Premier League five-year net spend table

[Happy Blue]

https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/premier-league-five-net-spend-134509929.html

Forget the league table, it’s all about the Premier League net spend table. Man Utd are being hauled in by Chelsea, with only one club turning a profit over the last five years.

Bold denotes a profit; final league positions in brackets…

 

1) Manchester United: £-545.8m
22/23: £-204.4m
21/22: £-98.4m (6th)
20/21: £-58.32m (2nd)
19/20: £-138.24m  (3rd)
18/19: £-46.94m (6th)

 

2) Chelsea: £-517.3m
22/23: £-336m
21/22: £1.76m (3rd)
20/21: £-169.56m (4th)
19/20: £101.04m (4th)
18/19: £-113m (3rd)

 

3) Arsenal: £-440.4m
22/23: £-97.4m
21/22: £-122.4m (5th)
20/21: £-59.27m (8th)
19/20: £-96.08m (8th)
18/19: £-65.03m (5th)

 

4) West Ham: £-355.7m
22/23: £-147.78m
21/22: £-63.24m (7th)
20/21: £-8.36m (6th)
19/20: £-58.11m (16th)
18/19: £-77.43m (10th)

 

5) Tottenham: £-331.45m
22/23: £-118m
21/22: £-55.15m (4th)
20/21: £-87.48m (7th)
19/20: £-75.6m (6th)
18/19: £4.82m (4th)

 

6) Newcastle: £-314.3m
22/23: £-120.67m
21/22: £-117.45m (11th)
20/21: £-34.85m (12th)
19/20: £-33.53m (13th)
18/19: £-7.83m (13th)

 

7) Aston Villa: £-271.97m
22/23: £-37.2m
21/22: £-2.54m (14th)
20/21: £-88.72m (11th)
19/20: £-140.85m (17th)
18/19: £-2.66m (5th in Championship)

 

Liverpool: £-253.61m
22/23: £-45.64m
21/22: £-51.71m (2nd)
20/21: £-58.91m (3rd)
19/20: £28.08m (Champions)
18/19: £-126.79m (2nd)

 

9) Wolves: £-250.36m
22/23: £-73.55m
21/22: £-5.22m (10th)
20/21: £-3.24m (13th)
19/20: £-83.34m (7th)
18/19: £-80.51m (7th)

 

10) Manchester City: £-213.8m
22/23: £18.36m
21/22: £-36.63m (Champions)
20/21: £-90.14m (Champions)
19/20: £-79.67m (2nd)
18/19: £-18.89m (Champions)

 

Edited January 21 by Happy Blue

[Happy Blue]

https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pages/sports-business-group/articles/deloitte-football-money-league.html

Manchester City retain their position at the top of the Money League and for the second time were the club to generate the highest revenue in world football. This caps off a rapid rise up the rankings, with the club having only broken into the top five for the first time in 2015/16. This growth has been fuelled by an increase in commercial revenue (up €65m to €373m in 2021/22), which is a new Premier League record.

Liverpool were the biggest movers among the consistent clubs included in this and last year’s edition of the Money League. The club rose four places (from 7th to 3rd) to achieve its highest position in Money League history, and in doing so overtook Manchester United for the first time, on the back of a run to the UEFA Champions League Final 2022. It was also only one of five clubs to report over €100m in matchday revenue, which was the first time the club had done so, as fans returned to football stadia in their masses. This is expected to increase further in coming years, with the expansion of the Anfield Road Stand due to be completed prior to the 2023/24 season.

For the first time since 2018/19 a new club entered the Money League top 10, with Arsenal replacing Juventus (who fell from 9th to 11th), primarily by virtue of the significant matchday revenue generated, which was almost three times that of the Serie A club in 2021/22. Whilst Juventus and other Italian clubs played a significant portion of their season under the crowd restrictions noted previously, it also reflects a significant return on the investment into the Emirates stadium and goes some way to justifying the infrastructure investment being explored by clubs such as Real Madrid, FC Barcelona, the Milan clubs and Everton, who are looking to future-proof their businesses.

