Manchester City confirmed on Tuesday that they’d agreed a deal in principle for Erling Haaland and Fabrizio Romano revealed he had a release clause of €60m (£51.2m) that was triggered, not the €75m (£64m) widely reported. He noted that City will pay the 21-year-old around £375k-per-week/£19.5m-a-year.
But while many are claiming City have landed one of Europe’s most prolific strikers for a bargain, what’s being ignored is the salary over five years, the commission that needs to be paid and the potential bonuses attached to the deal.
Pol Ballus and Paul Hirst of The Times say Haaland’s agent fees and commission will set City back £85.6m, so his wages (£97.5m over five years) on top will bring that total to £183.1m. And that’s not including any goal bonuses or appearance-based bonuses. Haaland may be in line to make more money from the club if he wins trophies too, so City are committing a lot of money to the Norwegian international.
That’s not to say he isn’t worth it, scoring 85 goals with 23 assists in 88 games for Borussia Dortmund, but he’s not a bargain aquisition. Dortmund have made a profit on his sale but not as much as they should have given Haaland’s ability. City are paying most of the money to Haaland and his representatives rather than the club that owned him.
They were careful not to give him more money than De Bruyne too, otherwise they’d likely have to improve the Belgian’s contract.
In other news, journalists say ‘creative’ Man City man was ‘sensational’ v Newcastle
How is that Journalist’s and the media always try to inflate the players cost.
Initially the release clause was €75m plus all the agents fees etc us the reported wages of £500/week.
The fact is City have a bargain.
How much has Pogba cost United?
Transfer fee £89m six years ago.
Agents fees etc £50m
Wages £350k/week x 300 = £105m
Total outlay £244m
Going for Free Transfer
Who’s gotten best deal PLUS IN 5 YEARS CITY WILL RECOUP THEIR OUTLAY
so for comparison purposes, ow much was the all-inclusive cost over the full contract length for Man Utd for Paul Pogba? And how much was the total cost of Liverpool’s purchase of Virgil Van Dyke calculated on the same basis please?
Not much point in an article that simply adds up every number to get get to a big figure when it only does it for one particular player/club, when all other transfers are expressed in transfer fee cost alone.
Why have you decided to do the maths this way in this particular case?