Man United top European table for overpaying on transfers, blowing £209m since 2012

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
58,959
A study by the CIES Football Observatory found United overpaid by €238m (£209m) on player transfer fees since 2012, the highest figure in Europe and leading the way on inflating the market.

The research uses their in-house player values (no idea of their veracity) and covers 33 fee-paying transfers, so not the likes of Sanchez. You can see the table below.

Given Maguire must comprise c£40m of that, I'm surprised the figure isn't higher. Annoyingly City way down, only paying £23m in excess fees, despite more transfers at 38. That surely can't include Grealish, unless they're considered to have underpaid for the likes of KdB and he lowered the total?

https://football-observatory.com/

sDPqJMu.jpg
 
It's true but such a study will always be down to subjectivity and their in-house values might not be accurate. Moreover, the timing of transfers and ease of negotiations plays a role in the final cost.
 
Jippy said:
A study by the CIES Football Observatory found United overpaid by €238m (£209m) on player transfer fees since 2012, the highest figure in Europe and leading the way on inflating the market.

The research uses their in-house player values (no idea of their veracity) and covers 33 fee-paying transfers, so not the likes of Sanchez. You can see the table below.

Given Maguire must comprise c£40m of that, I'm surprised the figure isn't higher. Annoyingly City way down, only paying £23m in excess fees, despite more transfers at 38. That surely can't include Grealish, unless they're considered to have underpaid for the likes of KdB and he lowered the total?

https://football-observatory.com/
Click to expand...
And Antony €50m.
 
horsechoker said:
It's true but such a study will always be down to subjectivity and their in-house values might not be accurate. Moreover, the timing of transfers and ease of negotiations plays a role in the final cost.
Click to expand...
A player's value is clearly highly subjective and obviously what anyone will ultimately pay, but surely things like the timing of transfers is part of the strategy to avoid overpaying.
 
Jippy said:
A player's value is clearly highly subjective and obviously what anyone will ultimately pay, but surely things like the timing of transfers is part of the strategy to avoid overpaying.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Being positioned to benefit from favourable contract situations is part of a successful strategy.

We as a club become way too fixated on specific players every summer. That's got to change, you've got to adapt and make the most of what the markets actually offering in a summer.
 
Absolutely shocked Barcelona is not there, not just on the list, but at the very top of it.
 
cafecillos said:
Absolutely shocked Barcelona is not there, not just on the list, but at the very top of it.
Click to expand...

Was just thinking this. Need to look into the methodology to get more answers. Maybe they netted it off but it still doesn't make sense Liverpool features but not Barca.
 
Jippy said:
A study by the CIES Football Observatory found United overpaid by €238m (£209m) on player transfer fees since 2012, the highest figure in Europe and leading the way on inflating the market.

The research uses their in-house player values (no idea of their veracity) and covers 33 fee-paying transfers, so not the likes of Sanchez. You can see the table below.

Given Maguire must comprise c£40m of that, I'm surprised the figure isn't higher. Annoyingly City way down, only paying £23m in excess fees, despite more transfers at 38. That surely can't include Grealish, unless they're considered to have underpaid for the likes of KdB and he lowered the total?

https://football-observatory.com/

sDPqJMu.jpg
Click to expand...
Absolute values we were the worst but that’s because we spent the most. Percentage wise we are pretty average on that list.
 
CIES are the same outfit that value Ferran Torres at 110mil, Mason Mount at 100mil, Kimmich at 65mil and Tchou at 60mil. If they were a caf poster, they'd spend 20yrs in the newbies drowning it in shit opinions.
 
Jippy said:
A player's value is clearly highly subjective and obviously what anyone will ultimately pay, but surely things like the timing of transfers is part of the strategy to avoid overpaying.
Click to expand...
Very true. Something people don't pay attention and thinking City bagging Haaland for peanuts was a lucky punt.
 
Rennes wasting half as much as us is pretty good going for a farmers league
 
So had United been no 1 and the players values therefore higher, then we wouldn’t have topped this?

will always be a very subjective list then where all value comes down to how good the manager is at making the big players perform.
 
Whilst we are incompetent I don't think these studies really do a good job of quantifying how well a club spends their money.

Firstly, 'value' is highly subjective, as is the ability of a player. There are so many factors to be considered it's nearly impossible to decide what qualifies as 'overpaying'.

For example, if City had signed Sancho and Maguire and we had signed Dias and Grealish, would their values have been impacted by the relative success they would have enjoyed in this alternate Universe?

Would Dias have spent 18-months floundering in a high-line behind a failed press and would he be the 'meme player'? Would Grealish's poor return for goals and assists been more heavily criticised in a failed side?

In contrast, would Maguire have benefitted from a functioning unit, shown his 'England form' and 'justified' a high price tag? Would Sancho have benefitted from better coaching and more opportunities to attack, resulting in a much healthy goals/assists return?

Those are just two examples and I don't want to get bogged down in comparing players but you get the gist of what I am saying.