[Happy Blue]

In contrast to Liverpool and Arsenal, FC Barcelona reported one of the sharpest falls in the rankings, with the club dropping from 4th to 7th. This was primarily due to a 13% decline in broadcast revenues, which were partially attributed to underperformance in UEFA club competitions in comparison to previous years, as the club competed in the second tier of UEFA club competition in 2021/22 for the first time since the 2003/04 season (by virtue of the club dropping out of the UEFA Champions League Group stage). Furthermore, the growth in their commercial revenue was significantly outpaced by other clubs (€7m compared to €65m for Manchester City, €37m for Liverpool, €47m for Manchester United, €46m for Paris Saint-Germain and €33m for Bayern Munich). The club commenced a multi-year commercial agreement with Spotify, covering the men’s and women’s team shirt and training kit sponsorship as well as naming rights for the Camp Nou, in the 2022/23 season. It remains to be seen how this and the sale of the club’s ‘economic levers’ (which did not impact revenue in 2021/22), including the sale of both 49.9% of its ‘Barça Licensing and Merchandising’ company and 25% of its domestic La Liga rights over a 25-year period, impacts the club’s position in the Money League in upcoming editions.

[Happy Blue]

For the first time, more than half of the top 20 clubs (11 of 20) heralded from one country – England – further highlighting the financial superiority of the Premier League and how clubs were able to better ride the wave of COVID. Indeed, there has been a steady increase in the number of English clubs in the Money League over the last decade, as clubs that have not competed in UEFA club competitions and that have moderately sized stadia have made their way into the rankings at the expense of clubs from other ‘big five’ leagues who regularly compete in UEFA club competitions. This is evidenced by Leeds United appearing in the rankings for the first time since the 2002/03 season, with the club competing in the second tier of the English football pyramid as recently as 2019/20.

When considering the top 30, there are 16 English clubs, representing 80% of all clubs in the Premier League. The remainder of the top 30 ranking includes five clubs from La Liga, three from both Serie A and the Bundesliga and one from Ligue 1, all of whom competed in UEFA club competitions in 2021/22 and, with the exception of Villarreal CF, played in a stadium with a capacity of over 40,000 or more (and over 60,000 for all other than Paris Saint-Germain, Juventus, Sevilla and Eintracht Frankfurt). Benfica (24th) and Ajax (27th) were the only clubs outside the ‘big five’ leagues to be ranked in the top 30, driven by consistent performance in Europe with a Quarter-final and Round of 16 appearance in the UEFA Champions League respectively.

[Cicero]

It's easy to get a head start over everyone else when you've been defrauding your revenue stream for the first half a decade of City's ownership. 

[6666]

Our spending is now pretty normal for a top Premier League side (barring Man City & Chelsea) but we are a complete disaster at selling. We basically just let players go cheaply or on free transfers just to get rid of wages.

Would've been interesting if they also gave numbers for money spent/made from transfers.

[Gunnersaurus]

1 minute ago, 6666 said:

Our spending is now pretty normal for a top Premier League side (barring Man City & Chelsea) but we are a complete disaster at selling. We basically just let players go cheaply or on free transfers just to get rid of wages.

Would've been interesting if they also gave numbers for money spent/made from transfers.

They do don't they? Net spend is transfer fees  v transfer money received I think 

[6666]

2 minutes ago, Gunnersaurus said:

They do don't they? Net spend is transfer fees  v transfer money received I think 

I meant separate columns. One for money spent and one for money received.

[Gunnersaurus]

28 minutes ago, Cicero said:

It's easy to get a head start over everyone else when you've been defrauding your revenue stream for the first half a decade of City's ownership. 

If you go back ten years city are second in net spend. When you spend a lot of money you are able to make a lot in transfer sales which keeps your net spend down. Although they're  net spend is behind teams like west ham over 5 years. West ham were never able to generate  enough money from player sells to  spend the kind of money city have. 

