Statman
"often" accused, so there's absolutely no truth in this idea at all then?
A decade for sale 989And clearly you have not understood how the transfers are listed. Where did you get those stats Dave? And did you even read...
they often did.
A decade for sale 991And your constant repetition of that one fact doesn't? Well you are not doing very...
really? I have it on good authority that manutd outspent everyone in at least 4 of the 1990's seasons, you care to dispute this?
" the£40m kitty eminently affordable. Kenyon describes the club as "cash rich", though that is understating the obvious. Financially, they are in a different league."
"United topped the table in transfer spending in the six seasons up to 2002 with £99million."
that's about it summed up right there, if you look at manure this century what's the buying picture look like then? and what did manure get for their millions? your stats are meaningless as a response to the "championship" thread if that's what they are as that examines or rather "rants" at how chelsea have upped he ante so i suggest you return with some figures on the years 2000-2006. but thanks all the same.
FYI
and no mention of veron. LOL!
The review shows that Manchester United and Arsenal were the biggest spenders on wages in 2001-2, £69.9million and £61.4million respectively.
United also topped the table in transfer spending in the six seasons up to 2002 with £99million.
Leeds were next (£91m) and then Chelsea (£84m), Liverpool (£81m) and Tottenham (£53m). Arsenal's net spending on transfers was £24million, less than Manchester City's (£32m).
Manchester United spent the most on wages in 2002 (£69.9m) followed by Arsenal (£61.4m), Liverpool (£56.1m), Chelsea (£53.6m) and Leeds (£53.6m).
The Ôtop spendersÕ in Summer 2005 have been Chelsea (reported fees of around £56m) followed by Newcastle United (£38m), Liverpool (£19m) and Tottenham Hotspur (£16m).
A decade for sale 994this is a load of bollox and I'm sick to the eye teeth listening to it. Same old pooe from the same fans who wanted Houllier out and have about as much of a...
"Spending more than double that of Arsenal and Manchester United combined, Chelsea have distorted the pattern of transfer spending since the boom of 2001-02, when Premiership clubs paid out a record £323 million."
A decade for sale 995A major league side trying to buy their way to success? Don't be silly! We all know that this...
"Among Glazer's new buttets is Rio Ferdinand, Manchester United's famous £30m defender. Despite receiving successive penalties for driving offences, Ferdinand, also notorious for his excessive visits to nightclubs, was recently stopped on the M6 motorway after he overtook - while driving at an impressive 106mph - a marked police car.
A decade for sale 992A reasonable post ruined with that last comment. What utter bollocks! How many of those now...
With the help of Pini Zahavi, his cigar-puffing multimillionaire agent, Ferdinand has now demanded a weekly pay increase of £50,000. Apparently, £70,000 per week is insufficient and Ferdinand wants £120,000, despite his contribution to Manchester United standing an unprecedented 20 points behind Chelsea in the Premiership. If Glazer chooses to ignore Ferdinand's demand, he might reflect that Ferguson has actually offered his defender £100,000 to prevent Chelsea snapping him up.
Ever since Roman Abramovich, the Russian oligarch, was allowed by the Football buttociation to buy Chelsea despite the dubious origins of his fortune, English football has become more fractured than ever. By spending well over £200m on players, Abramovich threatens the tattered fabric of the Premiership. The arrival of the Glazers compounds the problem. Unfortunately, there is no happy ending in sight. On the contrary, the greedy, dim-witted natives involved in football seem destined to steer their cash cow towards an ugly cataclysm."
"Yet the need to strengthen is recognised and, to green-eyed astonishment, the £40m kitty eminently affordable. Kenyon describes the club as "cash rich", though that is understating the obvious. Financially, they are in a different league. According to Deloitte & Touche Sport's annual report into football's finances, the seven-times Premiership champions generated merchandising revenue over 3 times that of their nearest rivals Leeds during the 2000-01 season.
At £31.1m, their operating profits - the money available for investment in infrastructure and the squad - was almost three times that of second placed Liverpool (£10.4m) for the same year, the third successive season in which they have been more than three times greater than their nearest rivals. That they have been able to establish their successes largely upon the FA Youth Cup winning squad of 1993 has only added to the pot. "With money tight in the market, that strength off the pitch comes into its own," added Kenyon, who has simultaneously controlled salary levels at the club. "
there's plenty more where they came from..... www.google.com
--
