This is a much better table than Mr Bo's attempt at a link!

Total seasonal spend stats, not just summer. No idea about the accuracy

I'll leave you all to pick holes - don't shoot the messenger!

Did you actually look at the details first Santi? Yours states it is from "the total of transfer fees received from the sale of Players is subtracted from the total money spent in transfer fees on purchasing players since 2003". So that would take it to 2008. I saw that table when I was searching and purposely didn't use it because I saw it was outdated by years.

My link states that the figures were from just after the 2015 Summer window had closed.

This is a much better table than Mr Bo's attempt at a link!

Total seasonal spend stats, not just summer. No idea about the accuracy

I'll leave you all to pick holes - don't shoot the messenger!

Did you actually look at the details first Santi? Yours states it is from "the total of transfer fees received from the sale of Players is subtracted from the total money spent in transfer fees on purchasing players since 2003". So that would take it to 2008. I saw that table when I was searching and purposely didn't use it because I saw it was outdated by years.

My link states that the figures were from just after the 2015 Summer window had closed.

Crikey bj use your loaf, if you net spent 110m last summer then it's pretty obvious you spent more than 70m over the previous 4 years.

Anyway for your info : 15/16 110.3m 14/15 60m 13/14 89.8m 12/13 14m 11/12 48.2m Total 322.2 m

IMG_4269.jpg

This is a much better table than Mr Bo's attempt at a link!

Total seasonal spend stats, not just summer. No idea about the accuracy

Source: http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premier-league-last-five-seasons/transfer-league-tables/premier-league-table-last-five-seasons.

No real surprises considering what we all know form ad hoc reports over the years, other than:

West Ham not far off Arsenal's modest tally - ridiculous given relative performance levels

Everton has been well managed financially

How extraordinary is Spurs given they have been in one or other form of Europe over the period?

I'll leave you all to pick holes - don't shoot the messenger!

Yep, certainly punching above our weight

This is a much better table than Mr Bo's attempt at a link!

Total seasonal spend stats, not just summer. No idea about the accuracy

I'll leave you all to pick holes - don't shoot the messenger!

Did you actually look at the details first Santi? Yours states it is from "the total of transfer fees received from the sale of Players is subtracted from the total money spent in transfer fees on purchasing players since 2003". So that would take it to 2008. I saw that table when I was searching and purposely didn't use it because I saw it was outdated by years.

My link states that the figures were from just after the 2015 Summer window had closed.

They have updated the figs but just haven't updated the year

This is a much better table than Mr Bo's attempt at a link!

Total seasonal spend stats, not just summer. No idea about the accuracy

I'll leave you all to pick holes - don't shoot the messenger!

Did you actually look at the details first Santi? Yours states it is from "the total of transfer fees received from the sale of Players is subtracted from the total money spent in transfer fees on purchasing players since 2003". So that would take it to 2008. I saw that table when I was searching and purposely didn't use it because I saw it was outdated by years.

My link states that the figures were from just after the 2015 Summer window had closed.

Crikey bj use your loaf, if you net spent 110m last summer then it's pretty obvious you spent more than 70m over the previous 4 years.

Anyway for your info : 15/16 110.3m 14/15 60m 13/14 89.8m 12/13 14m 11/12 48.2m Total 322.2 m

Alfie, I don't pluck these figures from the air. The first link which showed Man Utd spent far more than us over the last 5 years was from TalkSport. This link is from the Independent, which although figures vary, it again shows United spent far more than us.

Manchester United's net spend dwarfs that of their rivals, with a mixture of Sir Alex Ferguson, David Moyes and Louis van Gaal managing to lighten the Old Trafford bank balance by £287.16m. That's the most of any of the sides considered to be in serious contention for the Premier League title.

