Irn Bru Canary 0 Posted August 2, 2013 I know it won''t be the final table but all the same it is great to see that level of spend,Top flight clubs’ summer spend1 Manchester City £95.5m2 Chelsea £30m3 Norwich £27.475m4 Swansea £24.75m5 Liverpool £24.8m6 Tottenham £24m7 Southampton £21m8 Cardiff £17.15m9 Sunderland £16.38m10 West Ham £15m11 Aston Villa £13.55m12 Crystal Palace £8.6m13 Everton £8m14 Hull £7.55m15 Stoke £3m16 Manchester United £2.4m17= Arsenal, Newcastle WBA £0m Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dubai Mark 0 Posted August 2, 2013 It certainly shows that we have completed the majority of our signings relatively early compared to some other clubs, which is a good thing. But as you say this wont be the final table, I am expecting to see Arsenal in particular to end up being one of the biggest spenders. Swansea''s money already looks well spent after last nights result! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paul moy 235 Posted August 2, 2013 The spend of 2.4m by Manure sums up the relevance of that table as they surely will finish in the top three in the actual Prem table. My bets are Chelski, Manure, Arsenal in that order for top three. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salopian 1 Posted August 2, 2013 I suspect that the figures include the money on RvW, who was paid from last year''s budget even if technically signed in July.The figures are impressive from a CR perspective, and there could be more, as there could for the "big boys" who are still deciding whom they will sign.Norwich expenditure could rise further, bolstered by £4m or so from transfers out, depending to a slight extent how much we receive for Steer. So, given that RvW was signed with last year''s budget, and we have about £4m extra, who know how much more we may spend! There is always the warning, especially in our case and that of others, that figures quoted are guesses by the Press or others. There is also the question of other things like part deferred payments (add-ons) and payments not included in transfer payment - signing on fees, agents fees, etc. In virtually all cases involving us, CR releases no information about fees and what is quoted comes usually from leaks or statements at the other end. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paul moy 235 Posted August 2, 2013 [quote user="paul moy"]The spend of 2.4m by Manure sums up the relevance of that table as they surely will finish in the top three in the actual Prem table. My bets are Chelski, Manure, Arsenal in that order for top three. [/quote]Just confirmed that Bale goes to Madrid for 105m and Ronaldo comes to Old Trafford !!!! I now predict Manure to retain the Prem Title and Chelski runners up. ..... [:D] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fleckys Flip-Flop 0 Posted August 2, 2013 For ''confirmed'' read ''proposed by the tabloid press'' Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yelloow Since 72 54 Posted August 2, 2013 Technically, RvW''s fee comes out of last year''s budget, but whatever happens elsewhere, it''s still impressive that City have around £27m player value coming in, and another £12-16m if two more targets are signed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chicken 0 Posted August 2, 2013 That looks to include both RVW and Garrido. I also don''t like totals as they sometimes include add ons for some transfers and not for others. I have seen articles comparing players signed such as Redmond and stated his total fee with add ons and then compared him to another player whose fee is without the add ons.Personally I''d knock off £10million for RVW and Garrido although it is slightly more than that.That leaves £17million say.Nash - free.Fer - £5million(ish)Redomond £3.2million in total.Hooper - £5millionishOlsson - £2.5million ish.So they are around about right - give or take some.But if you take off RVW and Garrido - who were really bought before the summer and with last years budget if big Mc is to be believed - we are in and around Cardiff, Sunderland and West Ham.Just goes to show there is probably a little bit more money in the pot yet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paul moy 235 Posted August 2, 2013 [quote user="Fleckys Flip-Flop"]For ''confirmed'' read ''proposed by the tabloid press''[/quote]Well, I''m willing to bet this will happen but obviously until contracts are signed anything can ruin it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sussexyellow 55 Posted August 2, 2013 It is not how much is spent, it is how effectively that it is spent that counts. And we will need to wait ans see how effectively our new and exciting acquisitions gel into a team to judge that.What that table does demonstrate to me though is that we are showing some ambition. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Redders Right Foot 22 Posted August 2, 2013 RM have been trying out ronaldo in different attacking positions in their friendlies, so that they can fit both him and bale into the team at the same time, so confirmed? give me strength! anything and everything but! if bale goes (which I really hope he doesn''t) ronaldo has more chances of staying than leaving. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0 Posted August 2, 2013 [quote user="chicken"]......... Just goes to show there is probably a little bit more money in the pot yet.[/quote]Hopefully we can land at least another striker shortly and then do some late shopping on one or two more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Row D Seat 7 0 Posted August 2, 2013 WBA signed Anelka for £5m so the zero by their name is wrong. Arsenal signed a player early in the window whose name I forget. He wasn''t expensive, but the zero by their name is also incorrect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites