The mancityfans.net football forum

Just saw sky put up the transfer fees for the most expensive premier league transfers, it goes.....

Torres 50m
Tevez 47m
Ozil 42.4m
Aguero 38m
Mata 37.1m
Sanchez 35m
Carroll 35m

Tevez 47m????? Really? I know sky come out with made up shit because nobody challenges them but this is the first time I have seen this figure wheeled out by them.

Wonderwall wrote:Just saw sky put up the transfer fees for the most expensive premier league transfers, it goes.....

Torres 50m
Tevez 47m
Ozil 42.4m
Aguero 38m
Mata 37.1m
Sanchez 35m
Carroll 35m

Tevez 47m????? Really? I know sky come out with made up shit because nobody challenges them but this is the first time I have seen this figure wheeled out by them.

I remember it being high 20s.

But who did we even pay?

Cheers

Well it's certainly the first I have heard of such a figure.I guess they have taken it upon themselves to rewrite history now.

Regardless of what it was, he was definitely worth a damn sight more than Ozil and Torres so no complaints here...

They're obviously just being cunts about it....

This article shows their report where they have stated his value at £25M.

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news ... -city-boss

I know it's rumoured that we did pay a figure more like the £47M mark, but was there anything more substantial than gossip to substantiate the rumour?

It was £25.5M and I'm fairly certain at the time they were reporting our transfer fee and total wages of the contract as one figure.

There's also another article I found, not from sky, but from the telegraph which quotes Kia Joorabchian who flatly denies that we paid more than the £25.5 stated, and that we made a full disclosure to the FA and the Premier League with regards to his transfer fees etc.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... chian.html

It was rumoured at the time that it was a british transfer record 47mil but this was denied by the club, some genius spotty faced intern researcher has googled it and written down the first number he has seen

Slim wrote:It was £25.5M and I'm fairly certain at the time they were reporting our transfer fee and total wages of the contract as one figure.

Yes...this was the start of a new trend reserved only for City signings

The problem for Sky (media in general) is that when they seen the figures and those who had spent them, it didn't take into account what they wanted to report. Hence, use a fictional figure to ensure they follow the path they have trodden for many years - 'City inflating the market/buying the league'.

All part of the Sky 4 love-in, nothing more.

pepsi_dave wrote:They're obviously just being cunts about it....

This article shows their report where they have stated his value at £25M.

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news ... -city-boss

I know it's rumoured that we did pay a figure more like the £47M mark, but was there anything more substantial than gossip to substantiate the rumour?

It was a rumour spread by the Govan piss-can after the rag's £25 million bid for him failed. Whether there is any truth to it I've no idea.

That figure will be with the wages chucked on top. This only happens when City buy a player - never with anyone else.

Correct me from wrong but the highest weve ever paid is £38m for Aguero so though we ruined football, plenty more clubs have paid far higher transfer fees. Doesnt fit the media narrative though as the bare truth gets in the way, demoantrated by the dicks who kept saying "you cant buy success," and then the same ones, after we'd won trophies, piped up "youve just bought success." Comedy gold.

A year ago they also reported that we let him go for £10m. Now that is ludicrous.

LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:A year ago they also reported that we let him go for £10m. Now that is ludicrous.

Ha. Well done.

Still bitter about it. How he won't be playing on Sunday with the Argies is hopefully not an act of hubris for them. Silly really.

DoomMerchant wrote:

LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:A year ago they also reported that we let him go for £10m. Now that is ludicrous.

Ha. Well done.

Still bitter about it.

Not really mate, what the fuck is money? Especially when it's not yours.

Just tired of people moaning here. "Ohhh, so and so said this", "He done that". So what? Grow a pair of fucking balls.

DoomMerchant wrote:How he won't be playing on Sunday with the Argies is hopefully not an act of hubris for them. Silly really.

Now that is fucking stupid. Don't you worry my little American buddy, Argentina will get what is coming to them UNLESS one of their big two or three puts on the game of their life. Which they are very capable of.

LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:A year ago they also reported that we let him go for £10m. Now that is ludicrous.

Ha. Well done.

Still bitter about it.

Not really mate, what the fuck is money? Especially when it's not yours.

Just tired of people moaning here. "Ohhh, so and so said this", "He done that". So what? Grow a pair of fucking balls.

DoomMerchant wrote:How he won't be playing on Sunday with the Argies is hopefully not an act of hubris for them. Silly really.

Now that is fucking stupid. Don't you worry my little American buddy, Argentina will get what is coming to them UNLESS one of their big two or three puts on the game of their life. Which they are very capable of.

Hope you're wrong, I'd like to see our three boys come back World Cup winners.

Back on topic, the first I ever saw of that type of figure being mooted was from David Conn ( as you will note if you click on the link this article is currently subject of a legal battle )

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/david- ... e-revealed