Much as I agree with the comment re our owners, I'd suggest people actually read that rather than the headline quote, given in almost Daily Gammon style (you haven't got a gurning picture of Klopp to go with it as well, have you?). 1) Liverpool's NETT spend is £328m, half that of 3rd place United, less again by a further £40m from Chelsea, and one third of that of City. 2) Per season nett spend is only £2m more than Everton. 3) The nett spend per season is half that of United's and Chelsea's, and one third of City's. 4) So if we consider Liverpool more in a group of themselves, Arsenal, Villa and Everton, as opposed to being in the top group of United, City and Chelsea, have Liverpool and Arsenal over-achieved in their trophy tally in this period, or have Everton and Villa proportionally spunked the most money just to say they were there?
Everyone knows this ****, they just choose not to think about it that way. Agendas and that... so it's always the record transfer on a keeper and cb we keep hearing about instead of the fact we used the coutinho to buy them. Peps spent over 400m on defenders alone Just defenders But oh yeh they don't spend big on players right
Think that's just full-backs at that. But anyone claiming Liverpool have nett spent proportionally big since 2003 is having a chemically-induced brain seizure, imo. We did in the 90's, in fairness, but not since 2003 we haven't.
Net spend isn't as relevant as your wage bill. The league generally lines up with that and it's an ongoing payment. The six highest spenders are the Super League Six, for example.
Fair point, but I didn't post it in the first place to try and prove a point (that spectacularly backfired). But to develop this then, Liverpool are a long, long way off being the league's highest wage-to-earnings ratio. But I'll give you a clue - the two teams atop of that league play in blue, and they're not Chelsea or Brighton.
Leicester and it was Bournemouth, but they got relegated. Wages higher than their revenue. Has to be Everton, I guess.
I could. Wages in £ and then wages as a percentage of revenue: please log in to view this image please log in to view this image Everton are further down than you thought. Some ****ing dangerously high numbers for a few clubs in there.
Is that the one that has them at 85%? It's a year out of date and the results are posted a year late, so it's basically two years back. It's got Huddersfield and Cardiff in it, who went down at the end of the 18/19 season. Everton's percentage has actually gone up, but several clubs have leapfrogged them. The current season's going to be far worse for everyone, of course, but we won't see that for a year.
So there was actually **** all point chucking up a graph showing gross spend since 2003. Is that what you're saying?
No, liverpool spent that much on wages. City spent that and various bung and image rights schemes on wages.
You and Tobes are definitely gunna beat the **** out of each other over this. Tobes got the big buttons so you're effectively fighting with one hand behind your back. Good luck
What graph, not sure what you are on with. But if it makes you feel better, err, liverpool win net spend trophy this year. But have it taken away for loaning Chip Spice in, because he is gash