Manchester City have a net spend of £200.29m over the last five years. Meanwhile, Liverpool have a net spend of £149.67m, despite recouping over £100m with the sales of Luis Suarez and Raheem Sterling alone.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/arsenal-chelsea-manchester-united-manchester-city-and-liverpool-highest-and-lowest-transfer-spenders-10421476.html

Let's be perfectly clear here in the point I am trying to make. I am NOT trying to state we haven't spent a lot of money, we have. I stated these figures in response to Nev who seemed to think that we should have won Away at Watford as we have spent a Zillion but he seems to have forgotten that United have spent more. Yet we were dissapointed with our performance at an in form Watford, whilst he was satisfied with beating Swansea (an out of form team) at Home.

Any chance City of owning their own ground instead of renting from the council

City, "under its new ownership, renegotiated its 250-year lease with the city council in October 2010, gaining the naming rights in return for a substantial increase in rent".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Manchester_Stadium

I understand that the Club has the option to buy the Stadium.

Sorry to post this on the MUFC forum, just answering the question.

Any chance City of owning their own ground instead of renting from the council

City, "under its new ownership, renegotiated its 250-year lease with the city council in October 2010, gaining the naming rights in return for a substantial increase in rent".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Manchester_Stadium

I understand that the Club has the option to buy the Stadium.

Sorry to post this on the MUFC forum, just answering the question.

Hope they won't be applying for housing benefit.

Any chance City of owning their own ground instead of renting from the council

City, "under its new ownership, renegotiated its 250-year lease with the city council in October 2010, gaining the naming rights in return for a substantial increase in rent".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Manchester_Stadium

I understand that the Club has the option to buy the Stadium.

Sorry to post this on the MUFC forum, just answering the question.

Hope they won't be applying for housing benefit.

Seeing as our owners put a lot more dosh into the local economy than United do, I doubt it.

This is a much better table than Mr Bo's attempt at a link!

Total seasonal spend stats, not just summer. No idea about the accuracy

I'll leave you all to pick holes - don't shoot the messenger!

Did you actually look at the details first Santi? Yours states it is from "the total of transfer fees received from the sale of Players is subtracted from the total money spent in transfer fees on purchasing players since 2003". So that would take it to 2008. I saw that table when I was searching and purposely didn't use it because I saw it was outdated by years.

My link states that the figures were from just after the 2015 Summer window had closed.

Crikey bj use your loaf, if you net spent 110m last summer then it's pretty obvious you spent more than 70m over the previous 4 years.

Anyway for your info : 15/16 110.3m 14/15 60m 13/14 89.8m 12/13 14m 11/12 48.2m Total 322.2 m

Alfie, I don't pluck these figures from the air. The first link which showed Man Utd spent far more than us over the last 5 years was from TalkSport. This link is from the Independent, which although figures vary, it again shows United spent far more than us.

Manchester United's net spend dwarfs that of their rivals, with a mixture of Sir Alex Ferguson, David Moyes and Louis van Gaal managing to lighten the Old Trafford bank balance by £287.16m. That's the most of any of the sides considered to be in serious contention for the Premier League title.

Manchester City have a net spend of £200.29m over the last five years. Meanwhile, Liverpool have a net spend of £149.67m, despite recouping over £100m with the sales of Luis Suarez and Raheem Sterling alone.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/arsenal-chelsea-manchester-united-manchester-city-and-liverpool-highest-and-lowest-transfer-spenders-10421476.html

Let's be perfectly clear here in the point I am trying to make. I am NOT trying to state we haven't spent a lot of money, we have. I stated these figures in response to Nev who seemed to think that we should have won Away at Watford as we have spent a Zillion but he seems to have forgotten that United have spent more. Yet we were dissapointed with our performance at an in form Watford, whilst he was satisfied with beating Swansea (an out of form team) at Home.

Yes we have spent we have had too we have lost vidic Ferdinand evra scholes Rafeal, all needed replacing and I am sure you could add others to that list too, and the artical by the independent is all over the place, just for this season it says we have a loss of 59 mil, but they fail to add on the sales of Di maria 45 mil and Hernandez 12 mil, hey hold on adding them means the artical naming united as the wicked spenders is defunct as it means we have spent nothing this season.

