You might want to check your sources. 05-06 In Simon Davies - Tottenham Hotspur, 26 May, £3,500,000 Per Krøldrup - Udinese, 27 June, £5,000,000 Phil Neville - Manchester United, 4 August, £3,500,000 Matteo Ferrari - Roma, 26 August, season-long loan Andy van der Meyde - Inter Milan, 31 August, £2,000,000 Sander Westerveld - Portsmouth, 24 February, 28-day loan Out Marcus Bent - Charlton Athletic, 17 January, £2,000,000 Per Krøldrup - Fiorentina, 31 January, £3,600,000 £8.4m that comes to as net spend.
Exactly, the main difference between Everton and Stoke is that Everton have been making up the numbers for longer. Can't be too harsh on them though when they have to suffer Bill helping himself to Everton's transfer funds to make his awful plays, films and records.
Arteta I've missed off, you can add £2m so it's £10.4m. Johnson and Lescott was the following season.
So add the extra £14m net for Lescott and Johnson to the following season. I was talking about 3 seasons so that still doesn't help you.
you're actually right over those 3years (well close to right, it's closer to £35m net spend than £40m) However to compare Stoke to Everton is just ******ed (And that's dismissing the net spend since they came into the premier league). It would be like me saying to you that Portsmouth have achieved more than Liverpool over the last 5 years.
Why? My comparisons are valid. Since Stoke joined the Premier League they have been to as many cup finals as Everton. The only difference is that Everton have finished on average a few places higher thus earning a few extra million in Premier League prize money. They haven't finished as high as you, but they have never finished as low as you either. And Everton's higher finishes haven't meant anything in practical terms e.g. success in Europe.
Stoke equaled Everton's Cup final appearance, but they trump Everton by also qualifying for the Europa League.
Well it isn't incomprehensible, is it? I can read it, for one, and for two it's written in better English than you've displayed thus far.
No, it would be absolutely nothing like that, and that you can even seriously suggest so is ludicrous.
They've qualified twice for Europe through the league. That means a lot for a club struggling for money like Everton.
Well it appears that none of the other people who read my post agree with you otherwise they would have said so. A little self analysis is called for methinks. BTW you really ain't much brighter when it comes to Geography.
Technically haven't they always gone out at the qualifying stages and never qualified for European competition proper i.e. group stages?
The only person to comment on it is a bigger bell end than you Everyone else gas given it the swerve as its a pile of stenching ****e
