To get an idea of the real net spend you've got to look at all the operations over a period of at least 3 years. This Mirror analysis seems accurate. You will see that Spurs have hardly spent anything, Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal 120-150 mil and ourselves and United are way out in front...300 mil plus.
Unfortunately, that's the reality.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/premier-league-transfers-big-six-13014572
Yeah but the point was the Coutinho money went out as soon as it came in, so they are idiots for using that transfer as an excuse for thier summer transfers(probably still think they have some left for Fekir in Jan, the deluded ****s haha). That's what I was responding to in that post, a literal example of someone doing it in that twitter feed. I find it odd that you've somehow twisted it into whether our netspend is higher or not, which wasn't questioned by myself. Oh and that article has inaccurate figures too, VVD was £75m, if the reason for that is some of it is by the way of addons, then why is the Coutinho fee not £105m? There's a reason people don't count red top papers as credible sources.
The netspend argument is bollocks too though mate, ours is higher sure but we've never been a selling club(which is a good thing for football provided our players are happy to stay, which they are). They are still "buying the title" every bit as much as us and United, they've spent the best part of £400m to build their squad. Netspend is just a poor excuse to hide the money that has really exchanged hands to build it. They have no room to talk about buying titles anymore or "doing it the right way,
that's the reality.
Who cares if they got a "lottery win", they didn't really "earn it" by "developing" Coutinho as they like to spin it, just like Suarez before him he was always destined for the top, most scouts saw that, they could have gone literally anywhere and earned another club a pay day. They both wanted to leave that cult of a club too, so it's not like they had a choice not to sell in the long run.
As an aside, how is them adding to transfer market inflation, by holding players to ransom, so they can get massive fees a good thing? I'm happy we've never been involved in the sale or purchase of a transfer like either of those. I'm sure the day will come but it's quite ironic City have been getting the blame for years for those sorts of mega transfers.
