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!