Happy Face 29 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 (edited) Just totting up who's spent what this summer. Not net spend or freebies, just who's paid for what to improve their squad and change things about. In decreasing order... MANCHESTER CITY £79.25mYaya Toure Barcelona £28m David Silva Valencia £24m Aleksandar Kolarov Lazio £16m Jerome Boateng Hamburg £11m Alex Henshall Swindon Town £250,000 WOLVERHAMPTON WANDERERS £16.5m Steven Fletcher Burnley £6.5m Stephen Hunt Hull City £3m Steven Mouyokolo Hull City £2.5m Jelle van Damme Anderlecht £2.5m Adlène Guedioura Charleroi £2m MANCHESTER UNITED £16m+ Chris Smalling Fulham £10m Javier Hernandez Chivas de Guadalajara £6m Marnick Vermijl Standard Liege Undisclosed BIRMINGHAM CITY £12m Ben Foster Manchester United £6m Nikola Zigic Valencia £6m WIGAN ATHLETIC £9.5m Mauro Boselli Estudiantes £6m Ronnie Stam FC Twent £3m James McArthur Hamilton Academicals £500,000 ARSENAL £8.5m Laurent Koscielny Lorient £8.5m CHELSEA £7.7m+ Yossi Benayoun Liverpool £5m Matej Delac Inter Zapresic £2.7m Tomas Kalac Sigma Olomouc Undisclosed TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR £6m+ Sandro Raniere Internacional £6m rising to £10m SUNDERLAND £5m+ Marcos Angeleri Estudiantes £2m Simon Mignolet Sint Truidense £2m Titus Bramble Wigan Athletic £1m Cristian Riveros Cruz Azul Undisclosed WEST HAM UNITED £5m Pablo Barrera UNAM Pumas £4m Frederic Piquionne Lyon £1m LIVERPOOL £3.7m Danny Wilson Rangers £2m Jonjo Shelvey Charlton Athletic £1.7m WEST BROMWICH ALBION £2.3m Boaz Myhill Hull City £1.5m Gabriel Tamas Auxerre £800,000 BOLTON WANDERERS £1.6m Marco Alonso Real Madrid £1.6m NEWCASTLE UNITED £1.5m James Perch Nottingham Forest £1.5m EVERTON £1.4m Magaye Gueye Strasbourg £900,000 Joao Silva Desportivo Das Aves £500,000 STOKE CITY Undisclosed Florent Cuvelier Portsmouth Undisclosed ASTON VILLA £0 BLACKBURN ROVERS £0 BLACKPOOL £0 FULHAM £0 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...ummer-2010.html I had no idea Wolves had spent so much. Edited August 4, 2010 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 99 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 You know what will happen, the club will come out and point out that in remaining tough times we have still spent more than some clubs etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrysteve 0 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 (edited) Just totting up who's spent what this summer. Not net spend or freebies, just who's paid for what to improve their squad and change things about. In decreasing order... MANCHESTER CITY £79.25mYaya Toure Barcelona £28m David Silva Valencia £24m Aleksandar Kolarov Lazio £16m Jerome Boateng Hamburg £11m Alex Henshall Swindon Town £250,000 ARSENAL £19m Marouane Chamakh Bordeaux £10.4m Laurent Koscielny Lorient £8.5m WOLVERHAMPTON WANDERERS £16.5m Steven Fletcher Burnley £6.5m Stephen Hunt Hull City £3m Steven Mouyokolo Hull City £2.5m Jelle van Damme Anderlecht £2.5m Adlène Guedioura Charleroi £2m MANCHESTER UNITED £16m+ Chris Smalling Fulham £10m Javier Hernandez Chivas de Guadalajara £6m Marnick Vermijl Standard Liege Undisclosed BIRMINGHAM CITY £12m Ben Foster Manchester United £6m Nikola Zigic Valencia £6m WIGAN ATHLETIC £9.5m Mauro Boselli Estudiantes £6m Ronnie Stam FC Twent £3m James McArthur Hamilton Academicals £500,000 CHELSEA £7.7m+ Yossi Benayoun Liverpool £5m Matej Delac Inter Zapresic £2.7m Tomas Kalac Sigma Olomouc Undisclosed TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR £6m+ Sandro Raniere Internacional £6m rising to £10m SUNDERLAND £5m+ Marcos Angeleri Estudiantes £2m Simon Mignolet Sint Truidense £2m Titus Bramble Wigan Athletic £1m Cristian Riveros Cruz Azul Undisclosed WEST HAM UNITED £5m Pablo Barrera UNAM Pumas £4m Frederic Piquionne Lyon £1m LIVERPOOL £3.7m Danny Wilson Rangers £2m Jonjo Shelvey Charlton Athletic £1.7m WEST BROMWICH ALBION £2.3m Boaz Myhill Hull City £1.5m Gabriel Tamas Auxerre £800,000 BOLTON WANDERERS £1.6m Marco Alonso Real Madrid £1.6m NEWCASTLE UNITED £1.5m James Perch Nottingham Forest £1.5m EVERTON £1.4m Magaye Gueye Strasbourg £900,000 Joao Silva Desportivo Das Aves £500,000 STOKE CITY Undisclosed Florent Cuvelier Portsmouth Undisclosed ASTON VILLA £0 BLACKBURN ROVERS £0 BLACKPOOL £0 FULHAM £0 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...ummer-2010.html I had no idea Wolves had spent so much. Chamakh to Arsenal was a free transfer (although he will improve their squad). "On May 21, 2010, Chamakh completed his move to Arsenal, on a free transfer, which took effect on July 1, 2010." Edited August 4, 2010 by angrysteve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 4, 2010 Author Share Posted August 4, 2010 Chamakh to Arsenal was a free transfer (although he will improve their squad). I'll have to complain to the Telegraph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toon_don 0 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 Wolves paid nearly £7m for Fletcher? There's ambition and then there's madness. Clearly we need to find a happy middle ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 4, 2010 Author Share Posted August 4, 2010 Wolves paid nearly £7m for Fletcher? There's ambition and then there's madness. Clearly we need to find a happy middle ground Is it madder than £10m for Smalling who's played 13 league games in his whole career? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toon_don 0 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 Wolves paid nearly £7m for Fletcher? There's ambition and then there's madness. Clearly we need to find a happy middle ground Is it madder than £10m for Smalling who's played 13 league games in his whole career? I didn't even notice that one, who is he? And didn't Man U already flog one of their big money Serbian 'prodigies' at a massive loss recently? I understand going for up and coming talent, but how can someone with no experience be worth that much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 4, 2010 Author Share Posted August 4, 2010 (edited) Wolves paid nearly £7m for Fletcher? There's ambition and then there's madness. Clearly we need to find a happy middle ground Is it madder than £10m for Smalling who's played 13 league games in his whole career? I didn't even notice that one, who is he? And didn't Man U already flog one of their big money Serbian 'prodigies' at a massive loss recently? I understand going for up and coming talent, but how can someone with no experience be worth that much? He's only had a couple of mentions on here. Tictacwoe was singing his praises. Went from Maidstone to Fulham. Made 13 appearances and everyone was after him. Man U won the race. The times reported £12m at the time. Edited August 4, 2010 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney 0 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 There's rumours that Fergie only went for him as Wenger was about to sign him. He couldn't get a game for Fulham last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney 0 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 Didn't Spurs sign Kjaer and some other lad from the same team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay 10 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 Didn't Spurs sign Kjaer and some other lad from the same team? Signed for Wolfsburg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 4, 2010 Author Share Posted August 4, 2010 Didn't Spurs sign Kjaer and some other lad from the same team? On July 8, 2010 Palermo sold Kjær to Bundesliga club VfL Wolfsburg in a permanent move Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4431 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 Anyone know the source of Wolves' money? If it's based on borrowing/Sky money I could see another Pompey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 at the end of the day, you can make as much fuss/excuses [or as little] as you like about not spending money, but the successful clubs are the ones who show the ambition and generally spend the most money to buy the best quality players. Basic stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney 0 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 Didn't Spurs sign Kjaer and some other lad from the same team? On July 8, 2010 Palermo sold Kjær to Bundesliga club VfL Wolfsburg in a permanent move I saw that-I was under the impression he had agreed a deal for both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toon_don 0 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 at the end of the day, you can make as much fuss/excuses [or as little] as you like about not spending money, but the successful clubs are the ones who show the ambition and generally spend the most money to buy the best quality players. Basic stuff. I wasn't saying spending money is bad, we need investment, just querying whether some of those transfers represent value for money. I would argue that £6.5m for Fletcher and £10m for a Fulham reserve is paying way over the odds, but there you go. And if success was judged by the ability to throw money at problems, ourselves and Spurs would have a few more league titles to our names. It's spending wisely that counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 at the end of the day, you can make as much fuss/excuses [or as little] as you like about not spending money, but the successful clubs are the ones who show the ambition and generally spend the most money to buy the best quality players. Basic stuff. I wasn't saying spending money is bad, we need investment, just querying whether some of those transfers represent value for money. I would argue that £6.5m for Fletcher and £10m for a Fulham reserve is paying way over the odds, but there you go. And if success was judged by the ability to throw money at problems, ourselves and Spurs would have a few more league titles to our names. It's spending wisely that counts. of course, but that is the difficult bit only a small number of clubs manage to do, including ourselves in spells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holden McGroin 6821 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 No way did Smalling sign for £10m I think this contract was up anyway so a lower fee would have been negotiated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2207 Posted August 4, 2010 Share Posted August 4, 2010 No way did Smalling sign for £10m I think this contract was up anyway so a lower fee would have been negotiated. Maybe it's the whole worth of the contract if he makes set number of appearances for first team and England etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 5, 2010 Author Share Posted August 5, 2010 'newcastle united should be aiming to get into europe' Sol Campbell told sky sports news today. Couldn't agree more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 6, 2010 Author Share Posted August 6, 2010 The relative tranquillity of this summer’s transfer market has disguised the fact that Premier League revenues are up. This