Net spend

[Geordie1974]

Net Spends since June 2016 (£)

Man City: 343m
Man Utd: 310m
Chelsea: 203m
Everton: 160m
Arsenal: 148m
Brighton: 130m
Wolves: 124m
West Ham: 112m
Bourn: 104m
Fulham: 101m
Palace: 85m
Hudd: 81m
Leic: 76m
LFC: 73m
Burnley: 49m
Watford: 41m
Spurs: 31m
Newcastle: 4m
Southampton: -10m

We would be bottom of that list if we never signed Almiron and it just goes to show what a job Rafa has done.Especially when this season's relegated clubs have spent what they have.
I was a little bit surprised at Brighton,knew they spent a bit but not that high.
With that little net spend you would think fatty would be forging Rafas name to on a new contract.
Apparently though net spends dont count.Rafa has had a fortune.

[ghostrider]

Net spends are not something to brag about.
Net spends don't guarantee anything.

It's about building and bartering with the quality you have as much as adding in a few extra readies when required.
Man Utd spending 310 million ( if that's correct) to finish 6th, way back from any trophies, is ludicrous in the extreme and they only survive because of who they are, which is why the Glazers can have the club owing a mint.

Man City are a blank cheque club and rode along on fair play avoidance with sponsored ridiculousness.
Everton are little better than we are.
Fulham crashed and burned.
Huddersfield crashed and Burned.
Bournemouth were overtaken by us.
Spurs finished 4th and are in the champions league final on the 3rd lowest net spend, because they sold their top players to balance it out, whilst bringing through freebies in some cases.


So how are we doing on our low net spend? I'd say we are making progress, because the players we have ( in many) are worth a lot more than we paid.
That's progress and we're still progressing in the premier league.

If I had to give my honest opinion on this, I'd say it makes me proud to know that my club, Newcastle United, are a club that's not a breeding ground for mercenaries and a club that refuses to play the game of keeping up with the Jones' tail coat until such a time where it can be done in a sustained manner, which, in this mental elitist climate of football, is pretty slim on that sustained basis.
The thing is, some teams are afforded a sniff to keep the mindset of us football fans pacified and in belief that all clubs can play along if they spend big.

I don't mind us spending a little bit on players but I do not want to see us spewing regular 20 millions and more on players that also come with sickening wages, only to end up with a squad full of prima donnas as the north east bubble bursts for them and they want away or they refuse to play and wait out their expensive contracts.

That's when the reality will kick in.
That's all I see with big net spending.

Is it ideal? Not in this climate, no. But I still have a football club and a decent team that has a lot more to give and which can definitely be upgraded for sensible money, coupled with the sale of want away/unwanted players.

Ohh and Rafa has had a lot of money to play with, regardless of net spend.
The club still handed him the readies from player sales. It counts. It really does count.

[waalsendmick]

If your net spend is zero....

You have spent phuck all....


It isn't difficult.

[Geordie1974]

Cant see what he replied but can guess.The reason I put it up was because of only a small net spend,where is all the money Mike?
Proof if ever we need one that Mash Holdings are doing very well out of Newcastle.Something we all know,I know that,but what gets me more than anything is so called Newcastle fans that defend Ashley dont have a problem with this.
So called Newcastle fans,I like to call that minority that defend him Mackems.

[usedtobeshearer]

Net spends are not something to brag about.
Net spends don't guarantee anything.

It's about building and bartering with the quality you have as much as adding in a few extra readies when required.
Man Utd spending 310 million ( if that's correct) to finish 6th, way back from any trophies, is ludicrous in the extreme and they only survive because of who they are, which is why the Glazers can have the club owing a mint.

Man City are a blank cheque club and rode along on fair play avoidance with sponsored ridiculousness.
Everton are little better than we are.
Fulham crashed and burned.
Huddersfield crashed and Burned.
Bournemouth were overtaken by us.
Spurs finished 4th and are in the champions league final on the 3rd lowest net spend, because they sold their top players to balance it out, whilst bringing through freebies in some cases.


So how are we doing on our low net spend? I'd say we are making progress, because the players we have ( in many) are worth a lot more than we paid.
That's progress and we're still progressing in the premier league.

