\n<\/p>\n
After all, it’s not as if City could have signed Haaland himself in 2022 had they not laid the foundations for their success via illegal means. Even Guardiola admitted that City <\/span>“were not a team that has a long history with a lot of titles”<\/span><\/a>. Their pulling power was purely financial – and, as former Leeds United boss Jesse Marsch pointed out, “everyone knew” where the money was coming from.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201c[In the summer of 2022], us and Man City were the only teams that said we made money,” <\/span>the American told <\/span>The Guardian<\/em><\/i>.<\/span><\/a> “Us, we did make money, because we sold Raphinha, we sold Kalvin Phillips [to City]. We had a lot left over from what we bought. <\/span><\/p>\n “At the time, we weren\u2019t in a position financially to not save. Our ownership didn\u2019t have deep pockets. Whereas when Man City said [they made money] and I was literally like, \u2018Are you kidding me? Is this some kind of joke?\u2019 When they said they got Erling Haaland for \u00a352m, it\u2019s like: \u2018Yeah, OK, sure!’\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Liverpool had also long been sceptical of City’s revenue streams. All the way back in July 2011, when City had unveiled their \u00a3400m ($528m) sponsorship deal with Etihad Airways, <\/span>John Henry, the founder of Fenway Sports Group (FSG), which owns the Reds, quipped on Twitter<\/span><\/a>, “How much was the losing bid?”<\/span><\/p>\n