You think £15.2m in 1989 would be worth £533m today? That's quite some rate of inflation. £15.2m in 1989 would actually be the equivalent of £32m today.
You can't compare Man Utd and Man City in that way at the moment. Man City are currently going through the phase that Man Utd went through at the start of the 90's. The 'redeeming' features about Man Utd, all came in the 20 years after they went for it. Who is to say that Man City won't bring through amazing youth products, high revenue, make players into superstars etc... they are only just starting out.
Yes but you're comparing two era's and trying to find resembling features in the finance area when really it's no comparison. What I don't get is the neutral's rooting for man city yesterday are the same lot who have been saying man u have been buying titles for years... there's nothing better about the situation at all of 20 years ago, maybe you hate man u so much that you're blinded but it's the same if not a lot worse... You can't compare the two, you're trying to justify city spending £900+ million in and handful of years by comparing it to man u's season 20 years ago... I know you're basically saying "tit for tat" but it's not, this is a lot worse.
Inflation in football over the last 20 years is very different to inflation in the price of bread. The official rate of inflation is calculated by a 'typical basket' of goods. It certainly has never included a football player. That rate of inflation that I used is widely accepted, calculated via comparison of similar players/teams/wages at different points in time.
Nothing compared to the likes of Welbeck, Evans, hughes, Piqué, Rossi, beckham, Fletcher, giggs, scholes, nevilles, campbell, o'shea, Charlton, Platt, Edwards and the legendary Paul mcshane. (mind you, they did produce Robbie savage) They also produced Phil Bardsley, who is a complete dick!
