5 Years Nett Spent - An insight into us

[Sly]

 

The five year net spend by Premier League clubs gives some insight in how the table looks and shows why we’ve over performed. 
 

1) Manchester United: £-545.8m

2) Arsenal: £-440.4m

3) Chelsea: £-384m

4) West Ham: £-355.7m

5) Tottenham: £-331.45m

6) Newcastle: £-314m

7) Aston Villa: £-259.97m

8) Wolves: £-248.36m

9) Liverpool: £-216.61m

10) Manchester City: £-213.8m

11) Fulham: £-192.51m

12) Everton: £-168.3m

13) Nottingham Forest: £151.77m

14) Leeds United: £-123.15m

15) Southampton: £-121.93m

16) Crystal Palace: £-72.8m

17) Brighton: £-56.67m

18) Leicester: £-35.48m

19) Bournemouth: £-7.45m

20) Brentford: £100,000

We’ve put the money into long term investments like the training ground and we’re now looking at the stadium.
 

The concerning thing is, why have we needed the loans to finance certain things. 
 

Are we really forking that much out in wages that we’ve crippled ourselves, or are we really not spending like other clubs do in this league to maintain status? 
 

I’m not sure how much longer we can continue along this path though, without further investment or selling the part or all of the club. 
 

Would we ever look at sell, or will we drop back to clubs that spend at a similar level? We can’t rely on selling assets and when we do, that’s needs re-investing into the team. 
 

Half the Championship has a higher 5 year net spend than us. 

[st albans fox]

55 minutes ago, Sly said:

 

The five year net spend by Premier League clubs gives some insight in how the table looks and shows why we’ve over performed. 
 

1) Manchester United: £-545.8m

2) Arsenal: £-440.4m

3) Chelsea: £-384m

4) West Ham: £-355.7m

5) Tottenham: £-331.45m

6) Newcastle: £-314m

7) Aston Villa: £-259.97m

8) Wolves: £-248.36m

9) Liverpool: £-216.61m

10) Manchester City: £-213.8m

11) Fulham: £-192.51m

12) Everton: £-168.3m

13) Nottingham Forest: £151.77m

14) Leeds United: £-123.15m

15) Southampton: £-121.93m

16) Crystal Palace: £-72.8m

17) Brighton: £-56.67m

18) Leicester: £-35.48m

19) Bournemouth: £-7.45m

20) Brentford: £100,000

We’ve put the money into long term investments like the training ground and we’re now looking at the stadium.
 

The concerning thing is, why have we needed the loans to finance certain things. 
 

Are we really forking that much out in wages that we’ve crippled ourselves, or are we really not spending like other clubs do in this league to maintain status? 
 

I’m not sure how much longer we can continue along this path though, without further investment or selling the part or all of the club. 
 

Would we ever look at sell, or will we drop back to clubs that spend at a similar level? We can’t rely on selling assets and when we do, that’s needs re-investing into the team. 
 

Half the Championship has a higher 5 year net spend than us. 

What about spend on free beers and cakes though ???

[Koke]

Respect to Man City.

[dnewty]

This will need to change drastically starting this summer. Yes we will be saving lot’s on wages due to players contracts running out but we’re going to need some serious money spent on fees. The club keep saying that European places are the target each season but never back that up with spending.

 

[Sunbury Fox]

1 hour ago, Sly said:

 

The five year net spend by Premier League clubs gives some insight in how the table looks and shows why we’ve over performed. 
 

1) Manchester United: £-545.8m

2) Arsenal: £-440.4m

3) Chelsea: £-384m

4) West Ham: £-355.7m

5) Tottenham: £-331.45m

6) Newcastle: £-314m

7) Aston Villa: £-259.97m

8) Wolves: £-248.36m

9) Liverpool: £-216.61m

10) Manchester City: £-213.8m

11) Fulham: £-192.51m

12) Everton: £-168.3m

13) Nottingham Forest: £151.77m

14) Leeds United: £-123.15m

15) Southampton: £-121.93m

16) Crystal Palace: £-72.8m

17) Brighton: £-56.67m

18) Leicester: £-35.48m

19) Bournemouth: £-7.45m

20) Brentford: £100,000

We’ve put the money into long term investments like the training ground and we’re now looking at the stadium.
 

The concerning thing is, why have we needed the loans to finance certain things. 
 

Are we really forking that much out in wages that we’ve crippled ourselves, or are we really not spending like other clubs do in this league to maintain status? 
 

I’m not sure how much longer we can continue along this path though, without further investment or selling the part or all of the club. 
 

Would we ever look at sell, or will we drop back to clubs that spend at a similar level? We can’t rely on selling assets and when we do, that’s needs re-investing into the team. 
 

Half the Championship has a higher 5 year net spend than us. 

Surprised to see West Ham that high and Man City that low. I guess it reflects the fact that Man City have been able to raise significant funds by selling squad players, whereas West Ham have not sold anyone for big money in years. 