rise in revenue is attributable to the value of overseas television rights which have doubled to exceed £1 billion over three years. The twenty Premier League clubs have asked its chief executive, Richard Scudamore not the reveal how much the new deal is worth. Another rise in income may seem positive news but this will have far-reaching implications for the future of television rights and the ownership and financial management of clubs. In the spirit of openness should fans be made aware of their club’s share of the pot? Knowledge of the figures would allow fans to better hold their respective clubs to account and scrutinise their decisions. In the midst of a global economic downturn Premier League clubs are reluctant to have details of their wealth made public. The desire of top flight clubs not to reveal the details of this new agreement is also motivated by a wish not to give any rival clubs or agents an advantage in the transfer market. All valid reasons but fans may wish to know more about the financial health of their clubs. The distribution of overseas television money is more equitably distributed than in Spain and Italy where the elite sides negotiate their own deals. The appeal to make this information confidential may not be due to the discrepancies which occur between Premier League clubs but because of the financial mismanagement it would reveal. The figures that Premier League clubs do not want fans to see have huge implications for the future of the league. Overseas fans are the main driving force behind these increased revenues. This has maintained the Premier League’s financial advantage over Serie A, the Bundesliga and La Liga. This goes some way to explain the cosmopolitan profile of Premier League owners. The Chinese financier Kenny Huang is vying to become the latest foreign Premier League owner, recognising the unlimited potential of overseas markets. What does this mean for the average fan who attends games and watches their club on television? The ability of the domestic fan to bolster their club’s profits has long been in decline. In an effort to attract overseas fans we have already faced the rescheduling of league games and the widely criticised proposal of the 39th game. The prospect of each side playing an extra game abroad was received sceptically by managers but less so by club chairmen. The argument that overseas markets have altered the focus of Premier League clubs is hard to dismiss. Arsenal has recently signed a deal with MP & Silva, an international sports media company. Anticipating a move towards the internet becoming the dominant medium for football the club are intent on revamping its media output so it can eventually interact with fans across the globe, for a fee, via the touch of a button. Such decisions may make business sense but for the humble, domestic fan are the investments of clubs misplaced. A paradigm shift in how clubs raise revenue and how we watch football may be occurring. These changes may mean greater revenues still for top flight clubs and yet financial mismanagement still afflicts the league. Manchester United and Liverpool fans protest about the scale of debt at their clubs and Portsmouth became the first Premier League side to enter administration this year. With so much money sloshing around the system questions need to be raised about clubs’ investment in youth and coaching, paying down debts and reducing the cost of attending matches. Greater freedom of information would allow fans to question their club’s actions and guard against financial short-termism. http://www.footballfancast.com/2010/08/foo...United_Blogs%29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 The relative tranquillity of this summer’s transfer market has disguised the fact that Premier League revenues are up. This rise in revenue is attributable to the value of overseas television rights which have doubled to exceed £1 billion over three years. The twenty Premier League clubs have asked its chief executive, Richard Scudamore not the reveal how much the new deal is worth. Another rise in income may seem positive news but this will have far-reaching implications for the future of television rights and the ownership and financial management of clubs. In the spirit of openness should fans be made aware of their club’s share of the pot? Knowledge of the figures would allow fans to better hold their respective clubs to account and scrutinise their decisions. In the midst of a global economic downturn Premier League clubs are reluctant to have details of their wealth made public. The desire of top flight clubs not to reveal the details of this new agreement is also motivated by a wish not to give any rival clubs or agents an advantage in the transfer market. All valid reasons but fans may wish to know more about the financial health of their clubs. The distribution of overseas television money is more equitably distributed than in Spain and Italy where the elite sides negotiate their own deals. The appeal to make this information confidential may not be due to the discrepancies which occur between Premier League clubs but because of the financial mismanagement it would reveal. The figures that Premier League clubs do not want fans to see have huge implications for the future of the league. Overseas fans are the main driving force behind these increased revenues. This has maintained the Premier League’s financial advantage over Serie A, the Bundesliga and La Liga. This goes some way to explain the cosmopolitan