with no first team experience in multi Million pound deals. In the last 18 Mths alone you sold Torres (who made a handful of starts) for double what you paid. You are selling Sterling (coming off 2 bad seasons) for what you paid 7 years ago. You are selling Jesus for double what you paid 6 years ago. This despite the fact that he was the only true striker at the club in the last 2 years & still couldn't get a regular game. You are selling Ake to Chelsea for more than you payed despite the fact that many people didn't even know he still existed.

There is a saying that ''There's a mug round every corner'' It seems highly convenient that every time you want a player out of the club 9 times out of 10 you bump into a mug to take them off your hands at a profit. We have multi Million players who we can't get rid of for free.

Click to expand...

No, the OP said that he could think of 20 signings in the first 8 years of City’s takeover that would have been problematic for any other club had the transfers failed. Big, big difference.

And no, I’m not accepting your own transfer failings as reason for us conspiring with other clubs to get better deals in the market, as if the recipient clubs would accept larger fees on their books. What you’re saying makes absolutely zero sense.

It’s strange how people are willing to believe every Der Spiegel leak apart from the ones that put their favourite footballer in a bad light. Why should anyone believe unverified, leaked documents? Seems to be a lot of people swearing by them in this thread.

ExecutionerWasp001 said:

The OP stated that you made al least 20 bad transfers in the first 8 years of the Abu Dhabi era. You laughed off the suggestion. I have then debunked your assertion & listed 24 bad tranfers. These were only the Multi Million transfers, i may have missed a few. You also have to take into account the free transfers you made with massive signing on fees & wages who also flopped.

Abu Dhabi have been proven to be untrustworthy & duplicitous. It's safe to say you didn't make a profit on any of your bad signings. The figures you are quoting for player sales are highly dubvious when taken in context.

You sold Iheanacho to Leicester for £25Mill & he can't even get a regular start. You are selling youth players with no first team experience in multi Million pound deals. In the last 18 Mths alone you sold Torres (who made a handful of starts) for double what you paid. You are selling Sterling (coming off 2 bad seasons) for what you paid 7 years ago. You are selling Jesus for double what you paid 6 years ago. This despite the fact that he was the only true striker at the club in the last 2 years & still couldn't get a regular game. You are selling Ake to Chelsea for more than you payed despite the fact that many people didn't even know he still existed.

There is a saying that ''There's a mug round every corner'' It seems highly convenient that every time you want a player out of the club 9 times out of 10 you bump into a mug to take them off your hands at a profit. We have multi Million players who we can't get rid of for free.

Click to expand...

As a fan of a club with the same problem, which do you think is more likely:

• There is a giant conspiracy where other clubs are such fans of City that they're happy to waste their own transfer budget to pay over the odds for City players

OR

• City sign many players with high potential, coach them well and pay them within a semblance of wage structure - making these players attractive to other clubs.

We had to pay Ozil to leave because he was on 300k a week. We had to pay Auba to leave because he was on £250k a week. We had to pay Kolasinac to leave because he was on £100k a week and didn't even have awesome track record to entice buyers.

If you can't sell Phil Jones because he comfy earning six figures every seven days, that's a reflection of United's negotiation prowess - not City's. Pep probably wouldn't have signed him. He certainly would have extended his contract with a pay rise. That's the difference you're looking for, not collusion between PL clubs to send City money.

ExecutionerWasp001 said:

The OP stated that you made al least 20 bad transfers in the first 8 years of the Abu Dhabi era. You laughed off the suggestion. I have then debunked your assertion & listed 24 bad tranfers. These were only the Multi Million transfers, i may have missed a few. You also have to take into account the free transfers you made with massive signing on fees & wages who also flopped.

Abu Dhabi have been proven to be untrustworthy & duplicitous. It's safe to say you didn't make a profit on any of your bad signings. The figures you are quoting for player sales are highly dubvious when taken in context.

You sold Iheanacho to Leicester for £25Mill & he can't even get a regular start. You are selling youth players with no first team experience in multi Million pound deals. In the last 18 Mths alone you sold Torres (who made a handful of starts) for double what you paid. You are selling Sterling (coming off 2 bad seasons) for what you paid 7 years ago. You are selling Jesus for double what you paid 6 years ago. This despite the fact that he was the only true striker at the club in the last 2 years & still couldn't get a regular game. You are selling Ake to Chelsea for more than you payed despite the fact that many people didn't even know he still existed.

There is a saying that ''There's a mug round every corner'' It seems highly convenient that every time you want a player out of the club 9 times out of 10 you bump into a mug to take them off your hands at a profit. We have multi Million players who we can't get rid of for free.

Click to expand...

A lot is down to wages.