If I had to give my honest opinion on this, I'd say it makes me proud to know that my club, Newcastle United, are a club that's not a breeding ground for mercenaries and a club that refuses to play the game of keeping up with the Jones' tail coat until such a time where it can be done in a sustained manner, which, in this mental elitist climate of football, is pretty slim on that sustained basis.
The thing is, some teams are afforded a sniff to keep the mindset of us football fans pacified and in belief that all clubs can play along if they spend big.

I don't mind us spending a little bit on players but I do not want to see us spewing regular 20 millions and more on players that also come with sickening wages, only to end up with a squad full of prima donnas as the north east bubble bursts for them and they want away or they refuse to play and wait out their expensive contracts.

That's when the reality will kick in.
That's all I see with big net spending.

Is it ideal? Not in this climate, no. But I still have a football club and a decent team that has a lot more to give and which can definitely be upgraded for sensible money, coupled with the sale of want away/unwanted players.

Ohh and Rafa has had a lot of money to play with, regardless of net spend.
The club still handed him the readies from player sales. It counts. It really does count.

The point is...if you stop defending Ashley...if we spent more...nobody is asking to match man City etc...then we wouldn't be just besting relegation.

We could try to be the best of the rest..one season finishing 7th and better players would want to join...we would be making more money...there is then hope at least of moving forward.

You know all this but you can't accept anybody pointing out the truth of Ashleys reign which has basically been a hope drainer.

There is a big gap between spending none of the money the club has earn and "doing a leeds".

[Ragatino]

The point is...if you stop defending Ashley...if we spent more...nobody is asking to match man City etc...then we wouldn't be just besting relegation.

We could try to be the best of the rest..one season finishing 7th and better players would want to join...we would be making more money...there is then hope at least of moving forward.

You know all this but you can't accept anybody pointing out the truth of Ashleys reign which has basically been a hope drainer.

There is a big gap between spending none of the money the club has earn and "doing a leeds".

usedtobeshearer - Well said mate!

The Pro-Ashley bands are the type of people who were happy to doff their cap to the mill owner hours after their kid lost an arm in a machines working in the mill.

I'm not fan of the man how he has demoralised and humiliate the Newcastle fans is the worst indictment and shouldn't be allowed. Sadly we don't live in a world which values institutions of such importance other than for their ability to make money.

When he says there is no money or spouts that nonsense that 'every penny is available' anyone with half a brain knows that's horse Sh!te!

It's clear to see that the revenue streams of a club as big as ours return less money for running the club, developing the facilities and investing in players than much smaller clubs in terms of fan base like Brighton or Bournmouth or Wolves etc etc is outrageous!

Had we had a wealth owner or consortium who were aggressive in seeking better and better sponsorship deals which will improve the over finances of the club which leads to benefits in the playing staff, facilities and enjoyment of the fans.

This is hubris people, you gotta speculate to accumulate!

Thanks all

[ghostrider]

The point is...if you stop defending Ashley...if we spent more...nobody is asking to match man City etc...then we wouldn't be just besting relegation.

Of course nobody is asking to match Man City under Ashley.
Fans (some) want big signings for bigger money than we've shelled out. They want a few names on big wages with record beating transfer fees just to appear like we can compete.
That's all well and good if we can sustain it and have a contingency plan in case it goes teets up.

The issue is, do we end up with a better team/squad because of it?
The answer may seem simple as in " of course you get a better squad and team if you spend more."
The reality can be massively different for a club like ours trying to keep up with the further south teams that appear to be able to beg steal and borrow their way through.
I want the Keegan days back. I want the Robson days back. But this is a different climate and you need an owner who can afford to sanction blank cheques and not have to worry about the ramifications of failure to achieve, but simply shrug and start again.
Who can do that?
The Sheikh's and the oil barons. Ashley is neither and his billions are not cash on his hip. And nor is he going to go outside of his comfort zone without a contingency plan.

We could try to be the best of the rest..one season finishing 7th and better players would want to join...we would be making more money...there is then hope at least of moving forward.

