Is Pep Guardiola right about Manchester City’s net spending?

There are two ways to look at things.

Yes, City are not the biggest spenders.

But the data also shows they spent the second-highest amount on players during this period.

Chelsea spent the largest amount (£1.57bn) trying to catch up with the likes of Manchester City. They sold the most too, £862m worth of talent.

Guardiola comes in second on both, having spent £962.3m of which £637.6m was brought in from sales.

This underscores how incredibly adept City are at bringing in players from their academy and selling them for high transfer fees. In fact, around £280 million has been recovered in this way in the past five years.

Cole Palmer has moved to Chelsea for £40.9m. James McAtee has signed for Forest in a deal worth £22.2m. Taylor Harwood-Bellis has moved to Southampton for £20m.

Between them they have made six Premier League appearances for City, yet all three appear to be pure cash-ins as players who trained at the club.

That’s not a criticism, though. This is exactly how the academy should work.

If a player is not at first-team level, or his opportunities are limited, he should be sold. Rinse and repeat over the years.

But this could be interpreted as creating a slightly misleading picture regarding net spending on the first team.

Chelsea have the same kind of model, so it should come as no surprise that their finances are the same way. They’re just slightly different levels.

Manchester United have the worst of all worlds: high spending, low transfer returns, and disappointing results on the pitch.

The Red Devils are third in spending (£920.9m) but have not come close to capitalizing on the value of their academy, with player sales reaching just £246.6m.

This puts them second in net spending (£674.3m).

This could also be said of Arsenal, who are third in net spending (£610.1m) but have the lowest outbound sales of the top clubs – just £184.2m.

But of course, the Gunners are clearly at the top of the Premier League. Their £743.9m inbound transfer business was more efficient than Manchester United’s.