Negative net transfer spending? (Last 10 tears) we are top of the list.

UnofficialDevil

Anti Scottish and Preoccupied with Donkeys.
Joined
Aug 5, 2006
Messages
19,701
Location
I'm not anti Scottish, I just wanted Moyes out.
Apparently we have spent more
than any other team in the world and are top of the list for most negative net transfer spending.


omades-dapanes.PNG

https://football-observatory.com/MonthlyReport97
 
Not even remotely surprising, but hey, at least we are top of something.

Onwards.
 
Wolves, West Ham, Bournemouth and Palace surprise me more than Utd being top.

We've been terrible buying and selling players.
 
It's 130m per season, I thought it'd b emore. When considering we had our best selling income in over a decade last year and the "net spend" was still 113mil.
 
Relative to what we've spent, we have a good shout for being the worst run football club in Europe. Among clubs at our level anyway. We may only look like we're a couple of places ahead of Spurs and Arsenal, but our net spend is approaching double theirs. And despite all that money, we struggle to quality for the top 4 every year, the absolute bare minimum. And when we do get in, we go out quickly and quietly. We've been irrelevant in the Champions League for a decade. It's really something to be that bad. This is why I feel like Ineos could well see things improve. They only need to be average to be significantly better than the last guys.
 
Valencia Shin Crosses said:
Sneakily one of the biggest issues/failures in the post SAF era. We handicap ourselves far more when we are unable to sell well or move players on for good value. It makes reshaping the squad that much more expensive and a longer process
Click to expand...

I think it's a very glaring problem, you need to overpay for players in order for them to come to you while putting them on huge wages. That makes it very hard to move them on specially if they aren't performing consistently at a very high level and it also seems like the club doesn't really know when to cut their losses with certain players and managers.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Interesting that no Saudi club makes the top ten, considering they only buy, never sell.
Click to expand...

Off the top of my head, they've only been at this for a couple years now, right? This goes back to 2015 and I don't really recall anyone of note going to Saudi then.

If it was like 2021-2024 or so they would probably be higher
 
Acheron said:
I think it's a very glaring problem, you need to overpay for players in order for them to come to you while putting them on huge wages. That makes it very hard to move them on specially if they aren't performing consistently at a very high level and it also seems like the club doesn't really know when to cut their losses with certain players and managers.
Click to expand...

It’s the #1 thing I hope new ownership fixes. If you buy a player for a huge fee and also pay them a fat salary, your margin for error is essentially minuscule in whether or not you’ll get value out of them if they aren’t excellent.

Something I think your own club has done very well even while being very rich themselves is understanding that it’s smarter to pay what’s considered a big fee for a very young talented player before they become a household name instead of waiting for those players to become superstars at other clubs and being forced to pay Jude level fees constantly. Because even if those young players don’t work out, you will have a much easier time selling a 23 year old that still has potential over a 27 year old that’s getting paid 300k a week, doesn’t want to leave, and you bought for a huge fee.
 
Erictheking7 said:
Real Madrid not on the list?
Click to expand...
  • 2015: - €76 million
  • 2016: + €7 million
  • 2017: + €92 million
  • 2018: - €28 million
  • 2019: - €225 million
  • 2020: + €108 million
  • 2021: + €47 million
  • 2022: + €12 million
  • 2023: - €133 million
  • 2024: - €33 million
Net spend for the 2015—24 timeframe: - €229 million.

On a tangential note, the Premier League is on a whole other level, wowzers. :eek:

ZWmNn2g.png
 
Invictus said:
  • 2015: - €76 million
  • 2016: + €7 million
  • 2017: + €92 million
  • 2018: - €28 million
  • 2019: - €225 million
  • 2020: + €108 million
  • 2021: + €47 million
  • 2022: + €12 million
  • 2023: - €133 million
  • 2024: - €33 million
Net spend for the 2015—24 timeframe: - €229 million.

On a tangential note, the Premier League is on a whole other level, wowzers. :eek:

ZWmNn2g.png
Click to expand...

What's the matter with that?

The PL is atop the food chain thanks to TV rights. It makes sense to consume rather than produce for others to consume.
 
Acheron said:
I think it's a very glaring problem, you need to overpay for players in order for them to come to you while putting them on huge wages. That makes it very hard to move them on specially if they aren't performing consistently at a very high level and it also seems like the club doesn't really know when to cut their losses with certain players and managers.
Click to expand...
Spot on. Fecking clueless Ed and his incompetent cronies. Feck, i've said it numerous times now, think Woodward gave me some sort of PTSD but his incompetence was staggering.

Massively overpaid for players due to our sheer desperateness (is that a word?), then gave them exorbitant wages - which exacerbated the issue ten fold. This also brought about a massive overhyped/indulged squad, full of entitlement. No coherent vision or strategy of team building, hopping from managers with completely different philosophies and giving said managers almost unparalleled input over said signings.

And when we don't perform, we're unable to shift players being paid at superstar level, but on average - barely scraping by at europa league level performances. So this data isn't a surprise at all.
 
Is there such a list for gross spend?

Net spend shows how good you are at selling (or not), I'd like to see what the expenditure is without that.
 
Horrifying to look at. Insane amount of money that can go a long way to improve some cities and countries, yet wasn’t enough to improve a fecking football club.

Either way, onwards and upwards. We seem to have learned some lessons and hopefully things improve long term and we get more bang for our buck.
 
Top of the league!

No surprises considering we paid £86m for Antony and will probably either let him go on a free, or sell him for a quarter of that :rolleyes:
 
Erictheking7 said:
Real Madrid not on the list?
Click to expand...
You obviously don't know how smart Florentino Perez, the president of Real Madrid is. Actually, Real Madrid has the most valuable squad in the world at the moment, thanks to smart signings. Alaba, Rüdiger, Mbappé etc. arrived as a free agent and they bought cheap young players like Vini Jr, Rodrygo, Valverde and these youngsters turned out to be 100+ million euro players or 200 million in case of Vinicius. AND during this 10 year long period they sold players for 881 million euros! So their balance isn't bad at all. That's why in the money spent per squad value comparison Real Madrid actually on the top of the list, they spent only about 730 million to create the current squad worth 1.36 billion so they almost doubled their money. In comparison we spent about 1.2 billion on the current squad worth 854 million... :-( Bad. I was hoping INEOS will change this but then i saw Zirkzee arriving for 45 million... We're gonna lose a lot of money on that guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.