I agree, the higher you are the more better players will join....for a price and for the money as their forefront, not for the love of the club, mostly.
The north east is not a major pull for players, even if we were higher than mid table. The money on offer, is. That's the stark reality.
This is why we are a pull for potential top players who the bigger clubs cannot take in to promise first team football. We generally make the player and the player gets recognised and touted, then hankers for the move.
We become a well paid feeder club on a large scale.

You know all this but you can't accept anybody pointing out the truth of Ashleys reign which has basically been a hope drainer.

I can accept anyone putting out a truth, if it is the truth.
The issue here is, it's all speculation and fanciful thoughts.
I can see the downfalls as much as others can see the paradise of high buys. It just doesn't tend to work like that from either side until it actually becomes a reality.
Expectation, hope, despair, acceptance all rolled into one from every person.

There is a big gap between spending none of the money the club has earn and "doing a leeds".

The more money you spend the bigger the wages and the potential of big contracted dummy spitting of players deciding to put the club into ransom mode.
I firmly believe in this day and age of footballers that is what we will end up like if we fall for the big buys and hand out of big wages.
I've seen people arguing about out wages being low and acting as if it's sickening, even though some of our players are on 50,000 a week.
This is how desensitised we've become and also because we are Newcastle United we should be competing with the big boys idea.
Yes we should be competing in a fair world of football. But it's not a fair world of football and we are cast out as second class, regardless.

That's how I see it, but just because I see it like that does not mean I do not want us to be challenging for everything.
I just don't think we can do it by taking major risks without backing in case it fails where we do a Leeds or Sunderland.
Look at the clubs that try it and go all out?

Let's do it with the Schars and the Rondon type and the Dummett type and add the same gusto into the trench.
Leave the Wellbecks and the likes to fester wherever on their mammoth wages and little action or care.

[ghostrider]

The Pro-Ashley bands are the type of people who were happy to doff their cap to the mill owner hours after their kid lost an arm in a machines working in the mill.

Absolutely nothing like it.

I'm not fan of the man how he has demoralised and humiliate the Newcastle fans is the worst indictment and shouldn't be allowed.

The man is human himself and he's been crucified much much worse than he could ever do to a football fan.
The man owns the club and the club is still in the premier league even after a few relegations, that happened, not due to under investment, but by failure of manager and team/squad to gel and put their heart and soul into the club.

Few hated the man when we won the championship. Many were contemplating forgiving him for the supposed monstrous things he's done, as was made out.
As for being demoralised. I don't feel it and I've been a fan for close to 50 years. But then again I concentrate on what happens from the players and managers point, not from whether the owner will be nice or truthful or whether, supposedly burning my eyes out with his so called advertising...etc...etc...etc.
It's became a frenzy but it's a frenzy borne from storytelling narratives to follow...and people simply follow it if it's bad and disbelieve it and scorn it if it appears to be good.

When he says there is no money or spouts that nonsense that 'every penny is available' anyone with half a brain knows that's horse Sh!te!

What is said and what is done is life, is not just an Ashley thing.
The reality is very simple. We buy players and we sell them.
The players we buy are good and bad like all clubs.
The issue is, with some...the players are not net spends so are cast off as mediocre, even though some have turned out to be pretty good and much better than was first thought.

I call that progression that can be built upon and yet no need to deal in mass amounts of notes if you can offset by player sales.
That's real investment. Ploughing back your profit on your assets into better assets.
I think we do that very well under the circumstances.

It's clear to see that the revenue streams of a club as big as ours return less money for running the club, developing the facilities and investing in players than much smaller clubs in terms of fan base like Brighton or Bournmouth or Wolves etc etc is outrageous!

Brighton and Bournemouth finished below us.
What do they get for their investments?
What did we get for our investments of Mitrovic, Wijnaldum and co?
Investment and ambition. What exactly do they mean in football anymore?

Liverpool, Man City and co cannot be used as any yardstick because it's not really investment in the real sense of the word and nor is it ambition in the real sense of the word.
It's over expectation dependent on outlay that is clearly unsustainable in a fair set up.
That's the reality.

