I'm not sure how it works but I didn't thin the CL money got paid upfront which would mean we've not had it yet The figures I put above are very simple. There will be additional costs such as wages, agents fees etc too. Maybe the TV money went towards all this? Anyone ITK with our clubs finances?
something still doesn't add up though, everton who are a lot fecking poorer than we are, have just spent what in the summer? i take it the extra tv money helped there, so if they had it available to a manager, that for years havent been given much by their owner, where has it gone for us?
Players in: Adam Lallana (25m) Emre Can (10m) Lazar Markovic (20m) Dejan Lovren (20m) Divock Origi (10m) Alberto Moreno (12m) Mario Balotelli (16m) Total: £113m Players out: Jakub Sokolik (FREE) Adam Morgan (FREE) Luis Suarez (75m) Conor Coady (???) Pepe Reina (???) Martin Kelly (???) Jack Robinson (???) Daniel Agger (3m) Total: £78m Net spend = £35m http://www.soccerbase.com/teams/team.sd?team_id=1563&teamTabs=transfers The answer to your question regarding TV money, no idea. The £35m net is probably about what we expected anyway
maybe, i thought we had £50 mill to spend before the sale of Luis anyway, or is that bollocks? i havent heard any dif to that.
I remember reading that but I tend not to take any notice of those sort of things. I know FSG said when they arrived that they don't work in budgets so won't be setting a transfer budget for the manager. If a player is highlighted and the feel he fits they will sanction the purchase.
have it n good authority that coady was 1mil, kelly was about 1mil and robinson was about 500k. reina was a misery 2mil. so add around 4.5 to 5 mil to that intake.
3rd? fair enough, thought we was a lot lower than that, spent wise not surprised( ie over £100 mill) we are near the top, but net?
Do you have a link for that? I was going to say Chelsea are higher having splashed out on Costa and Fabregas, both over £30m. But then recalled the ludicrous Luiz deal to PDG
The fee is but overall its probably not. He was a high earner, probably £100k per week which made him a £5.2m liability on our books. Effectively, selling him boosted our summer budget by £7.2m (in simple terms). Of course, we could have not signed Migs and used Reina instead
Yeah that was a great decision that wasn't it. Y'know I was looking at Jones sat on our bench yesterday and wondering what the **** must be going on inside his own head. It's a special kind of player who'll accept the perma-bench warming position, but to have to do it watching Mignolet flap around like a set of dog's jowls for 90 minutes
transfer market aint perfect but it is a decent overview if you apply a =/- to the info. http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premiership-transfers/liverpool-transfers.html this has suarez at only 65mil so its 44mil net not 34mil net. http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premiership-transfers/everton-transfers.html everton net of 36.5mil... so.... is that accurate? http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premiership-transfers/arsenal-transfers.html arsenal 53mil net utd: http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premiership-transfers/manchester-united-transfers.html 113mil net sooooooooooooooooo.................. Gerrez points to all the add ons in these transfers. who knows. http://www.caughtoffside.com/2014/0...s-sold-man-united-arsenal-way-out-in-front/4/ even though its caughtbloodyoffside it is directly stolen form the gaurdian and the numbers seem reasonable. I have to say that 34mil aint exactly monumnetla. its just that its a total waste and there prob 30mil mil more losses when we sell on built into it
Manchester United, net spend £122m Arsenal, net spend £46m Liverpool, net spend £36m Everton, net spend £33m Manchester City, net spend £32m West Ham United, net spend £31m Hull City, net spend £25m Newcastle United, net spend £25m Queens Park Rangers, net spend £21m West Bromwich Albion, net spend £13m Crystal Palace, net spent £11m Chelsea, net spend £10m Leicester City, net spend £10m Sunderland, net spend £10m Burnley, net spend £8m Aston Villa, net spend £6m Tottenham Hotspur, profit £6m Swansea City, net spend £1.5m Stoke City, net spend £0.5m Southampton, profit £31m We are third but there isn't exactly a lot in it between us Everton and Man City which shows how ridiculous net amounts can be considering those two; one known for having a tight budget and rarely spending, the other known for splashing cash like its going out of fashion. Seeing the likes of West Ham, Hull and Newcastle on such amounts is surprising though
Biscuits finest post. (Time to concentrate on Ludogorets isn't it? Rumour is they're really angry with you for lucking out at Anfield)
