Question for anyone who can direct me

[Paul Marin]

I was once advised to "eschew obfuscation"... and I'm gonna do so right now; BTW, seeing the defending champs Leicester have lost two thirds as many matches as they did last season, after four rounds, my advice to Ranieri, if the trend continues, is to offload Vardy and Mahrez in January and look for two unknowns from the Championship division to shore up his forces! Boom! LOL

Now there you go! Negative net spend will surely deliver "more with less"! LOL!!! Yeesh. Lawd the bredda fool.

[Peter R]

Voodoo economics,the question is can you get more out of less than your competitors ?

You throw up red herrings,granular concepts that you cannot explain as to why Klopp believes he is working with less financially and expects more to increase his squad value.

In other words as you have stated ,you are an idiot,Educated one if you went to school ,if not a pathological degenerate.

Lawwd figive mi.

I was once advised to "eschew obfuscation"... and I'm gonna do so right now; BTW, seeing the defending champs Leicester have lost two thirds as many matches as they did last season, after four rounds, my advice to Ranieri, if the trend continues, is to offload Vardy and Mahrez in January and look for two unknowns from the Championship division to shore up his forces! Boom! LOL

[Paul Marin]

Voodoo economics,the question is can you get more out of less than your competitors ?

Sure. Okay, show me where any team in the premier league era has *consistently* challenged for the title using your stupid "more from less" paradigm. Don't bother, because facts already show you to be an ass.

You throw up red herrings,granular concepts that you cannot explain as to why Klopp believes he is working with less financially and expects more to increase his squad value.

LOL!! Really, what "granular concept" have I thrown up other than the size of your brain? LOL!! Klown, stop using big words like "granular" LOL!!!. It nuh suit u.

In other words as you have stated ,you are an idiot,Educated one if you went to school ,if not a pathological degenerate.

Idiot? Pathological degenerate? This from the one who:

a) cannot differentiate between acquisition cost and market value
b) doesn't understand the historical correlation between wage bill/squad value and league table performance
c) claims that one of our clubs greatest heroes is a "fraud"
d) supported Chelsea, Napoli and Manchester City all in the same year that he then did an about face and stated that Rodgers is "growing in stature" and that we should "keep him" no matter that was only when it looked like BR would win the title
e) and oh yeah...the "pathological degenerate" that claimed that City "seduced" him. LOL!

Eedyat...tek u foolishness an gwey!

[Sir X]

Voodoo economics,the question is can you get more out of less than your competitors ?

You throw up red herrings,granular concepts that you cannot explain as to why Klopp believes he is working with less financially and expects more to increase his squad value.

In other words as you have stated ,you are an idiot,Educated one if you went to school ,if not a pathological degenerate.

Lawwd figive mi.

[Paul Marin]

Well, I saw that site and I was wondering where certain people got the idea that LFC had a negative net spend this year? and I'm talking about cash spent and cash received. Mind you, the positive net spend according to the site is not much at £1M (rounded) but it certainly isn't negative. Another site has it at £2.3 M, but anyway, I'm still looking for the evidence of the negative net spend... maybe someone can point me in the right direction...

...but, talk about a dog wid a bone!

Peter - the net spend is only relevant in the context of overall squad value and wage bill. These figures are sometimes shaky, but it goes without saying that LFC is way off the mark compared to the teams that are always in the mix. I believe if you can find reliable data that these two will map very closely to the league standings at the end of each season with an occasional outlier or two (e.g. Leicester City).

[Bruce]

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/jumpl...wettbewerb/GB1
TRANSFER VALUE OF EPL TEAMS


TOP 5 EPL TEAMS (x1 million pounds) Manchester United 454.1; Manchester City 440.3; Chelsea, 431.6; Arsenal 398.2; Liverpool 329.1

(9) Leicester 178.9

[Peter R]

Well, I saw that site and I was wondering where certain people got the idea that LFC had a negative net spend this year? and I'm talking about cash spent and cash received. Mind you, the positive net spend according to the site is not much at £1M (rounded) but it certainly isn't negative. Another site has it at £2.3 M, but anyway, I'm still looking for the evidence of the negative net spend... maybe someone can point me in the right direction...

...but, talk about a dog wid a bone!

[Paul Marin]

Peter, try the site transfermarkt.com - they are used by a number o credible sources.

[Peter R]

All dat tuh!

[Lazie]

Net spend? Oh ... when you want to talk bout profits and revenues ... let me know.

[Peter R]

to a site (or sites) that gives accurate net spend of EPL clubs in 2016/17 so far.

No, I'm not trying to rehash, or start, any debate... yet (LOL), just trying to educate myself with some facts from independent sources.

Thanks in advance.