MongeySpangle said:

I’m not accepting your own transfer failings as reason for us conspiring with other clubs to get better deals in the market, as if the recipient clubs would accept larger fees on their books. What you’re saying makes absolutely zero sense.

Click to expand...

How do we know that all the money for transfers is coming from the recipient clubs. Your owners have £850 Billion in the bank. They are homicidal maniacs with links to ASSAD & other regimes who have committed genocide. A farmer was tortured & buggered over a £5000 debt owed to your owners family. Is it really such a leap to suggest your owners would commit financial fraud on a large scale to further their own agendas.

Tavern in the town said:

It’s strange how people are willing to believe every Der Spiegel leak apart from the ones that put their favourite footballer in a bad light. Why should anyone believe unverified, leaked documents? Seems to be a lot of people swearing by them in this thread.

Click to expand...

City have never refuted any of the Der Spiegel accusations. If you are accused of a crime you didn't commit It's usual to declare your innocence in the first instance. When charged by UEFA, rather than saying they would clear their name in court, they threatened to bankrupt UEFA with legal fees before the case could get to court. When UEFA did try to charge them they had the case referred to CAS. It's important to remember that they were not exonerated by CAS. They refused to comply with preceedings & wouldn't allow any investigation into their financial irregularities.

Hammondo said:

A lot is down to wages.

Click to expand...

We pay crazy wages but City pay even more. City are the richest club in England. When players leave it's obvious that the club they move to will be paying a lower wage. You never hear though from unhappy players being forced out of City & in turn losing Millions in wages. It's also never reported that players are being paid to leave.

ExecutionerWasp001 said:

How do we know that all the money for transfers is coming from the recipient clubs. Your owners have £850 Billion in the bank. They are homicidal maniacs with links to ASSAD & other regimes who have committed genocide. A farmer was tortured & buggered over a £5000 debt owed to your owners family. Is it really such a leap to suggest your owners would commit financial fraud on a large scale to further their own agendas.




City have never refuted any of the Der Spiegel accusations. If you are accused of a crime you didn't commit It's usual to declare your innocence in the first instance. When charged by UEFA, rather than saying they would clear their name in court, they threatened to bankrupt UEFA with legal fees before the case could get to court. When UEFA did try to charge them they had the case referred to CAS. It's important to remember that they were not exonerated by CAS. They refused to comply with preceedings & wouldn't allow any investigation into their financial irregularities.




We pay crazy wages but City pay even more. City are the richest club in England. When players leave it's obvious that the club they move to will be paying a lower wage. You never hear though from unhappy players being forced out of City & in turn losing Millions in wages. It's also never reported that players are being paid to leave.

Click to expand...

I've not read anywhere that they pay high wages than we were.

ExecutionerWasp001 said:

How do we know that all the money for transfers is coming from the recipient clubs. Your owners have £850 Billion in the bank. They are homicidal maniacs with links to ASSAD & other regimes who have committed genocide. A farmer was tortured & buggered over a £5000 debt owed to your owners family. Is it really such a leap to suggest your owners would commit financial fraud on a large scale to further their own agendas.

Click to expand...

We don’t. But don’t you think that when the reported fees come out, the recipient clubs would have something to say about City increasing the fees beyond what they were actually paying?

Hammondo said:

I've not read anywhere that they pay high wages than we were.

Click to expand...

Because they don’t pay all the players salaries through City that’s why. Project Longbow shows they were paying players image rights through a seperate loss making company. It’s all a front. Even Mancini was being paid as an ambassador of the UAE, doubling his salary.

It’s no different to City ‘only’ paying £51m for Haaland. People making out they do good business are having a laugh and prove that sports washing works, just like Chelsea fans cheering Abramovich’s name.

Hammondo said:

I've not read anywhere that they pay high wages than we were.

Click to expand...

https://cdn.prod.www.spiegel.de/media/592f2b46-96b2-4e64-9217-9a17ae26f38b/RM.pdf

The Italian coach was signed by Manchester City on Dec. 19, 2009. According to a preliminary agreement hammered out by the two sides, Mancini was to be paid a base salary of 1.45 million pounds per season, with another 4 million pounds in performance-based bonuses on top of that. On that same day, Mancini signed an apparent consultancy contract – part of which contained identical language to the main contract – with Al Jazira. That deal promised him an annual salary of 1.75 million pounds for his services: "The Fees will be paid to an account nominated by your company and will be paid without deduction of any taxation."

The company initially named by Mancini to receive those fees was an entity called Sparkleglow Holdings, based in the tax paradise of Mauritius. One year later, he switched to a company registered in Rome called Italy International Services (IIS), which began issuing quarterly invoices. But those invoices were only seemingly paid by Al Jazira: IIS would send its invoices to Manchester City, the club would wire the money to ADUG which would then send it onward to Al Jazira before it was eventually paid to IIS. The system was described by a ManCity employee in July 2012, with Simon Pearce confirming the procedure from the emirate's perspective.