In addition, you also have to consider 'rich club tax' that applies to clubs like United. We're highly unlikely to get many bargains because the mere fact we're interested increases a players' value, as compared with a club like Brighton or Leicester being interested.
 
ROFLUTION said:
So had United been no 1 and the players values therefore higher, then we wouldn’t have topped this?

will always be a very subjective list then where all value comes down to how good the manager is at making the big players perform.
Click to expand...

I think this is at purchase point.
 
Varun said:
CIES are the same outfit that value Ferran Torres at 110mil, Mason Mount at 100mil, Kimmich at 65mil and Tchou at 60mil. If they were a caf poster, they'd spend 20yrs in the newbies drowning it in shit opinions.
Click to expand...
They definitely seem to overweight age as a factor and don't get the Torres or Mount love-in - Transfermarkt has him at €75m too. No idea who would pay €71.4m for Tammy Abraham either.

Pexbo said:
Absolute values we were the worst but that’s because we spent the most. Percentage wise we are pretty average on that list.
Click to expand...
Still higher than our main domestic rivals and ultimately it's the absolute figure that blows a hole in your balance sheet.
 
To be fair, our fans support this.
You often see the phrase "if not him then who" in the transfer thread. As if United could only find 1-2 players in the position they want to improve.
 
Last edited:
ROFLUTION said:
So had United been no 1 and the players values therefore higher, then we wouldn’t have topped this?

will always be a very subjective list then where all value comes down to how good the manager is at making the big players perform.
Click to expand...
They look at the value at the time of the transfer, so how they performed after joining wouldn't matter
 
The worst thing is it doesn't take account of the tens of millions that we've blown on terrible contracts and free transfers. Players like Ighalo cost us the best part of £20m, Cavani similar or more for very little output. Sanchez, Schweinsteiger, Falcao, burning money. £500k a week Ronaldo. And then there's loads of ridiculous contract renewals.
 
Shouldn't Barcelona be on that list on the merits of Dembele, Coutinho and Griezmann alone?
 
I mean, it’s not surprising. We’ve spent an absolute shit load of money incredibly badly. It’s actually disgraceful how careless we’ve been with our funds.

Mad seeing Villa right up there as well. Their reckless spending has gone a bit below the radar.
 
This and this.

Not saying we haven’t overspent (Maguire being the worst example) but it seems like some clubs bad buys are rated (by CIES) as worse than other clubs bad buys

Varun said:
CIES are the same outfit that value Ferran Torres at 110mil, Mason Mount at 100mil, Kimmich at 65mil and Tchou at 60mil. If they were a caf poster, they'd spend 20yrs in the newbies drowning it in shit opinions.
Click to expand...
matsdf said:
Shouldn't Barcelona be on that list on the merits of Dembele, Coutinho and Griezmann alone?
Click to expand...
 
In other news - Grass is green, water is wet and Prince Andrew is a nonce
 
Varun said:
CIES are the same outfit that value Ferran Torres at 110mil, Mason Mount at 100mil, Kimmich at 65mil and Tchou at 60mil. If they were a caf poster, they'd spend 20yrs in the newbies drowning it in shit opinions.
Click to expand...
So true. 2021 they had this list, in order:
  1. Rashford (yes this isn't a joke) £165m
  2. Haaland £152m
  3. TAA £151.6m
  4. Bruno £151.1m
  5. Mbappe £149.4
  6. Sancho £148.3m
  7. Felix £141.5m
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I mean, it’s not surprising. We’ve spent an absolute shit load of money incredibly badly. It’s actually disgraceful how careless we’ve been with our funds.

Mad seeing Villa right up there as well. Their reckless spending has gone a bit below the radar.
Click to expand...

What's more maddening is that we still haven't learnt anything
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I mean, it’s not surprising. We’ve spent an absolute shit load of money incredibly badly. It’s actually disgraceful how careless we’ve been with our funds.

Mad seeing Villa right up there as well. Their reckless spending has gone a bit below the radar.
Click to expand...

Definitely. Rightly we (Everton and United) have been shafted for our spending but didn't realise how poor Villa have spent too.
 
according to that chart when you just put PL teams in we've spent 400m euro less than United in the last 10 years, that doesn't sound right
 
Well done on helping them get the PR they were obviously after. It's basically glorified clickbait.

Next sensational table...Teams in red that did better in 2000 to 2010 than in the last decade - YOULL NEVER BELIEVE WHOS TOP.
 
Looking at percentages, united aren't at the top by far.
Also, Barca apparently have turned a profit, soo... I dunno.
 
The transfer valuations they put on players are honestly just idiotic so this whole article is pointless. Basically just to get clicks for their site.
 
Skills said:
Barcelona's wages were a bigger problem. They've also netted some bargains.
Click to expand...
Still, they spent over 400M just on Dembelé, Coutinho and Griezmann, there must be some overpaying in there, right?
 
The numbers can be argued. But it's impossible to deny we've wasted a huge amount of money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.