Manchester City has set a fee of no less than £100 million for Kevin De Bruyne amid interest from Saudi Arabian clubs for a potential high-profile transfer in the upcoming summer window as the club gets ready to replace the key player.

Manchester City remains calm regarding Kevin De Bruyne’s future despite interest from Saudi Arabia, according to information obtained by talkSPORT.

The 32-year-old midfielder is being targeted by the Saudi Pro League, along with Liverpool’s Mo Salah.

However, De Bruyne is currently contracted with Manchester City until the summer of 2025.

It would likely require an offer exceeding £100 million for City to entertain the idea of selling him during the upcoming summer transfer window.

Presently, the former Chelsea player has not been presented with new contract terms by the Premier League champions.

However, this situation might change soon, given De Bruyne’s exceptional performance since his return to action last month.

In the nine games since recovering from a hamstring injury, he has contributed with two goals and eight assists across all competitions.

If De Bruyne opts to make the move from England to Saudi Arabia, he would follow in the footsteps of two other notable City players who joined Middle Eastern clubs.

Last summer, Algerian forward Riyad Mahrez signed with Al Ahli, where he forms part of a front three alongside Roberto Firmino and Allan Saint-Maximin.

Shortly thereafter, Spanish defender Aymeric Laporte transferred to Al Nassr, where he now shares the field with Cristiano Ronaldo and Sadio Mane.

De Bruyne was on the bench but didn’t play in City’s 1-0 victory over Brentford midweek because of a minor hamstring issue.

However, he might be available for selection for the away match against Bournemouth scheduled for Saturday at 5:30 pm.

In his pre-match press conference, Pep Guardiola remarked about the midfielder, stating, “I’m uncertain if he’s fully fit, but we made the right choice in avoiding any risks against Brentford.

I understand that if the outcome wasn’t favorable, questions would arise regarding his absence, but we made the decision based on his discomfort.”