Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Moderators: BillShankly, arxidi, Judge Judy, Forum Admins
Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Only joking, here's what anyone with a interest in the Premmier League knew all along.
The biggest suprises were the spending of Spurs, Villa and Sunderland.
http://www.transferleague.co.uk/
Bollocks, I spent 5 minutes spreading the figures out so they could easily be read! It's probably easier to understand if you click on the link.
The table below represents the clubs per season net spend on purchasing players from the beginning of the premiership season 1992/93 to date. Purchases is the total spent on buying players, sold is the total received from the sale players and net is Purchased minus sold giving a total of the money spend on players . The per season column gives an average of the money spend in each season in the corresponding period. If you click on the teams name in the left hand column of the page you will get a precise breakdown of each individual clubs transfer details.
# Net Spend 1992 - 2010 Purchased Sold Nett Per Season
1 Chelsea £558,190,000 £191,875,000 £366,315,000 £20,350,833
2 Man City £396,110,000 £102,553,000 £293,557,000 £16,308,722
3 Liverpool £415,355,000 £209,720,000 £205,635,000 £11,424,167
4 Tottenham £379,850,000 £202,017,500 £177,832,500 £9,879,583
5 Aston Villa £253,240,000 £108,225,000 £145,015,000 £8,056,389
6 Man United £410,350,000 £275,565,000 £134,785,000 £7,488,056
7 Sunderland £226,265,000 £108,730,000 £117,535,000 £6,529,722
9 Newcastle £304,195,000 £198,225,000 £105,970,000 £5,887,222
8 Middlesbrough £179,285,000 £108,770,000 £70,515,000 £3,917,500
10 Everton £216,745,500 £161,270,000 £55,475,500 £3,081,972
11 Arsenal £269,940,000 £245,074,000 £24,866,000 £1,381,444
12 Blackburn £177,602,000 £172,335,000 £5,267,000 £292,611
13 Portsmouth £115,100,000 £127,425,000 -£12,325,000 -£684,722
14 West Ham £167,582,000 £182,982,000 -£15,400,000 -£855,556
Leeds £145,780,000 £141,345,000 £4,435,000 £246,389
The table below represents the clubs net spend per season from the beginning of season 04/05 to date. Some users have questioned why we picked that timeframe to analysis. Season 05/05 is the year that Rafael Benitez became Liverpool Manager. Following his comments to the media about his lack of lack of funding in comparison to his competitors I constructed this table to see if what he was claiming was factual. Purchases is the total spent on buying players, sold is the total received from the sale of players and Nett equals the Players Purchased minus Players Sold giving a total of the money spend on players.
The per season column gives an average of the money spend in each season in the corresponding period season 04/05 to date
# Net Spend 04 - 09 Purchased Sold Nett Per Season
1 Man City £292,750,000 £71,900,000 £220,850,000 £36,808,333
2 Chelsea £267,950,000 £123,300,000 £144,650,000 £24,108,333
3 Liverpool £247,730,000 £134,080,000 £113,650,000 £18,941,667
4 Tottenham £262,000,000 £163,550,000 £98,450,000 £16,408,333
5 Aston Villa £130,200,000 £37,255,000 £92,945,000 £15,490,833
6 Sunderland £154,080,000 £67,900,000 £86,180,000 £14,363,333
9 Man United £188,650,000 £161,050,000 £27,600,000 £4,600,000
7 Everton £102,100,500 £78,200,000 £23,900,500 £3,983,417
8 West Ham £94,145,000 £71,325,000 £22,820,000 £3,803,333
10 Newcastle £120,750,000 £106,400,000 £14,350,000 £2,391,667
12 Middlesbrough £62,200,000 £54,500,000 £7,700,000 £1,283,333
11 Blackburn £49,052,000 £57,290,000 -£8,238,000 -£1,373,000
13 Portsmouth £92,200,000 £107,240,000 -£15,040,000 -£2,506,667
14 Arsenal £112,050,000 £145,820,000 -£33,770,000 -£5,628,333
Leeds £5,900,000 £13,050,000 -£7,150,000 -£1,191,667
The biggest suprises were the spending of Spurs, Villa and Sunderland.
http://www.transferleague.co.uk/
Bollocks, I spent 5 minutes spreading the figures out so they could easily be read! It's probably easier to understand if you click on the link.
