SJP1Spending in the January transfer window hit a record high in Jan 2011 when £225m was spent before dropping back to £60m last year. Now the figures are on the rise again after the 2012 total was doubled to £120m in the month just gone.

Deloitte have produced a report on the transfer window spending and they’ve found that three clubs between them contributed over 50% of this January’s activity; QPR, Liverpool and Newcastle United.

In January 2012, QPR and Newcastle United were also two of the three biggest spenders, with Papiss Cisse arriving at St.James’ Park. Which may pose the question, is January spending a deliberate ploy by Mike Ashley?

The report goes on to comment that the Premier League spending has been relatively restrained considering that as of next season broadcasting revenues are due to rise by between £20m and £30m per club.

While the Premier League spending was £120m in January it actually ended up being around £70m net once outgoing transfers such as Newcastle’s Demba Ba were taken into account.

The report also mentions that this reporting period will count towards the first assessment of UEFA’s financial fair play break even requirement  which could help account for the relative spending restraint.

Newcastle’s spending decisions made a big contribution to the fact that £75m (62%) of transfer spending went on overseas purchases.

The actual spending on deadline day was £35m, with £30m on that day in 2012 and a whopping £135m in January 2011 on ‘Andy Carroll’ day.

How do we compare to other countries?

Italian clubs were the next biggest spenders paying out around 70% of what English clubs did, while Germany was around 45% and France 30%. While in Spain the spending was almost non-existent with the likes of the Russian and Brazilian leagues spending more.

Top Selling Newcastle United MagazineYou can buy a single issue (only £3 plus postage) or a subscription (from £23) in our online shop and get it delivered through your letter box wherever you live in the World. You can also buy it from your local newsagents (on sale at over 450 different ones) if you live in the north east.

[latest_issue]

9 comments
newcastle7
newcastle7

No matter what happens the accounts tell a true story over a period of time despite the coming and going of players so just get over it.Support the team on Sunday go to the game and take your mates with you

RexN
RexN

@newcastle7 Thanks for the advice. Rather than support the team on Sunday, (most of who are unlikely to be with us next year) I choose to support the long term interests of the club against what Ashley has done to it. You and your friends are welcome to join us.

Sean Kelly
Sean Kelly

as I've said before, the chronicle could and should be doing a great deal more with regards to this aswell. instead of their so called celebrity journalists tweeting absolute shite day in day out whilst sitting on the fence.

LeazesEnder
LeazesEnder

I wonder if the club really did fine Pardew for his 'head-butt'....I suggested at the time it be donated to charity... 


... would that show up in any form?

IntravenusMP
IntravenusMP

@LeazesEnder It 'may' be within the charitable donations and it 'may' be within the salaries however,  but for directors, a company must not divulge individual salaries to the outside world. 

Sickandtiredstill
Sickandtiredstill

@toontooncouk 

Rex -How can players signed in Jan '13 (12/13 accounts period) and players after June 30th '14 (after the 13/14 account period closed) be in the latest accounts?

The money was spent before or after this accounting period. I don't get this one.

IntravenusMP
IntravenusMP

@Sickandtiredstill Becasue when highish earners like Sissoko arrived in January 13, we paid them for services Jan/Feb13-June 13 in the 2013 accounts but Jul 13-Jun 14 in the 2014 accounts so that would help explain why the wage figure was higher. Obviously, as the employer, NUFC are not going to (& must not) divulge the salaries of individuals but it's just an explanation of the higher wage cost.  

RexN
RexN

@Sickandtiredstill Sorry about that. It was to do with the players' wages on one hand and amortisation on the other.


The players signed in January 2013 had 6 months wages in 2012-13, and 12 months wages in 2013-14. That is a partial explanation about the increase in wages. The other side to it is the extra amortisation as compared with the previous year, which is what I was trying to highlight.


As for signings after the end of June 2014, there is a possibility (not explained by the club) that any commitment made can be listed under `accruals'. If a pre-contract agreement has been made but the payment will be made when the contract starts, this is legitimate. There were reports that Colback tried to get out of it when West Ham offered a higher wage but that the agreement ( I believe leaked by sources close to West Ham) suggested that Colback's agreement with NUFC was watertight.


It's fair to say that different clubs may have different policies as to how to account for this sort of thing. It makes for an interesting technicality post-Bosman, particularly with a club that likes to get players cheaply.


I hope that helps.