Also with inflation you can make money back easier. Between 2003 and 2018 city spent more money than anyone despite only having a lot of money since 2008

City also have the second or third highest wage bill which needs to he taken into account. They are a very well run club definitely but you would expect them to be more successful than liverpool. Man utd should be doing better. But man city aren't these massive over achievers like HB is trying to make out.

Edited January 25 by Gunnersaurus

[Gunnersaurus]

3 minutes ago, 6666 said:

I meant separate columns. One for money spent and one for money received.

Ow right. 

[OrangeKhrush]

it's funny when Chelsea are doing what everyone thought Newcastle will do.  

it seems like FFP only applies to non top 6 clubs.  it's the handbrake to prevent someone else cutting into that comfort pie.

[Gunnersaurus]

Just now, OrangeKhrush said:

it's funny when Chelsea are doing what everyone thought Newcastle will do.  

it seems like FFP only applies to non top 6 clubs.  it's the handbrake to prevent someone else cutting into that comfort pie.

Chelsea have time to balance out the books though. They will have only broken the rules if they haven't done that within the allotted time. 

[Stan]

5 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

it's funny when Chelsea are doing what everyone thought Newcastle will do.  

it seems like FFP only applies to non top 6 clubs.  it's the handbrake to prevent someone else cutting into that comfort pie.

Do you think Newcastle will flash the cash over the next 2-3 seasons? 

[OrangeKhrush]

Just now, Gunnersaurus said:

Chelsea have time to balance out the books though. They will have only broken the rules if they haven't done that within the allotted time. 

UEFA are on to them and I hope for fairness the 5 year mandatum applies retrospectively to prevent Chelsea having advantage from  deliberate circumvention of FFP intents.   it will mean Chelsea have a smaller window to make it work.   I do however think they will cash out now and the summer then park the handbrake for 2 or 3 Windows

[OrangeKhrush]

Just now, Stan said:

Do you think Newcastle will flash the cash over the next 2-3 seasons? 

we will spend but unlikely to spend anywhere near what the "big 6" will

[Gunnersaurus]

2 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

UEFA are on to them and I hope for fairness the 5 year mandatum applies retrospectively to prevent Chelsea having advantage from  deliberate circumvention of FFP intents.   it will mean Chelsea have a smaller window to make it work.   I do however think they will cash out now and the summer then park the handbrake for 2 or 3 Windows

The point is though is that they still haven't broken the rules yet. So they aren't getting preferential treatment like you suggested 

[OrangeKhrush]

10 minutes ago, Gunnersaurus said:

The point is though is that they still haven't broken the rules yet. So they aren't getting preferential treatment like you suggested 

if you cheat in an exam and your marks come 3 weeks later, doesn't mean you didn't get your advantage three weeks prior.

Chelsea have bent rules to gain an advantage ipso facto they should not benefit from it

[Gunnersaurus]

10 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

if you cheat in an exam and your marks come 3 weeks later, doesn't mean you didn't get your advantage three weeks prior.

Chelsea have bent rules to gain an advantage ipso facto they should not benefit from it

They haven't broken the rules though because FFP is based over 3 years or so. So if they have a few quiet windows and get good money back from transfers they will be fine.

[OrangeKhrush]

3 minutes ago, Gunnersaurus said:

They haven't broken the rules though because FFP is based over 3 years or so. So if they have a few quiet windows and get good money back from transfers they will be fine.

they will find it hard to sell some of their high earning underperformers.   thry can sell James for a lot but that's counter productive

to many dead contracts, lukaku and sterling are immovable roadblocks

[Honey Honey]

Man City would have had a higher net spend had they needed to. 