The table below represents the clubs per season net spend on purchasing players from the beginning of the premiership season 1992/93 to date. Purchases is the total spent on buying players, sold is the total received from the sale players and net is Purchased minus sold giving a total of the money spend on players . The per season column gives an average of the money spend in each season in the corresponding period. If you click on the teams name in the left hand column of the page you will get a precise breakdown of each individual clubs transfer details.
# Net Spend 1992 - 2010 Purchased Sold Nett Per Season
1 Chelsea £558,190,000 £191,875,000 £366,315,000 £20,350,833
2 Man City £396,110,000 £102,553,000 £293,557,000 £16,308,722
3 Liverpool £415,355,000 £209,720,000 £205,635,000 £11,424,167
4 Tottenham £379,850,000 £202,017,500 £177,832,500 £9,879,583
5 Aston Villa £253,240,000 £108,225,000 £145,015,000 £8,056,389
6 Man United £410,350,000 £275,565,000 £134,785,000 £7,488,056
7 Sunderland £226,265,000 £108,730,000 £117,535,000 £6,529,722
9 Newcastle £304,195,000 £198,225,000 £105,970,000 £5,887,222
8 Middlesbrough £179,285,000 £108,770,000 £70,515,000 £3,917,500
10 Everton £216,745,500 £161,270,000 £55,475,500 £3,081,972
11 Arsenal £269,940,000 £245,074,000 £24,866,000 £1,381,444
12 Blackburn £177,602,000 £172,335,000 £5,267,000 £292,611
13 Portsmouth £115,100,000 £127,425,000 -£12,325,000 -£684,722
14 West Ham £167,582,000 £182,982,000 -£15,400,000 -£855,556
Leeds £145,780,000 £141,345,000 £4,435,000 £246,389
The table below represents the clubs net spend per season from the beginning of season 04/05 to date. Some users have questioned why we picked that timeframe to analysis. Season 05/05 is the year that Rafael Benitez became Liverpool Manager. Following his comments to the media about his lack of lack of funding in comparison to his competitors I constructed this table to see if what he was claiming was factual. Purchases is the total spent on buying players, sold is the total received from the sale of players and Nett equals the Players Purchased minus Players Sold giving a total of the money spend on players.
The per season column gives an average of the money spend in each season in the corresponding period season 04/05 to date
# Net Spend 04 - 09 Purchased Sold Nett Per Season
1 Man City £292,750,000 £71,900,000 £220,850,000 £36,808,333
2 Chelsea £267,950,000 £123,300,000 £144,650,000 £24,108,333
3 Liverpool £247,730,000 £134,080,000 £113,650,000 £18,941,667
4 Tottenham £262,000,000 £163,550,000 £98,450,000 £16,408,333
5 Aston Villa £130,200,000 £37,255,000 £92,945,000 £15,490,833
6 Sunderland £154,080,000 £67,900,000 £86,180,000 £14,363,333
9 Man United £188,650,000 £161,050,000 £27,600,000 £4,600,000
7 Everton £102,100,500 £78,200,000 £23,900,500 £3,983,417
8 West Ham £94,145,000 £71,325,000 £22,820,000 £3,803,333
10 Newcastle £120,750,000 £106,400,000 £14,350,000 £2,391,667
12 Middlesbrough £62,200,000 £54,500,000 £7,700,000 £1,283,333
11 Blackburn £49,052,000 £57,290,000 -£8,238,000 -£1,373,000
13 Portsmouth £92,200,000 £107,240,000 -£15,040,000 -£2,506,667
14 Arsenal £112,050,000 £145,820,000 -£33,770,000 -£5,628,333
Leeds £5,900,000 £13,050,000 -£7,150,000 -£1,191,667
Manchester United, not arrogant, just better.
