Is £203m per trophy a sane way to spend money? « Untold Arsenal: Arsenal News, supporting the club, the players and the manager
Transfers. Staying within a budget?
Or bottomless pockets?
By Cameron Wolfe
Mancini was airing his views (ie. complaining) the other day that Man City hadn’t signed anyone this summer. And it made me wonder if he would be spending the money that’s been spent in the last few seasons so freely if it was his own. No, of course not. It’s always easier spending other people’s money.
I’m always of the belief that Arsène spends the funds available to him like it was his own cash. As any good manager should do. I think it gives him a better perspective on the transfers.
As it happens today is the anniversary of the first match of three of the early arrivals under the Wenger regime (Leeds v August 1997) and so with that in mind I started to wonder…
How much has Arsène spent since he arrived? How does that compare to the other top teams?
From 1996 the amounts are…
| Spent | Loss | Average loss per year | |
| Chelsea | £695m | £502m | £43m |
| Man City | £648m | £463m | £40m |
| Liverpool | £533m | £207m | £33m |
| Man U | £487m | £184m | £30m |
| Tottenham | £412m | £170m | £25m |
| Arsenal | £365m | +£45m | £22m |
I could go through the whole league but in spending terms it makes more sense to look at the other teams next to us in the league. And this is enough to note that Arsène has spent less than any other manager and I’m sure it’ll come as no surprise that Arsene is the only manager to have made a profit over the years.
The interesting facts I found out while looking at the EPL transfer figures were that in a single season Man. City spent a whopping £154m closely followed by Chelsea who spent £153m. Both have also recorded the biggest losses in a single season. Chelsea recouped only £100,000 compared with City’s £37m.
The other interesting fact was that City has spent £406m in just three seasons alone.
Or so far it’s cost them £203m per trophy.
Which begs two questions: would City have won anything without such a huge investment? and is £203m per trophy a sane way to spend money.
Who knows? Probably not though. But the big question that remains is “Will fair play have any effect on these big spending clubs?”
The official UEFA’s website says that FFP is introduced…
- to introduce more discipline and rationality in club football finances
- to decrease pressure on salaries and transfer fees and limit inflationary effect
- to encourage clubs to compete with in their revenues
- to encourage long-term investments in the youth sector and infrastructure
- to protect the long-term viability of European club football
- to ensure clubs settle their liabilities on a timely basis
The concept has also been supported by the entire football family
.
Now I have highlighted what seem to me to be the two most interesting statements – and I do this with the thought that it is going to be difficult to enforce such a set of rules. Especially if they actually believe it’s supported by all.
I think that leads to another huge question. I think Arsène has been phenomenal in keeping us in the top four every single year and usually having a decent run in all cup competitions. On a budget. New stadium, training facilities. (Indeed it is interesting that Tottenham, Liverpool and Chelsea are all still thinking about new stadia, and will have to find the money for such a venture. Maybe not too hard for Chelsea, but more of a stretch for the other two).
Of course we can ask, how more successful would Arsèneand Arsenal be if funds were unlimited? But that question above still keeps ringing in my ears…
Is £203m per trophy a sane way to spend money.
—————–
Ordinary is Pointless
The Great History of Arsenal Competition – complete with prizes
————————–