[Gunnersaurus]

7 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

they will find it hard to sell some of their high earning underperformers.   thry can sell James for a lot but that's counter productive

to many dead contracts, lukaku and sterling are immovable roadblocks

Well that might well be true but they still haven't broken the rules yet. They can't be punished on what might happen 

[Spike]

I'd rather see gross spending over net spending. It paints a clearer picture on how much teams buy, and I don't care what they sell.

[Dr. Gonzo]

7 hours ago, OrangeKhrush said:

it's funny when Chelsea are doing what everyone thought Newcastle will do.  

it seems like FFP only applies to non top 6 clubs.  it's the handbrake to prevent someone else cutting into that comfort pie.

Wait til you're in the CL mate before you start spouting off, because there's no way the Saudis are going to not throw shitloads of cash at players once you're in the CL.

[Happy Blue]

14 hours ago, Gunnersaurus said:

But man city aren't these massive over achievers like HB is trying to make out.

Like everything else, HB just brings you facts. your interpretation of them is upto you 

[OrangeKhrush]

I keep hearing man United fans blame lack of investment yet they spent twice as much as City.   The glazers have shelled out a fortune but people running man United spunked it out on bad signings.   

man city are every man United fan is envious to become but not admit it.

[OrangeKhrush]

10 hours ago, Spike said:

I'd rather see gross spending over net spending. It paints a clearer picture on how much teams buy, and I don't care what they sell.

Gross transfer spend of the Big Six Premier League clubs in England in summer 2022(in million euros)

 

Characteristic	Gross transfer spend	Percentage of league total
Chelsea	279	12
Manchester United	238	11
Tottenham Hotspur	170	8
Manchester City	140	6
Arsenal	132	6
Liverpool	86	4

sorry it is only one year but it still shows the trend of Chelsea and Man United shovelling cash down any rabbit hole.   It continues to show how well Liverpool and City recruited.

[OrangeKhrush]

7 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Wait til you're in the CL mate before you start spouting off, because there's no way the Saudis are going to not throw shitloads of cash at players once you're in the CL.

the champions league is not a licence to spend, FFP is based off the clubs revenue and our revenue is 220m vs Liverpool 700m, man United 680m, Arsenal 570m.   the champions league may help but if we don't build sustainability we will face the same issue Leicester did.  

I am confident that the model will be about building from the academy and a younger team base rather than spunking out like Chelsea.  we have added 6 new positions in player recruitment including a scouting analyst from City.  fan Ashworth interview recently stated that he is adopting a Brighton like system, a conveyor belt of cheap talent and trying to polish them into diamonds.

[Stan]

11 hours ago, Spike said:

I'd rather see gross spending over net spending. It paints a clearer picture on how much teams buy, and I don't care what they sell.

 

8 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

Gross transfer spend of the Big Six Premier League clubs in England in summer 2022(in million euros)

 

Characteristic	Gross transfer spend	Percentage of league total
Chelsea	279	12
Manchester United	238	11
Tottenham Hotspur	170	8
Manchester City	140	6
Arsenal	132	6
Liverpool	86	4

sorry it is only one year but it still shows the trend of Chelsea and Man United shovelling cash down any rabbit hole.   It continues to show how well Liverpool and City recruited.

This is from Transfermarkt:

 

From 2019/20 to 2022/23, sorted by expenditure from PL clubs within that time. 

Excluding loan fees, excluding transfers within clubs.

[OrangeKhrush]

5 minutes ago, Stan said:

 

This is from Transfermarkt:

 

From 2019/20 to 2022/23, sorted by expenditure from PL clubs within that time. 

Excluding loan fees, excluding transfers within clubs.

thanks.   we had 89m net across that time without investment putting us at Norwich level.   Mike Ashley needs no discussion, I hope no team ever has to suffer him as an owner, nobody deserves that

 

ps: this is why I want us to have a Brighton/City model, high selling turnover because you invest and sell on for value.   Chelsea and Man United are disasters

Edited January 26 by OrangeKhrush

[Stan]

5 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

we had 89m net across that time

On the table it says the net across that time-frame is approx 337m Euros (approx £300m)?