- El Capitano
- Star Player
- Posts: 4226
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:29 am
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Spurs high spending shouldn't be a surprise.
Feel Good Inc.
-
- First Team Regular
- Posts: 2100
- Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 11:34 am
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Arsenal winning more than most, and spending less.
Well run club.
Well run club.
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 19844
- Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 10:55 am
- Been thanked: 138 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
And the ManU figure it totally skewed because of the Ronaldo sale. If he was still at United they'd be much higher up.
"The game is about glory, doing things in style and with a flourish, going out and beating the other lot, not waiting for them to die of boredom."
Danny Blanchflower
Danny Blanchflower
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 19844
- Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 10:55 am
- Been thanked: 138 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Just make us a quick list of what they've won in the last four seasons.A-Mac wrote:Arsenal winning more than most, and spending less.
Well run club.
Hmm..... Told you it would be a quick list
"The game is about glory, doing things in style and with a flourish, going out and beating the other lot, not waiting for them to die of boredom."
Danny Blanchflower
Danny Blanchflower
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Do you only want to know the truth if it suits your agenda? That's like saying we should disregard Spurs' spending because they spent it on crap players! Maybe we can disregard some Spurs income, seeing as a whack of it came from United.Nice One Cyril wrote:And the ManU figure it totally skewed because of the Ronaldo sale. If he was still at United they'd be much higher up.
Manchester United, not arrogant, just better.
- El Capitano
- Star Player
- Posts: 4226
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:29 am
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Spurs spending wasn't on crap players. The spending was on players they didn't need, but bought anyway.M160RA wrote:
Do you only want to know the truth if it suits your agenda? That's like saying we should disregard Spurs' spending because they spent it on crap players! Maybe we can disregard some Spurs income, seeing as a whack of it came from United.
Liverpool on the other hand.....Well no need to list their dud signings again.
Feel Good Inc.
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 17368
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 4:54 pm
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
All transfer lists are a lot of guess work as not all transfers are known, many fees are undisclosed, and even if you look at the books, they don't have players names on for each signing. Also these tables don't have sell on fees that come in.
I am not saying the order is right or wrong, but it can't be taken as gospel.
Also, I would prefer to spend 70m on 4 very good players rather than 50m on one world class.
I also don't care what anyone says, look at the squad that luckily won the CL in 2005, and look at the squad that finished last season. Raf has made good progress, its just UTD had an exceptional run last season to win the league. This season isn't over, if Aqualini proves to be as good as some say, Liverpool still have a very good squad.
So if people say Rafa has bought duds, he has also moved them on again, he is doing a good job. I don't have the stats at hand, but his average points total is far better than what went before him...so I ask, why is he doing such a bad job? Is it because he has lost 4 in a row.......mmmmm?
I am not saying the order is right or wrong, but it can't be taken as gospel.
Also, I would prefer to spend 70m on 4 very good players rather than 50m on one world class.
I also don't care what anyone says, look at the squad that luckily won the CL in 2005, and look at the squad that finished last season. Raf has made good progress, its just UTD had an exceptional run last season to win the league. This season isn't over, if Aqualini proves to be as good as some say, Liverpool still have a very good squad.
So if people say Rafa has bought duds, he has also moved them on again, he is doing a good job. I don't have the stats at hand, but his average points total is far better than what went before him...so I ask, why is he doing such a bad job? Is it because he has lost 4 in a row.......mmmmm?
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 19844
- Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 10:55 am
- Been thanked: 138 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Not at all. I'm not one of those who gives a flying fuck how much others spend, you're the one having the barney with the Scallys about who's spent most, but, you'd have to admit the figures would be very different if Ronnie was still at Utd.M160RA wrote:Do you only want to know the truth if it suits your agenda? That's like saying we should disregard Spurs' spending because they spent it on crap players! Maybe we can disregard some Spurs income, seeing as a whack of it came from United.Nice One Cyril wrote:And the ManU figure it totally skewed because of the Ronaldo sale. If he was still at United they'd be much higher up.