Why are there so many newbies becoming vocal around the same time who support City and all pushing the same very obviously false narrative around their spending?

There’s no mystery to how City breached FFP and allowed themselves to skip the hard part of building a club. Only a goldfish would praise their recent net spend without adding any context whatsoever.

Woah, woah, wait. Are people saying city are bent?....

Bosws87 said:

https://cdn.prod.www.spiegel.de/media/592f2b46-96b2-4e64-9217-9a17ae26f38b/RM.pdf

The Italian coach was signed by Manchester City on Dec. 19, 2009. According to a preliminary agreement hammered out by the two sides, Mancini was to be paid a base salary of 1.45 million pounds per season, with another 4 million pounds in performance-based bonuses on top of that. On that same day, Mancini signed an apparent consultancy contract – part of which contained identical language to the main contract – with Al Jazira. That deal promised him an annual salary of 1.75 million pounds for his services: "The Fees will be paid to an account nominated by your company and will be paid without deduction of any taxation."

The company initially named by Mancini to receive those fees was an entity called Sparkleglow Holdings, based in the tax paradise of Mauritius. One year later, he switched to a company registered in Rome called Italy International Services (IIS), which began issuing quarterly invoices. But those invoices were only seemingly paid by Al Jazira: IIS would send its invoices to Manchester City, the club would wire the money to ADUG which would then send it onward to Al Jazira before it was eventually paid to IIS. The system was described by a ManCity employee in July 2012, with Simon Pearce confirming the procedure from the emirate's perspective.

Click to expand...

This isn't showing as much as you are saying though. We have no information about what the players are paid now. Nor do I know what happens when a player is sold in terms of if they keep any of the payments or not.

As longs UEFA let Barceloba get away with flagrant murder with their financial anarchy. I don't want to read jack shit about "Man City spent this" nor 'PSG did that...."

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:

As longs UEFA let Barceloba get away with flagrant murder with their financial anarchy. I don't want to read jack shit about "Man City spent this" nor 'PSG did that...."

Click to expand...

Barça are at least playing with their own future and risking horrendous consequences. Much of it to try keeping pace with PsG and City and prevent them doing with Messi what they did with Neymar.

Regulus Arcturus Black said:

Barça are at least playing with their own future and risking horrendous consequences. Much of it to try keeping pace with PsG and City and prevent them doing with Messi what they did with Neymar.

Click to expand...

There is no valid excuse for what UEFA is letting them get away with.

MongeySpangle said:

Don’t you think that when the reported fees come out, the recipient clubs would have something to say about City increasing the fees beyond what they were actually paying?

Click to expand...

I don't run a Multi Million Pound business & have access to some of the worlds best creative accountants. In this respect i have no ideas of the intricacies of the con. In the same breath, if i watch Penn & Teller i know i'm being tricked, but as i'm not a magician i don't know how they're doing it. All i know is what they are doing isn't real as it's impossible to make a card vanish into thin air.

Hammondo said:

This isn't showing as much as you are saying though. We have no information about what the players are paid now. Nor do I know what happens when a player is sold in terms of if they keep any of the payments or not.

Click to expand...

All cons become more sophisticated as time goes on. The con has to permanently evolve to keep 1 step ahead of the authorities. When 1 avenue is closed criminals will always find another way to commit the same offence. The con never dies. You only have to look at all the different cons in online banking since it's inception.

Anyone think City are losing some of their sqaud depth? Sterling, Jesus, Fernandinho all gone. Zinchencko subject of a bid from arsenal.

Haaland and Alvarez gives them firepower upfront. Kalvin Philips isnt a fernandinho. Sterling, Zinchencko and Jesus could be deployed in different positions. So they are losing some flexibility.

They need to pay for fans and all.

So, £112 for a day's work, meh.

And why do they deduct agency commission? The people coming don't have agents, why should they pay them commission?

In any case, where are they going to find 150 'real' City fans?

How complete and utterly pathetic

Is it just me or is City's squad looking quite thin going into this season? With Fernandinho released, Sterling and Jesus sold, and Zinchenko looking on his way out, this is their team as I see it:

------------------------------Ederson-----------------------------

Walker------Diaz/Stones-------Ake/Laporte----Cancelo

-------------------------Rodri/Phillips---------------------------
----------------De Bruyne------Silva/Gundogan---------

Marhez----------------Haaland-------------Foden/Grealish

Does that not look very light, especially in a season where there's a world cup smack bang in the middle? I know there may be youth players I'm not counting, but still, it's hardly two world class players in every position, which is what they've had most years up until now. Does anyone know if they're expecting to do much more business? Particularly up front and at full-back they look very vulnerable to injuries. All this with them having already spent the better part of 100mil on Phillips and Haaland.