The thing is we are in debt still and can only spend revenue raised and limit it to a maximum of 50% revenue, we don't have a endless supply of money like you lot.

Yes we are happy we got a win why not they have beaten us the last 3 times.

Any chance City of owning their own ground instead of renting from the council

City, "under its new ownership, renegotiated its 250-year lease with the city council in October 2010, gaining the naming rights in return for a substantial increase in rent".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Manchester_Stadium

I understand that the Club has the option to buy the Stadium.

Sorry to post this on the MUFC forum, just answering the question.

Hope they won't be applying for housing benefit.

Seeing as our owners put a lot more dosh into the local economy than United do, I doubt it.

I think they should have checked the spelling first, probably made around Platt Lane

Any chance City of owning their own ground instead of renting from the council

City, "under its new ownership, renegotiated its 250-year lease with the city council in October 2010, gaining the naming rights in return for a substantial increase in rent".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Manchester_Stadium

I understand that the Club has the option to buy the Stadium.

Sorry to post this on the MUFC forum, just answering the question.

Hope they won't be applying for housing benefit.

Seeing as our owners put a lot more dosh into the local economy than United do, I doubt it.

I think they should have checked the spelling first, probably made around Platt Lane

Out of curiosity how much do they put in?

Out of curiosity how much do they put in?

Do a bit of research.

I guarantee its a lot more than your money grabbing Glazers have put into your club.

Been looking, but can't find any figures.

Did you actually look at the details first Santi? Yours states it is from "the total of transfer fees received from the sale of Players is subtracted from the total money spent in transfer fees on purchasing players since 2003". So that would take it to 2008. I saw that table when I was searching and purposely didn't use it because I saw it was outdated by years.

My link states that the figures were from just after the 2015 Summer window had closed.

Crikey bj use your loaf, if you net spent 110m last summer then it's pretty obvious you spent more than 70m over the previous 4 years.

Anyway for your info : 15/16 110.3m 14/15 60m 13/14 89.8m 12/13 14m 11/12 48.2m Total 322.2 m

Alfie, I don't pluck these figures from the air. The first link which showed Man Utd spent far more than us over the last 5 years was from TalkSport. This link is from the Independent, which although figures vary, it again shows United spent far more than us.

Manchester United's net spend dwarfs that of their rivals, with a mixture of Sir Alex Ferguson, David Moyes and Louis van Gaal managing to lighten the Old Trafford bank balance by £287.16m. That's the most of any of the sides considered to be in serious contention for the Premier League title.

Manchester City have a net spend of £200.29m over the last five years. Meanwhile, Liverpool have a net spend of £149.67m, despite recouping over £100m with the sales of Luis Suarez and Raheem Sterling alone.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/arsenal-chelsea-manchester-united-manchester-city-and-liverpool-highest-and-lowest-transfer-spenders-10421476.html

Let's be perfectly clear here in the point I am trying to make. I am NOT trying to state we haven't spent a lot of money, we have. I stated these figures in response to Nev who seemed to think that we should have won Away at Watford as we have spent a Zillion but he seems to have forgotten that United have spent more. Yet we were dissapointed with our performance at an in form Watford, whilst he was satisfied with beating Swansea (an out of form team) at Home.

To be fair, what is the point in using link's that are obviously wrong, i mean where did the Independent get the figure of 200.29m surely you must have known that you have net spent well over 185.4m in the past 5 years, i find websites that's main aim is to provide specific data always more accurate than anyone else.

Out of curiosity how much do they put in?

Have a read, you might find it interesting, and if you ever get the chance pay a visit to the campus, with the National Cycling Centre adjacent, its very impressive.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etihad_Campus

]

Out of curiosity how much do they put in?

Have a read, you might find it interesting, and if you ever get the chance pay a visit to the campus, with the National Cycling Centre adjacent, its very impressive.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etihad_Campus

]

Cheers.

