Like many of you, I have been watching the recent summer transfer activity in the Premier League, prompted no doubt by influx of  new money being pumped into the league by a new television deal. Estimates go as high as an average of £60m. per club, though the real figure is likely to be far lower than that.

Mixed in with this, we see a new influx of billionaire patriarchs at several clubs. Mike Ashley, Thaksin Shinawatra, Stan Kroenke, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, among others, are the latest raft of super-rich businessmen to acquire an interest in English clubs.

The money that they are able to put into the game is almost beyond belief. And it is interesting to look at the different approach to the money that has been taken by a number of clubs.

'Inevitably, many people believe that some clubs are paying vastly over-inflated prices for average players, while others are betting the family jewels on their new breed of players'


Manchester United lead the field in transfer spending, but have brought in relatively few players. The three that have arrived are clearly held in high regard by Sir Alex Ferguson, high enough to be the next batch of Red Devils. Liverpool, on the other hand, have brought in a good mix. Several high profile young players, Fernando Torres and Ryan Babel, a couple of more experienced players, and a whole host of potential youth talent.

Spurs, in a similar vein, have brought in what they believe to be the next generation of Martin Jol's team building. Darren Bent, Younes Kaboul, Gareth Bale, Adel Taarabt (watch this space) and Yuri Berchiche with the prospect of Germany’s Young Player of the Year, Kevin-Prince Boateng (aka the “Ghetto Kid”) joining their ranks shortly.

Should all of these players fulfil all of the contractual extras, each club will have spent well in excess of £40m.

At the other end of the scale, we see clubs such as Reading – a club that surprised many in their first Premiership  season finishing in eighth. It seems though, that with no major investments of the summer, they may well have a rocky time ahead trying to stay afloat with the amount of competition that will be forthcoming.

It will be interesting to see how the difference in spending pans out in the new season. Obviously, even with a fairly restricted transfer window in Jose Mourinho’s eyes, Chelsea will still be a dominant force in English and European football. But what about teams such as Newcastle and Aston Villa? These two have remained in the Premiership for many years, sliding up and down the table.

Newcastle will be praying that Michael Owen can keep a clean bill of health and they have added Mark Viduka to their striker power, Joey Barton and Geremi to their midfield, and Czech international David Rozehnal in defence. Villa have spent heavily (for them) on Nigel Reo-Coker and Marlon Harewood from West Ham.

Transfer spending has already been higher than ever before with a couple of weeks still to go. Inevitably, many people believe that some clubs are paying vastly over-inflated prices for average players, while others are betting the family jewels on their new breed of players. I simply see this as economics. Supply and demand.

If clubs can earn the money that they do from the TV networks, who in turn earn their revenue from the paying public, then why shouldn’t they? Who are we to complain, when we’re the ones willing to pay in the end?