By using properspursy.com services you agree to our Cookies Use and Data Transfer outside the EU.
We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, ads and Newsletters.

  • Love the Shirt - Tottenham Forum

    Join one of the best Tottenham Hotspur Supporters forums on the interweb, Discuss the ins and outs of our great club with like minded spurs fans from around the world. Please note, if you are easily offended, this forum is not for you.


    Join us!

Top 6 net spend ... amazing!

B

Basskadet

Well-Known Member
Founding Member
A couple stories came out in the press today where they compared the net spend of the current top 6 over the last 5 years, and it makes for incredible reading!

Top 6 Net Spend

Manchester City's net spend is the worst and, frankly, pretty scary at £402.5m over 5 years!

Next worst is Manchester United who, despite finishing outside the top 4 twice in the last 3 seasons, have a massive net spend of £368.65m

It then drops substantially to Arsenal, who have actually spent the least over 5 years (despite splashing out big on the likes of Sanchez and Ozil),but their sales are pathetic, meaning their net expenditure over 5 years is still £205.89m

Then, perhaps surprisingly, there's Chelsea who may have spent big, but they've sold big also, and so have recouped a decent portion, leaving their net expenditure over 5years at £192.3m.

Then there is Liverpool, who have hardly excelled in the transfer market in recent years. Their net spend is at a more reasonable £121.52m.

Coming last out of the top 6 were Spurs. Our net spend over the same period is ... wait for it....

...£1m


....that is JUST £ONE MILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!



Then I thought about something which the article doesn't address - wages. It would be interesting to see how the top 6 compare in that regard also but, considering Spurs only recently broke our wage structure to pay a player £100kpw and that all the other top 6 have several players earning way more than that and have been paying such sums for many years, I'd wager Spurs are bottom of that list also.

When you think of the money that is in the Premier League these days, especially for clubs who finish in the top 6 and who get lots of air time on the tellybox, and also the money for Champion's League qualification, which we've now done twice in that timespan, knowing we're achieving that with a net spend of just £1m must surely mean we are RAKING in the readies

Suddenly that £800m needed for the new stadium doesn't look too bad!
 
Last edited:
Ted the Yid

Ted the Yid

Moderator
Founding Member
A couple stories came out in the press today where they compared the net spend of the current top 6 over the last 5 years, and it makes for incredible reading!

Top 6 Net Spend

Manchester City's net spend is the worst and, frankly, pretty scary at £402.5m over 5 years!

Next worst is Manchester United who, despite finishing outside the top 4 twice in the last 3 seasons, have a massive net spend of £368.65m

It then drops substantially to Arsenal, who have actually spent the least over 5 years (despite splashing out big on the likes of Sanchez and Ozil),but their sales are pathetic, meaning their net expenditure over 5 years is still £205.89m

Then, perhaps surprisingly, there's Chelsea who may have spent big, but they've sold big also, and so have recouped a decent portion, leaving their net expenditure over 5years at £192.3m.

Then there is Liverpool, who have hardly excelled in the transfer market in recent years. Their net spend is at a more reasonable £121.52m.

Coming last out of the top 6 were Spurs. Our net spend over the same period is ... wait for it....

...£1m


....that is JUST £ONE MILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!



Then I thought about something which the article doesn't address - wages. It would be interesting to see how the top 6 compare in that regard also but, considering Spurs only recently broke our wage structure to pay a player £100know and that all the other top 6 have several players earning way more than that and have been paying such sums for many years, I'd water Spurs are bottom of that list also.

When you think of the money that is in the Premier League these days, especially for clubs who finish in the top 6 and who get lots of air time on the tellybox, and also the money for Champion's League qualification, which we've now done twice in that timespan, knowing we're achieving that with a net spend of just £1m must surely mean we are RAKING in the readies

Suddenly that £800m needed for the new stadium doesn't look too bad!

Even more amazing, if you stick your head into the Kane n dele make top 10 thread, @Don Diaz posted some interesting estimates on current squad value, making our squad the most expensive in the PL and 3rd in the world.
 
Yid

Yid

Moderator
Founding Member
How in fucks name can anyone call for Levy's head is beyond me.

Even enic stack up well to be fair... they may not have invested huge sums but they have done such a great job running the club that we generate our own income to such a degree that we are hugely solvent as a business while every cunt and their dog chuck money at titles and silverware.

I'd rather do it this way even if it is slower.

The actual value of our club will be staggering if you look at the whole package.
 
skiathospurs

skiathospurs

Well-Known Member
Founding Member
Graphic to go with the article

C2ftOltXAAEZq6t.jpg
 
Havocc

Havocc

Well-Known Member
Founding Member
Would love to see the media make a big deal on how well the club is run. Considering the amount we spend based on our achievements in the league.
 
Don Diaz

Don Diaz

Zero tolerance of Numpty's
Founding Member
Graphic to go with the article

C2ftOltXAAEZq6t.jpg
Look at the difference between us and the Scum on matchday revenue, that will change in 2 years and we will be in the top 6. Unfortunately at that point I think the Lewis and Levy show will sell up and make a fortune, there will be no other opportunities to expand and make money.
 
Dorset

Dorset

The Voice Of Reason
Founding Member
Graphic to go with the article

C2ftOltXAAEZq6t.jpg
Yeah, but that 12th is closer to 20th than to 1st, in the new way of looking at things:

Maybe we will ditch the 'Audrey is a goer' motto and go for "secundum positionem, sed magis ad sexton" - it's supposed to say 2nd position is closer to 6th, but I know fuck-all latin so I trusted Google translate
 
Top