--- title: "Manchester City’s transfer money: who got paid?" canonical: "https://readmancity.com/2026/10/03/man-city-transfer-money/" type: "post" language: "en-GB" author: "Gary Gowers" section: "Man City News" published: "2026-10-03T06:01:04Z" modified: "2026-10-03T06:01:04Z" --- # Manchester City’s transfer money: who got paid? **City’s huge transfer spending did more than build the squads that came to dominate English football. It also sent hundreds of millions of pounds through clubs across Europe and beyond.** A new [BBC Sport analysis](https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cmew9w451vx8o) has followed that money during the nine-season period from 2009/10 to 2017/18, examined by the independent commission which found City guilty of serious breaches of Premier League financial rules. City’s net transfer spend across that period was around £900m. According to the BBC’s research, their senior transfer business involved 46 selling clubs across 19 different national league systems. As BBC Sport senior journalist Daniel Austin puts it: “The money flowed around football. It made a lot of other clubs richer. It helped teams everywhere and especially in the Premier League.” ## Where City’s transfer millions went Just over a quarter of City’s total transfer outlay went to other Premier League clubs, according to the BBC analysis. Arsenal sold City four players during the period, more than any other club, despite competing with them towards the upper end of the Premier League. City also completed eight deals with clubs in La Liga. There were some striking contrasts elsewhere. City paid broadly similar amounts to Benfica and Porto, two of Portugal’s traditional giants, while making no senior signing from Sporting during the period. The Lisbon club did not win the Portuguese title between 2009 and 2018. The spending wasn’t confined to Europe’s leading divisions either. Around £13m went to Championship clubs for two players. The BBC’s figures cover senior transfers and exclude free transfers, loans and academy graduates. Following the money beyond the selling club produces another layer to the story. Queens Park Rangers received around £9m through a sell-on clause when Raheem Sterling moved from Liverpool to City in 2015, while Barnsley received approximately £7m following John Stones’ transfer from Everton a year later. Money paid by City was therefore reaching clubs that had never actually sold a player directly to them. ## What happened after clubs sold to City? Receiving a major City transfer fee didn’t necessarily leave the selling club stronger. Wolfsburg sold Kevin De Bruyne to City in 2015 before reinvesting part of the money. Julian Draxler arrived for roughly half the De Bruyne fee, while the German club also signed Dante from Bayern Munich. Replacing De Bruyne proved considerably harder than spending the money received for him. Wolfsburg had finished second in the Bundesliga before his departure but dropped to eighth the following season and then narrowly avoided relegation in successive campaigns. Monaco provide another example. City signed Bernardo Silva and Benjamin Mendy from the French club in 2017 after Monaco had won Ligue 1 and reached the Champions League semi-finals. Monaco subsequently recruited players including Terence Kongolo and Keita Balde but were fighting relegation within two seasons. Austin argues City’s financial power affected far more than the clubs receiving their transfer fees. “Manchester City’s spending power unquestionably changed the world football transfer market – their willingness to pay higher fees and wages meant prices rose for everybody else too.” ## Two very different £900m figures There is an important distinction between the BBC’s transfer analysis and the independent commission’s findings against City. The roughly £900m net transfer spend calculated by the BBC is **not** the same £900m-plus figure identified in the financial case. The independent commission found that between 2009/10 and 2017/18 City used arrangements which artificially inflated revenues and reduced costs by more than £900m. It concluded that the club’s accounts did not accurately represent its financial position and that City would have substantially breached Premier League and UEFA spending limits had the relevant arrangements been reported accurately. City have challenged those findings. The [Premier League confirmed on 2 October](https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4729207) that the club had formally lodged an appeal, which will be heard by an independent Appeal Board. Austin also makes clear that the two £900m figures should not be conflated. “The more than £900m by which the independent commission found the club had ‘inflated’ its accounts was not all spent on transfer fees.” The BBC’s analysis instead asks what happened to the extraordinary amount City did spend on players. Some of it bought the talent that transformed City into English football’s dominant club of the era. Some allowed selling clubs to rebuild, while other fees filtered further down football through sell-on clauses and previous agreements. Not every club prospered after receiving it, either. What the numbers demonstrate is the sheer reach of City’s spending during those nine seasons. From Premier League rivals to clubs elsewhere in Europe and those benefiting indirectly from sell-on clauses, the money travelled a very long way beyond Manchester. [***LIVE! Premier League 2026 / 27 News, Transfers, Updates & Viral Moments***](https://dave.sport/live/premier-league-2026-2027-season-updates/)