profile of Premier League owners. The Chinese financier Kenny Huang is vying to become the latest foreign Premier League owner, recognising the unlimited potential of overseas markets. What does this mean for the average fan who attends games and watches their club on television? The ability of the domestic fan to bolster their club’s profits has long been in decline. In an effort to attract overseas fans we have already faced the rescheduling of league games and the widely criticised proposal of the 39th game. The prospect of each side playing an extra game abroad was received sceptically by managers but less so by club chairmen. The argument that overseas markets have altered the focus of Premier League clubs is hard to dismiss. Arsenal has recently signed a deal with MP & Silva, an international sports media company. Anticipating a move towards the internet becoming the dominant medium for football the club are intent on revamping its media output so it can eventually interact with fans across the globe, for a fee, via the touch of a button. Such decisions may make business sense but for the humble, domestic fan are the investments of clubs misplaced. A paradigm shift in how clubs raise revenue and how we watch football may be occurring. These changes may mean greater revenues still for top flight clubs and yet financial mismanagement still afflicts the league. Manchester United and Liverpool fans protest about the scale of debt at their clubs and Portsmouth became the first Premier League side to enter administration this year. With so much money sloshing around the system questions need to be raised about clubs’ investment in youth and coaching, paying down debts and reducing the cost of attending matches. Greater freedom of information would allow fans to question their club’s actions and guard against financial short-termism. http://www.footballfancast.com/2010/08/foo...United_Blogs%29 Good read. Armageddon is surely coming for one of the big PL clubs if the levels of debt aren't addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 The relative tranquillity of this summer’s transfer market has disguised the fact that Premier League revenues are up. This rise in revenue is attributable to the value of overseas television rights which have doubled to exceed £1 billion over three years. The twenty Premier League clubs have asked its chief executive, Richard Scudamore not the reveal how much the new deal is worth. Another rise in income may seem positive news but this will have far-reaching implications for the future of television rights and the ownership and financial management of clubs. In the spirit of openness should fans be made aware of their club’s share of the pot? Knowledge of the figures would allow fans to better hold their respective clubs to account and scrutinise their decisions. In the midst of a global economic downturn Premier League clubs are reluctant to have details of their wealth made public. The desire of top flight clubs not to reveal the details of this new agreement is also motivated by a wish not to give any rival clubs or agents an advantage in the transfer market. All valid reasons but fans may wish to know more about the financial health of their clubs. The distribution of overseas television money is more equitably distributed than in Spain and Italy where the elite sides negotiate their own deals. The appeal to make this information confidential may not be due to the discrepancies which occur between Premier League clubs but because of the financial mismanagement it would reveal. The figures that Premier League clubs do not want fans to see have huge implications for the future of the league. Overseas fans are the main driving force behind these increased revenues. This has maintained the Premier League’s financial advantage over Serie A, the Bundesliga and La Liga. This goes some way to explain the cosmopolitan profile of Premier League owners. The Chinese financier Kenny Huang is vying to become the latest foreign Premier League owner, recognising the unlimited potential of overseas markets. What does this mean for the average fan who attends games and watches their club on television? The ability of the domestic fan to bolster their club’s profits has long been in decline. In an effort to attract overseas fans we have already faced the rescheduling of league games and the widely criticised proposal of the 39th game. The prospect of each side playing an extra game abroad was received sceptically by managers but less so by club chairmen. The argument that overseas markets have altered the focus of Premier League clubs is hard to dismiss. Arsenal has recently signed a deal with MP & Silva, an international sports media company. Anticipating a move towards the internet becoming the dominant medium for football the club are intent on revamping its media output so it can eventually interact with fans across the globe, for a fee, via the touch of a button. Such decisions may make business sense but for the humble, domestic fan are the investments of clubs misplaced. A paradigm shift in how clubs raise revenue and how we watch football may be occurring. These changes may mean greater revenues still for top flight clubs and yet financial mismanagement still afflicts the league. Manchester United and Liverpool fans protest about the scale of debt at their clubs and Portsmouth became the first Premier League side to enter administration this year. With so much money sloshing around the system questions need to be