Perhaps a fairer way of working out who's actually spent what, would be to look at the net spend then subtract the current value (obviously not easy to calculate) of the players bought in that are still remaining at the club. That would give you a truer picture.
I mean you could say that Torres cost 25 but is worth 100 million (no fucking pound sign on this poxy keyboard) which would make Rafa's spending look a hell of a lot better.
And it's not our fault if Pool wanted to give us 20 mill for the Irish Windmill (and then give him back for 12!) and your mob 30 mill for Berbastrop. Won't hear us complaining.
"The game is about glory, doing things in style and with a flourish, going out and beating the other lot, not waiting for them to die of boredom."
Danny Blanchflower
Danny Blanchflower
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Don't forget to include Carrick.Nice One Cyril wrote:[
(no bottle of shiraz pound sign on this poxy keyboard)
£££££
And it's not our fault if Pool wanted to give us 20 mill for the Irish Windmill (and then give him back for 12!) and your mob 30 mill for Berbastrop. Won't hear us complaining.
If you want a £ sign, do this....(Alt+0163).....Hold Alt and type 0163, when you let up on the Alt button it will show up.
Last edited by M160RA on Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Manchester United, not arrogant, just better.
-
- First Team Regular
- Posts: 2100
- Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 11:34 am
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Sorry, thought the post was from 1992.....Nice One Cyril wrote:Just make us a quick list of what they've won in the last four seasons.
Hmm..... Told you it would be a quick list
- El Capitano
- Star Player
- Posts: 4226
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:29 am
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
All those duds he signed de-valued while they were at Liverpool, they got moved on for far less than what they were bought for.... How is that a good job?e-football wrote: So if people say Rafa has bought duds, he has also moved them on again, he is doing a good job.
Feel Good Inc.
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 17368
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 4:54 pm
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
The fact that many came on free and we sold for money......
When you finish school, don't be an accountant
When you finish school, don't be an accountant
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
The wage bills are a big factor not taken into account. Arsenal paid ~ 30+ million pounds more a year in wages than all bar the other top 4.
- El Capitano
- Star Player
- Posts: 4226
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:29 am
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
If they came for free, then they weren't bought.e-football wrote:The fact that many came on free and we sold for money......
Feel Good Inc.
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 17368
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 4:54 pm
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
I should have said signed duds. But look at the value of others, how much was Alonso bought for? Swings and roundabouts.
As I said, the squad he has had each year has got better.
As I said, the squad he has had each year has got better.
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
well ud hope it would be better with a turnover of 70 players since hes been in chargee-football wrote:I should have said signed duds. But look at the value of others, how much was Alonso bought for? Swings and roundabouts.
As I said, the squad he has had each year has got better.
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 17368
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 4:54 pm
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
15 players a year, 5 in each squad, not excessive when turning a whole club round.
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
are u serious?e-football wrote:15 players a year, 5 in each squad, not excessive when turning a whole club round.
70 players in 5 yrs, and he still aint turned it around
sounds very excessive 2 me
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
The following link summarises the reign of Rafa quite well:
http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/10/of ... -over.html
There have been a lot of ins and outs, would you say more than any other club in the Premiership?
http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/10/of ... -over.html
There have been a lot of ins and outs, would you say more than any other club in the Premiership?
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 17368
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 4:54 pm
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
Yes I am serious, his first team is what really matters. The others (youth and reserves) not so much. Look at what he has done,his squad has evolved. Sometimes you buy players as a stop gap (Bellamy) and then you get the big prize (Torres).
There have been some major flops Keane. Morientes (no one still knows what went wrong there). You also look at people like Insua who is doing exceptionally well, a bargain at $1m.
You wouldn't see any of this, as your one eye only sees 70 players in 5 years. If you opened the other eye you would see the whole picture.
There have been some major flops Keane. Morientes (no one still knows what went wrong there). You also look at people like Insua who is doing exceptionally well, a bargain at $1m.
