From the Echo, using “since we won the Champions League in 2018” as a measure for recent net spend and comparing us to the big 6. As you can see we have actually brought more in than we have spent since winning the Champions League.
“Net spend is another metric used to determine how much a club has really shelled out on transfers too.
And since Liverpool became European champions, they have recouped £85.14m - meaning their total net spend on transfers during this time is positive £1.39m, since they have made more money than they've spent.
Harvey Elliott's potential fee has not been included in that yet, however, since it is yet to be decided in court.
However, that incoming figure includes the £23.4m departure of Rhian Brewster, the £10.8m exit of Dejan Lovren, the £19.98m for Danny Ings, the £6.48m for Ryan Kent and £6.3m for Simon Mignolet. A payment of £8.82m for Ki-Jana Hoever, £3.51m for Ovie Ejaria and loan fees of £1.17m and £2.43m for Harry Wilson, £1.8m for Marko Grujic and £450k for Taiwo Awoniyi make up the rest of the total.
Now, again during that same time for outgoing transfers; Man City brought in £117.59m, United saw £89.62m added to their funds, Chelsea had an injection of £193.11m, Tottenham made £70.02m and Arsenal recouped £65.08m.
That means, since Liverpool lifted the Champions League trophy in 2019, each club's transfer net spend is as follows:
Liverpool: +£1.39m (*Elliott fee to be decided)
Man City: -£181.56m
United: -£189.63m
Chelsea: -£69.89m
Tottenham: -£163.08m
Arsenal: -£154.9m
Clearly, Liverpool's model - which seems to rely on sales before major purchases - is a much more cautious one when compared with that of their rivals.
Such an approach allows them to keep financially stable at all times and even when the unthinkable happens, such as a worldwide pandemic, the Reds will emerge on the other side in a much more healthy position than those around them - which is most certainly a positive.“
Bookmarks