raised about clubs’ investment in youth and coaching, paying down debts and reducing the cost of attending matches. Greater freedom of information would allow fans to question their club’s actions and guard against financial short-termism. http://www.footballfancast.com/2010/08/foo...United_Blogs%29 Good read. Armageddon is surely coming for one of the big PL clubs if the levels of debt aren't addressed. yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cid_MCDP 0 Posted August 6, 2010 Share Posted August 6, 2010 The relative tranquillity of this summer’s transfer market has disguised the fact that Premier League revenues are up. This rise in revenue is attributable to the value of overseas television rights which have doubled to exceed £1 billion over three years. The twenty Premier League clubs have asked its chief executive, Richard Scudamore not the reveal how much the new deal is worth. Another rise in income may seem positive news but this will have far-reaching implications for the future of television rights and the ownership and financial management of clubs. In the spirit of openness should fans be made aware of their club’s share of the pot? Knowledge of the figures would allow fans to better hold their respective clubs to account and scrutinise their decisions. In the midst of a global economic downturn Premier League clubs are reluctant to have details of their wealth made public. The desire of top flight clubs not to reveal the details of this new agreement is also motivated by a wish not to give any rival clubs or agents an advantage in the transfer market. All valid reasons but fans may wish to know more about the financial health of their clubs. The distribution of overseas television money is more equitably distributed than in Spain and Italy where the elite sides negotiate their own deals. The appeal to make this information confidential may not be due to the discrepancies which occur between Premier League clubs but because of the financial mismanagement it would reveal. The figures that Premier League clubs do not want fans to see have huge implications for the future of the league. Overseas fans are the main driving force behind these increased revenues. This has maintained the Premier League’s financial advantage over Serie A, the Bundesliga and La Liga. This goes some way to explain the cosmopolitan profile of Premier League owners. The Chinese financier Kenny Huang is vying to become the latest foreign Premier League owner, recognising the unlimited potential of overseas markets. What does this mean for the average fan who attends games and watches their club on television? The ability of the domestic fan to bolster their club’s profits has long been in decline. In an effort to attract overseas fans we have already faced the rescheduling of league games and the widely criticised proposal of the 39th game. The prospect of each side playing an extra game abroad was received sceptically by managers but less so by club chairmen. The argument that overseas markets have altered the focus of Premier League clubs is hard to dismiss. Arsenal has recently signed a deal with MP & Silva, an international sports media company. Anticipating a move towards the internet becoming the dominant medium for football the club are intent on revamping its media output so it can eventually interact with fans across the globe, for a fee, via the touch of a button. Such decisions may make business sense but for the humble, domestic fan are the investments of clubs misplaced. A paradigm shift in how clubs raise revenue and how we watch football may be occurring. These changes may mean greater revenues still for top flight clubs and yet financial mismanagement still afflicts the league. Manchester United and Liverpool fans protest about the scale of debt at their clubs and Portsmouth became the first Premier League side to enter administration this year. With so much money sloshing around the system questions need to be raised about clubs’ investment in youth and coaching, paying down debts and reducing the cost of attending matches. Greater freedom of information would allow fans to question their club’s actions and guard against financial short-termism. http://www.footballfancast.com/2010/08/foo...United_Blogs%29 Good read. Armageddon is surely coming for one of the big PL clubs if the levels of debt aren't addressed. Whatever happened with that income to debt ratio deal the PL was discussing last season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 12, 2010 Author Share Posted August 12, 2010 NEWCASTLE UNITED £1.5mJames Perch Nottingham Forest £1.5m EVERTON £1.4m Magaye Gueye Strasbourg £900,000 Joao Silva Desportivo Das Aves £500,000 STOKE CITY Undisclosed Florent Cuvelier Portsmouth Undisclosed ASTON VILLA £0 BLACKBURN ROVERS £0 BLACKPOOL £0 FULHAM £0 Of the six teams to have spent less than us, one was promoted with us and will be relegated. Most of the others finished top half and none were in any danger of relegation. Hughton's in cloud cuckoo land though.... "Is it a gamble not to spend big on a couple of players? No. We have to bring in the right type of players. We are aware we have to work around a financial structure. We are aware of that these days. Not just me but numerous other managers will tell you the same. http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Newca...icle550057.html The managers we'll be involved in a relegation scrap with have dwarved our spending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now