The summer transfer window closed in most of Europe on Friday. Here are a few takeaways, though a few caveats first.
For starters, in most cases, transfer fees are not official, although clubs disclose them privately to the media. We based it on media reports collected by Transfermarkt, the most reputable (though not infallible) source out there. Regular readers will know to look at “Net spending” – the amount raised by changing players minus the amount spent to acquire players – rather than total spending, since it is a better measure of economic weight, although total spending provides cheerier, headline-friendly numbers.
Note also that in recent years we have seen a proliferation of “purchase condition loans”. These are deals in which a club takes a player on loan (sometimes for a loan fee) for a season and then commits to making his signing permanent the following summer, at which time the transfer fee is paid. (This is usually done for accounting reasons, so that the buying club can pay expenses in the future.)
Transfermarkt works based on when a deal becomes permanent and fees are paid, so we’ve done that. They also only use basic fees in their calculations, and do not take into account bonuses (although sometimes they can be obtained easily and are simply a way to spread the cost) or selling fees. It’s an imperfect system, but that’s what we have.
– Stream on ESPN+: LaLiga, Bundesliga and more (US)
It is also worth noting that ‘free agents’ may not cost the club a transfer fee, but often come with higher wages and larger commissions for brokers. While its cost may be “zero,” it is not free at all. The truth is that thinking about “fiscal strength” only in the context of transfer spending is wrong, because salaries constitute a huge part of it. Often, older players will cost a lower transfer fee but are paid higher wages, while it is the opposite with younger players, who usually cost more to sign but are paid less.
With all that said, here are five quick points about the summer transfer scene in Europe’s top five leagues.
1. The financial strength of the Premier League is unparalleled
For the second summer in a row, the Premier League, in terms of net worth, spent more than a billion euros: 1.295 billion euros ($1.390 billion) this summer, compared to 1.345 billion euros ($1.440 billion) last summer. What is also striking is that the Premier League not only outspends other major leagues; They have already done that Spend Money – period – instead of to prepare Money, which is what the German leagues, the Italian League and La Liga did by transferring players for more than they paid to acquire them. The German League achieved net inflows of 293.3 million euros ($315 million), the First Division 169.9 million euros ($182.1 million), and the Spanish League 131.7 million euros ($141.2 million).
This financial strength does not automatically translate into on-pitch dominance in European competition, but we are getting there.
Just four years ago, the English Premier League (90.462) ranked well behind La Liga (102.283) in UEFA Country Transaction Rankings, which is based on the accumulated results of the previous five seasons. Now, they’ve done it It opened a huge lead At the top (109,570 compared to 92,998 for Spain).
2. The transfer market has been distorted by the ‘Saudi Summer’ – without it, Premier League net spending would have been higher
Saudi clubs have spent €850 million ($912.5 million) this summer, and that number could rise further, given that the Saudi Professional League window does not close until Thursday. It had enormous influence throughout Europe.
The Premier League total would likely be around €1.6 billion ($1.72 billion) were it not for the fact that the “Saudi Summer” means a host of expensive players (from Riyad Mahrez to Aleksandar Mitrovic, from Kalidou Koulibaly to Fabinho). He made the jump.
3. Fiscal constraints in Spain and Italy led to a decline in net spending
Belt-tightening at traditional free-spending clubs has had a major impact. Barcelona, whose financial woes have been well chronicled, made a transfer profit of €102 million ($109.5 million), while Atletico Madrid made a profit of €57 million ($61.2 million). In fact, if you ignore Real Madrid – who unveiled Jude Bellingham – the biggest spenders in La Liga are… Rayo Vallecano, the capital’s minnows, who spent €11.6 million ($12.5 million).
In Serie A, Juventus spent €21.6 million ($23.2 million), but that includes having to formally acquire Manuel Locatelli and Moise Kean – two loan players with “commitments to make the transfers permanent” – for around €60 million ($64.4 million). . As we said: It’s very much a case of “putting the can down the road”, because without it, they would have made a huge profit.
By contrast, in the five summer windows through 2022, Juventus spent an average of €66 million ($70.9 million) per season. Inter and Roma, both of which were part of a settlement agreement with UEFA for breaches of Financial Fair Play rules, recorded positive transfer spending of €65.2 million ($70 million) and €68 million ($73 million) respectively. This goes some way to explaining how Serie A raised more than it spent for the first time in nearly 20 years.
4. The Bundesliga remains a model of responsible spending
They have the largest economy in Europe and the highest average attendances, but Bundesliga clubs remain a model of financial rectitude. For the fourth year in a row, the Bundesliga collected more than it spent, and its profits continue to rise (from 22.4 million euros) [$24.1m] In 2019, for a whopping €293.3 million [$314.9m] this summer). No, it’s not a Saudi payment: Sadio Mane’s transfer to Al-Nassr for 30 million euros was the only significant step in this direction.
Only two clubs in the Bundesliga spent more than €10 million/$10.7 million (contrast this with the English Premier League, where 16 clubs spent more than that in net worth): Bayer Leverkusen (€12.1 million/$13 million) and Union Berlin (29.9 million euros / 32.1 dollars). M) In the latter case, it is about qualifying for the Champions League (and its huge prize money) for the first time ever after years of competing on a limited budget.
The three richest clubs in the league have lost some notable players – Josko Gvardiol, Dominik Szoboszlai and Christopher Nkunku at Leipzig, Jude Bellingham at Borussia Dortmund, and Sadio Mane, Benjamin Pavard and Lucas Hernandez at Bayern – but they have managed to retool and reload. While still recording huge transfer earnings: €18.3 million ($19.6 million) at Bayern, €46.4 million ($49.8 million) at Dortmund, and €88.2 million ($94.7 million) at Leipzig.
It’s a different way of doing business, perhaps out of concern that Saudi money this summer has pushed transfer rates out of balance.
They were able to send Neymar for €90 million ($96.6 million) and ended up spending more than €200 million ($214.7 million). That’s more than any club in Europe and the world, second only to Saudi Arabia’s Al Hilal (and that’s only because they sold Neymar to them, which tipped the scales both ways).
More than any other club, Paris Saint-Germain seems to operate by its own rules. They had the highest wage bill in football last year, and one way or another – despite the departures of Neymar, Lionel Messi and Sergio Ramos – they may end up taking that title again, which will require some work.
It is clear that Saudi money is not the only one driving European transfer spending from the Gulf. Qatar also has a lot of resources and is not afraid to use them.
