Pep Guardiola’s Man City net spend claims come crashing down after £808m Arsenal oversight

Pep Guardiola overlooked an £800million-plus hole in his net spend calculations which highlights just how impressive Arsenal's rise has been ahead of back to back higher finishes

Pep Guardiola has made a sizeable omission from his latest rant regarding Manchester City’s spending compared to their rivals. As Arsenal look to claim their first title win over the Spaniard, the financial mind games were in full swing from Mikel Arteta’s former colleague and mentor.

Asked about Manchester City’s January’s transfer window, and the perception of it being the best in the league, the question was actually about Hugo Viana, the club’s sporting director, and how much credit he deserved.

Pep Guardiola replied: “Yeah, really good, really good. I am a little bit sad and upset because our net spend in the past five years we are seventh in the Premier League.

“So, I want to be the first, so I don't understand why the club has not spent more money. So, I am a little bit grumpy with them.

“But to be in that position like we were in the past was because we spent a lot, and now the other six teams have to win the Premier League and the Champions League and FA Cups because they have spent more in the past five years. This is a fact, it is not an opinion.

FOLLOW OUR ARSENAL FB PAGE! Latest Gunners news, analysis and much more via our dedicated Facebook page

“You can say an opinion for example: you played good or played bad against Spurs. So we can agree or disagree but that is facts so good luck for the six teams in front of us in the net spend for the last five years. Let's go, I am waiting.”

So, the question first of all, is whether Guardiola is factually correct? According to the BBC’s calculations, Manchester City are in fact sixth (£324.7million) in net spend, not seventh. A net spend of £1.7million more over the last five years than Nottingham Forest (£323million).

Newcastle United (£425million), Tottenham Hotspur (£544.8million), Arsenal (£610.1million), Manchester United (£674.3million) and Chelsea (£705.9million) make up the top five.

You could be lenient with Guardiola and say, well, this is a less than £2million error but the man himself said: "That is facts.” Based on the data used by the BBC, he appears to be wrong.

The position for Guardiola gets worse when you dive deeper. City were a powerhouse before Guardiola arrived, winning titles under Roberto Mancini and then Manuel Pellegrini.

They achieved this success through spending, which brought quality into the squad and helped them rival Manchester United and then Chelsea regularly for the Premier League crown. When Guardiola arrived in 2016, the squad he inherited would form the bedrock of his future success.

Spending began immediately with John Stones, Leroy Sane, Ilkay Gundogan, Claudio Bravo and Nolito all coming in during his first summer and the season ended, for the first time in Guardiola’s managerial career, without a trophy. Even more money was then spent in 2017 as Benjamin Mendy, Kyle Walker, Bernardo Silva, Ederson, Danilo and Aymeric Laporte came in and City would win the title with a record-breaking 100-point total.

A lot of quality was brought in, but don’t forget the foundations from before Guardiola arrived. That 2017/18 team contained: Vincent Kompany, Raheem Sterling, Sergio Aguero, Kevin De Bruyne, David Silva, Fernandinho, Nicolas Otamendi, Yaya Toure and a very young Phil Foden who made five league appearances.

When you think of the team that Mikel Arteta might win the league with this season, the only players in the Premier League squad who were here when he arrived in 2019 are Bukayo Saka, Gabriel Martinelli and William Saliba, who were all younger than 20 years of age at the time. And this is the difference between Arsenal and Manchester City.

The project at Arsenal has seen a rebuild to again fight for the titles the Gunners had been unable to chase since the early 2000s under Arsene Wenger. A shake-up of quality and a transformation of culture.

That comes at a cost, with just under £1billion (despite what some might tell you) invested into the group. Since Arteta arrived at Arsenal, City have spent more on players

According to Transfermarkt, since Arteta’s appointment in December 2019, Manchester City have outlaid €1.275billion (£1.109billion) on players. In the same timeframe, Arsenal have spent €1.086billion (£944.4million) on players.

But this is where Guardiola’s “net spend” argument comes in, and here, yes, he has a point. City have been far better at selling players than Arsenal have.

In the same time frame, according to the same source, Arsenal made just €261.3million (£227million) with €19.6million (£17million) of that categorised from the under-21s squad. City on the other hand, brought in €867.17million (£754.1million) with €162.42million (£141.24million) coming from the under-21s.

This is why net spend offsets the perception of Man City’s spending so greatly, and, understandably, why Guardiola points to it. It is also no surprise that Arsenal are currently looking into the academy side of the club, to see where improvements can be made.

Per Mertesacker is due to leave as head of the academy at the end of the season. Big changes are expected, and Arsenal have already started as they confirmed the signings of Evan Mooney and Jaden Dixon this winter and have already secured deals for talents set to join when they turn 18: Victor Ozhianvuna, plus Holger and Edwin Quintero.

But there is in fact an even bigger difference between the two clubs, one that Guardiola is not going out of his way to mention, without prompting, in press conferences: wages.

Manchester City have been one of the biggest spenders on player transfer fees, yes, but even more so when it comes to player wages. At the request of football.london, data has been provided by Deloitte, from their Annual Review of Football Finance, on both Arsenal and Manchester City’s wage spending, which tells a very interesting story.

Data over nine seasons from 2015/16 to 2023/24 (Arsenal are yet to provide their 2024/25 accounts) show a great chasm between both clubs’ outlay on wages. Manchester City spent £2.932billion on wages across those nine seasons.

Arsenal, on the other hand, have spent £2.124billion on wages. A difference of £808million.

The outlay on wages for 2020/21, Arteta’s first full season in the job, at Arsenal was £244.478million. City’s for the same season was £354.689million.

The three-season period of 2020/21 to 2023/24, the three seasons of available data from the full seasons Arteta has been in charge, shows Manchester City’s wage expenditure was £1.544billion compared to Arsenal’s £1.02billion. A difference of £524million.

Arsenal have, during Arteta’s tenure, managed to catch Manchester City competitively, overtaking them in 2024/25 by finishing above them in the table, and now lead them as of February 6, 2026 despite spending less on players both in terms of transfer fees and on wages. It seems Arsenal don’t need “luck” as Guardiola calls it, nor, remarkably, do they need to spend as much as City in order to eclipse them at the present time.