Had we had a wealth owner or consortium who were aggressive in seeking better and better sponsorship deals which will improve the over finances of the club which leads to benefits in the playing staff, facilities and enjoyment of the fans.

Like Q.P.R eh?
I am actually glad we have Ashley. I seriously seriously mean it.
I don't hold the man in contempt like some do and in a backhanded type of way, I thank him a lot more than I get frustrated by his actions on certain issues.
I see a club ran fairly well. Could be better and could be a damn sight worse by a long way.
I have a good enough memory of the times when Ellis Short was commended by Newcastle fans for being a proper owner and Ashley the Devil.
Why?
Well Ellis gave the fans what he thought they craved...and what he craved himself, which was a stab at some semblance of success by an apparent ambitious attempt to invest for it.
The rest is history with that mindset.

Us?
Where are we?

Sometimes you have to be ultra careful what you wish for.
I am careful what I wish for.

This is hubris people, you gotta speculate to accumulate!

Thanks all

Yep, as long as your speculation is not all your eggs into one basket.

[Ragatino]

Absolutely nothing like it.

The man is human himself and he's been crucified much much worse than he could ever do to a football fan.
The man owns the club and the club is still in the premier league even after a few relegations, that happened, not due to under investment, but by failure of manager and team/squad to gel and put their heart and soul into the club.

Few hated the man when we won the championship. Many were contemplating forgiving him for the supposed monstrous things he's done, as was made out.
As for being demoralised. I don't feel it and I've been a fan for close to 50 years. But then again I concentrate on what happens from the players and managers point, not from whether the owner will be nice or truthful or whether, supposedly burning my eyes out with his so called advertising...etc...etc...etc.
It's became a frenzy but it's a frenzy borne from storytelling narratives to follow...and people simply follow it if it's bad and disbelieve it and scorn it if it appears to be good.


Too long, didn't read.


What is said and what is done is life, is not just an Ashley thing.
The reality is very simple. We buy players and we sell them.
The players we buy are good and bad like all clubs.
The issue is, with some...the players are not net spends so are cast off as mediocre, even though some have turned out to be pretty good and much better than was first thought.

I call that progression that can be built upon and yet no need to deal in mass amounts of notes if you can offset by player sales.
That's real investment. Ploughing back your profit on your assets into better assets.
I think we do that very well under the circumstances.

Brighton and Bournemouth finished below us.
What do they get for their investments?
What did we get for our investments of Mitrovic, Wijnaldum and co?
Investment and ambition. What exactly do they mean in football anymore?

Liverpool, Man City and co cannot be used as any yardstick because it's not really investment in the real sense of the word and nor is it ambition in the real sense of the word.
It's over expectation dependent on outlay that is clearly unsustainable in a fair set up.
That's the reality.

Like Q.P.R eh?
I am actually glad we have Ashley. I seriously seriously mean it.
I don't hold the man in contempt like some do and in a backhanded type of way, I thank him a lot more than I get frustrated by his actions on certain issues.
I see a club ran fairly well. Could be better and could be a damn sight worse by a long way.
I have a good enough memory of the times when Ellis Short was commended by Newcastle fans for being a proper owner and Ashley the Devil.
Why?
Well Ellis gave the fans what he thought they craved...and what he craved himself, which was a stab at some semblance of success by an apparent ambitious attempt to invest for it.
The rest is history with that mindset.

Us?
Where are we?

Sometimes you have to be ultra careful what you wish for.
I am careful what I wish for.

Yep, as long as your speculation is not all your eggs into one basket.

Too long, didn't read.

[Nufcian]

The reason our net spend is so low is we have sold off players that really had any value, and the SQUAD has become progressively worse over the last few seasons.

Out best player of this season (Rondon), last season (Kenedy) aren’t our players even FFS.

We’ve downgraded the squad and it’s taken years to get to where we are now, but the best striker on OUR books is deemed surplus to requirement in any Premiership team he’s been a member of, and we’ve got little to none premiership quality strength in depth and have survived because of a proven manager.

Also...I haven’t even read Ghosts comments, I saw they were long, and they’ll be the same we can’t compete so we shouldn’t bother, and should be happy with why we have... either he’s a wind up merchant or he’s just a bit simple.