Lots of rumours of silva going too.

Mr Smith said:

Is it just me or is City's squad looking quite thin going into this season? With Fernandinho released, Sterling and Jesus sold, and Zinchenko looking on his way out, this is their team as I see it:

------------------------------Ederson-----------------------------

Walker------Diaz/Stones-------Ake/Laporte----Cancelo

-------------------------Rodri/Phillips---------------------------
----------------De Bruyne------Silva/Gundogan---------

Marhez----------------Haaland-------------Foden/Grealish

Does that not look very light, especially in a season where there's a world cup smack bang in the middle? I know there may be youth players I'm not counting, but still, it's hardly two world class players in every position, which is what they've had most years up until now. Does anyone know if they're expecting to do much more business? Particularly up front and at full-back they look very vulnerable to injuries. All this with them having already spent the better part of 100mil on Phillips and Haaland.

Click to expand...

Alvarez?

Mr Smith said:

Is it just me or is City's squad looking quite thin going into this season? With Fernandinho released, Sterling and Jesus sold, and Zinchenko looking on his way out, this is their team as I see it:

------------------------------Ederson-----------------------------

Walker------Diaz/Stones-------Ake/Laporte----Cancelo

-------------------------Rodri/Phillips---------------------------
----------------De Bruyne------Silva/Gundogan---------

Marhez----------------Haaland-------------Foden/Grealish

Does that not look very light, especially in a season where there's a world cup smack bang in the middle? I know there may be youth players I'm not counting, but still, it's hardly two world class players in every position, which is what they've had most years up until now. Does anyone know if they're expecting to do much more business? Particularly up front and at full-back they look very vulnerable to injuries. All this with them having already spent the better part of 100mil on Phillips and Haaland.

Click to expand...

This will never not be funny.

Mr Smith said:

Is it just me or is City's squad looking quite thin going into this season? With Fernandinho released, Sterling and Jesus sold, and Zinchenko looking on his way out, this is their team as I see it:

------------------------------Ederson-----------------------------

Walker------Diaz/Stones-------Ake/Laporte----Cancelo

-------------------------Rodri/Phillips---------------------------
----------------De Bruyne------Silva/Gundogan---------

Marhez----------------Haaland-------------Foden/Grealish

Does that not look very light, especially in a season where there's a world cup smack bang in the middle? I know there may be youth players I'm not counting, but still, it's hardly two world class players in every position, which is what they've had most years up until now. Does anyone know if they're expecting to do much more business? Particularly up front and at full-back they look very vulnerable to injuries. All this with them having already spent the better part of 100mil on Phillips and Haaland.

Click to expand...

With 2 more signings, they'll be thick again with top class squad depth quality. Plenty of times to wrap up 2 signings.

------------------------------Ederson/Ortega-----------------------------

Cancelo/Walker------Diaz/Stones-------Ake/Laporte----Cucurella/Cancelo/Ake

-------------------------Rodri/Phillips---------------------------
----------------De Bruyne/Gundogan------Silva/Foden---------

Foden/Marhez----------------Haaland/Alvarez-------------Foden/New LW

pacifictheme said:

Lots of rumours of silva going too.

Click to expand...

They'll surely spend big, but on who? Neymar?

Sassy Colin said:

So, £112 for a day's work, meh.

And why do they deduct agency commission? The people coming don't have agents, why should they pay them commission?

In any case, where are they going to find 150 'real' City fans?

Click to expand...

Maybe it's the agency advertising the post that are keeping 15% for themselves, they being the agents recruiting for the posts.

BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:

Alvarez?

Click to expand...

Damn, I forgot about him!

RC89 said:

Maybe it's the agency advertising the post that are keeping 15% for themselves, they being the agents recruiting for the posts.

Click to expand...

That's not how these things work. If I engage you to find me staff, you charge me commission, not the staff you recruit.

I would have thought that was obvious, no?

adexkola said:

This will never not be funny.

Click to expand...

Right? When was that? Zinchenko, Jesus, Aké, Otamendi, Danilo, Delph, Mangala, Clichy, Kolarov, Sagna, Fernando, Nolito, Bony, Demichelis, Navas, Jovetić, Nastasić, Sinclair, Richards, Rodwell, Javi García, Negredo... World class lot that, aye.

Sassy Colin said:

That's not how these things work. If I engage you to find me staff, you charge me commission, not the staff you recruit.

I would have thought that was obvious, no?

Click to expand...

Well, it's not the most professional looking ad. I'm not saying it's normal, I'm suggesting that that's probably what they're doing and they view themselves as the agents.