Just to put it all in perspective, Man City and Spurs have spent big, but they have also lost key players going out. Take Spurs: OUT: Bale £85m, Caulker £10m, Hudllestone £5m, Livermore £2m; IN: Soldado, Lamela, Paulinho, Eriksen, and Chiriches for a total outlay of £95m. That's £102m out and £95m in.
City by comparison have lost, OUT: Holt £1.5m, Vaughan £1m and Jackson and 8 others let go whilst, IN: RvW £8.6m, Hooper £5.5m, Fer £4.5m, Olsson £2.5m, Redmond £2m, Garrido £1.5m and Elmander on loan. That's around £2.5m out and around £25m in.
The pundits say Spurs have done better, but have they when you consider the losses as well?
http://metro.co.uk/2013/09/02/trans...ubs-who-have-done-the-best-business-3942696/?
City by comparison have lost, OUT: Holt £1.5m, Vaughan £1m and Jackson and 8 others let go whilst, IN: RvW £8.6m, Hooper £5.5m, Fer £4.5m, Olsson £2.5m, Redmond £2m, Garrido £1.5m and Elmander on loan. That's around £2.5m out and around £25m in.
The pundits say Spurs have done better, but have they when you consider the losses as well?
http://metro.co.uk/2013/09/02/trans...ubs-who-have-done-the-best-business-3942696/?