[dnewty]

I’m not Rodger’s biggest fan but I’m surprised he didn’t insist on a bigger budget before he came here. It’s possibly a good thing but let’s face it he’s never had the chance to have a good spend on players.

For example when was the last time we signed a player who wasn’t a replacement to go straight into the starting lineup ?

[SheppyFox]

Net spend has never been high to my knowledge.

[David Hankey]

15 minutes ago, dnewty said:

This will need to change drastically starting this summer. Yes we will be saving lot’s on wages due to players contracts running out but we’re going to need some serious money spent on fees. The club keep saying that European places are the target each season but never back that up with spending.

 

You can't spend money you haven't got unless serious and greater debt is incurred. Off the field expenditure over recent years with the new training ground facilities and the impending stadium expansion will/have made a big hole in the finances.

[Hamilton Fox]

38 minutes ago, Koke said:

Respect to Man City.

Easy to do when they probably spent a billion in the 5 years before 

[KingsX]

1 hour ago, Hamilton Fox said:

Easy to do when they probably spent a billion in the 5 years before 

Indeed, reported in February as second highest in Europe over the last ten years.

 

[Bordersfox]

6 minutes ago, KingsX said:

Indeed, reported in February as second highest in Europe over the last ten years.

 

How on earth aren't Real Madrid on that list? 

[coolhandfox]

Puts things a little in prospective.

[l444ry]

What constitutes Nett Spend? Does this include Salaries? How are these figures arrived at?  

[moore_94]

3 minutes ago, l444ry said:

What constitutes Nett Spend? Does this include Salaries? How are these figures arrived at?  

The total of transfer fee's paid minus the total of any transfer fee's received

[Guest kristianity77]

All it shows me is that if we continue with this, we will eventually stop circling the drain and drop back to the Championship.  Theres tight and then their isnt acting competitive.  Its highly likely we lose Tielemens and Maddison in the next 6 months.  You take them two players out of it, and we are complete Premier League fodder.

Edited 1 January 2023 by kristianity77

[Mr Weller 2]

By the way it’s net spend-with one t 

[Aus Fox]

So we’ve only spent £35 million on transfers over the past 5 seasons.

This has us earning over £130 million last season in tv money and £140 million the year before.

And our wage bill last season at £73 million. 
Training ground came in at just over £100 million.

I know there are other expenditures, but there are also other points of revenue.

We've also played in Europe twice and picked up some money for decent cup runs.

If these figures are all accurate, there appears to be a lot of money missing? 
I’m not an accountant, and have no experience of running a football club, but it does make me wonder ‘where’s all the money gone?’

[Hamilton Fox]

1 minute ago, Aus Fox said:

So we’ve only spent £35 million on transfers over the past 5 seasons.

This has us earning over £130 million last season in tv money and £140 million the year before.

And our wage bill last season at £73 million. 
Training ground came in at just over £100 million.

I know there are other expenditures, but there are also other points of revenue.

We've also played in Europe twice and picked up some money for decent cup runs.

If these figures are all accurate, there appears to be a lot of money missing? 
I’m not an accountant, and have no experience of running a football club, but it does make me wonder ‘where’s all the money gone?’

Pretty sure the financial reports had us at the highest wage to turnover ratio in the league at something like 90% plus so can’t see how that £73m wages is right

[Aus Fox]

Just now, Hamilton Fox said:

Pretty sure the financial reports had us at the highest wage to turnover ratio in the league at something like 90% plus so can’t see how that £73m wages is right

That could be it, this was just from a random Google Search.

But with that then, whoever is negotiating contracts needs to be looked at and be answering some serious questions.

[Hamilton Fox]

Just now, Aus Fox said:

That could be it, this was just from a random Google Search.

But with that then, whoever is negotiating contracts needs to be looked at and be answering some serious questions.

Problem is when your pushing for top 4 and all players are performing you have to pay the higher wages to keep those players - unfortunately when performance drops or you buy duds it looks a bad way of doing things

[ozleicester]

surely net spend is irrelevant. especially when you buy players for 1 million and sell them for 80 million

[gurru991]

23 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

surely net spend is irrelevant. especially when you buy players for 1 million and sell them for 80 million

If you buy for 1 and sell for 80 you are in profit

If you buy for 80 and sell for 1 you are in debt

It's all about balancing the books and being in the black not the red.

[HankMarvin]

Only Chelsea, Liverpool and Man City have brought in more money from player sales over the last 5 years 

[ozleicester]

28 minutes ago, gurru991 said:

If you buy for 1 and sell for 80 you are in profit

If you buy for 80 and sell for 1 you are in debt

It's all about balancing the books and being in the black not the red.

"we're top of net spend, we're top of net spend."

For me....Its all about building a competitive squad.

[filbertway]

Bench warmung striker on 140 bags. Class management

Edited 1 January 2023 by filbertway