You wouldn't see any of this, as your one eye only sees 70 players in 5 years. If you opened the other eye you would see the whole picture.
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
The main picture is trophies, and your team hasnt won any for agese-football wrote:Yes I am serious, his first team is what really matters. The others (youth and reserves) not so much. Look at what he has done,his squad has evolved. Sometimes you buy players as a stop gap (Bellamy) and then you get the big prize (Torres).
There have been some major flops Keane. Morientes (no one still knows what went wrong there). You also look at people like Insua who is doing exceptionally well, a bargain at $1m.
You wouldn't see any of this, as your one eye only sees 70 players in 5 years. If you opened the other eye you would see the whole picture.
but im glad ur happy with the squad u have
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 17368
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 4:54 pm
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
same with the money u spend as compare to arsenal !!
- El Capitano
- Star Player
- Posts: 4226
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:29 am
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
e-football wrote:The fact that many came on free and we sold for money......
When you finish school, don't be an accountant
haha from 2004 onwards (Rafas reign) Liverpool only signed 5 players for free. At present 3 are still at the club and the other 2 were released for free.Calo67 wrote: http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/10/of ... -over.html
Ill cya in school champ
Feel Good Inc.
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 17368
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 4:54 pm
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
That site is actually written by a Man Utd fan, no fan of any team would consistently be so negative.
Only 5 on free? I Know of 7, plus ones that were part of deal (swapped), plus others that he 'signed' from youth...all these are in the 70 players. If you want me to list them all I will.
Its amazing, when those who just read inaccurate info and then post it again they think they are right!!
Also currently 4 freebies are at the club, One you will remember very well from last season's match at OT.
Only 5 on free? I Know of 7, plus ones that were part of deal (swapped), plus others that he 'signed' from youth...all these are in the 70 players. If you want me to list them all I will.
Its amazing, when those who just read inaccurate info and then post it again they think they are right!!
Also currently 4 freebies are at the club, One you will remember very well from last season's match at OT.
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
difference is arsenal dun spend money on there playerse-football wrote:more than Arsenal recently!!!
its like any business, if u pump money into it u wanna see results... rafa has being buying lots of players and the owners rnt seein results
as for the arsenal comment, the way arsenal play, atleast they have a bright future
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 17368
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 4:54 pm
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
every arsenal fan would like to have the success we have had in the past 5 years. If any fan prefers playing good football to winning the CL, they need to see a doc.
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 17368
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 4:54 pm
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
I'm not going to argue the point much more , but since when was Nasri, Arshavin, Sylvester, Ramsey and Sagna etc free? I am sure there are more big money signings I have missed off
Enjoy the game tomorrow, if we win or lose I won't be on here much (other stuff to do next week), and as you all know I don't gloat when we do win, it's not my style. You win some and you lose some, that's football.
I don't get on a high after one win, and I am not suicidal after 4 or 5 defeats.
Cheers
Enjoy the game tomorrow, if we win or lose I won't be on here much (other stuff to do next week), and as you all know I don't gloat when we do win, it's not my style. You win some and you lose some, that's football.
I don't get on a high after one win, and I am not suicidal after 4 or 5 defeats.
Cheers
Re: Proof that MUFC spend a lot more on players than LFC.
e-football wrote:That site is actually written by a Man Utd fan, no fan of any team would consistently be so negative.
Only 5 on free? I Know of 7, plus ones that were part of deal (swapped), plus others that he 'signed' from youth...all these are in the 70 players. If you want me to list them all I will.
Its amazing, when those who just read inaccurate info and then post it again they think they are right!!
Also currently 4 freebies are at the club, One you will remember very well from last season's match at OT.
hahahaha please mate, wheres the proof that its a united supporter???
thats clearly a pool supporter who doesnt like benetiz and is jst gettin facts accross
y would a united supporter, or any other supporter for that matter write all that
all u got is that cl win, that u fluked in 05
im sure arsenal fans r happy with where they r headin in the future, i dont there many pool supporters r atm