According to the Express today Filipe Anderson coming to OT this month, 35mill.?

Probably more paper talk.

If ManU are looking for a striker, there's a lad in the Bundesliga who's right up your street. He's scored 19 goals in 22 appearances, and he's the Bundesliga Player of the Month for a second time in a row. Can't remember his name though.

If ManU are looking for a striker, there's a lad in the Bundesliga who's right up your street. He's scored 19 goals in 22 appearances, and he's the Bundesliga Player of the Month for a second time in a row. Can't remember his name though.

Did you actually look at the details first Santi? Yours states it is from "the total of transfer fees received from the sale of Players is subtracted from the total money spent in transfer fees on purchasing players since 2003". So that would take it to 2008. I saw that table when I was searching and purposely didn't use it because I saw it was outdated by years.

My link states that the figures were from just after the 2015 Summer window had closed.

Crikey bj use your loaf, if you net spent 110m last summer then it's pretty obvious you spent more than 70m over the previous 4 years.

Anyway for your info : 15/16 110.3m 14/15 60m 13/14 89.8m 12/13 14m 11/12 48.2m Total 322.2 m

Alfie, I don't pluck these figures from the air. The first link which showed Man Utd spent far more than us over the last 5 years was from TalkSport. This link is from the Independent, which although figures vary, it again shows United spent far more than us.

Manchester United's net spend dwarfs that of their rivals, with a mixture of Sir Alex Ferguson, David Moyes and Louis van Gaal managing to lighten the Old Trafford bank balance by £287.16m. That's the most of any of the sides considered to be in serious contention for the Premier League title.

Manchester City have a net spend of £200.29m over the last five years. Meanwhile, Liverpool have a net spend of £149.67m, despite recouping over £100m with the sales of Luis Suarez and Raheem Sterling alone.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/arsenal-chelsea-manchester-united-manchester-city-and-liverpool-highest-and-lowest-transfer-spenders-10421476.html

Let's be perfectly clear here in the point I am trying to make. I am NOT trying to state we haven't spent a lot of money, we have. I stated these figures in response to Nev who seemed to think that we should have won Away at Watford as we have spent a Zillion but he seems to have forgotten that United have spent more. Yet we were dissapointed with our performance at an in form Watford, whilst he was satisfied with beating Swansea (an out of form team) at Home.

To be fair, what is the point in using link's that are obviously wrong, i mean where did the Independent get the figure of 200.29m surely you must have known that you have net spent well over 185.4m in the past 5 years, i find websites that's main aim is to provide specific data always more accurate than anyone else.

I stopped reading that independent article when it states we have a net spending of minus 59 mil for this season and have not taken off the sales of di maria for 45 mil and Hernandez for 12 mil, which means we have spent not a lot, take off from the silly figure quoted and we are not way out in front.

Shoddy journalism.

I have ilikeHDtv and I have many choices to watch tonights game, for those that don't they are advertising it is on ch7.

Looking forward to a good game and atmosphere and a good rendition of Annie's song be better to hear than the normal borings songs sung at old Trafford.

Yeah its on thai channel 7.

Another dire game hardly worth sitting up for .De Pays performance was upgraded to winning a penalty which Roo thankfully put away in the dying minutes.

Playing against teams that stack the defence United just cant break teams down.Oh for some pace on the flanks Mata looks totally lost and

not having Shaw thundering down the left flank makes it all too predictable.

That was exciting!

Thread closed due to lack of interest

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Been meaning to get on here and post all day but I have nothing to say, this is worse than the Sexton years us older reds will remember.

We need a top striker and a creative midfielder in the transfer window just to have a chance of top 4, sadly I can see lvg saying a fergie quote " there is no value in the transfer market", so more money to line the Glazers pockets.

One bright note we are in the 4th round, we need an away game we are dull as dishwater at home.

^^ not qquite up to the boredom of birtles and.wilkiins but Imo not far short,,,

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Weren't those the days of Ray 'the crab' Wilkins who could only pass sideways.