Right, so what's all that nonsense above then? It struck me the number of posters who constantly bleat on about how 'Jose has spent blah...', 'Utd have spent blah...', as if it gives us some kind of God-given right to win titles. I have tried to explain to a number of these posters individually it's not the sums that matter, it's how that number compares to our main title rivals which is the key. So above you will see a year-by-year breakdown of what United, Chelsea and City have spent on transfer fees. I have chosen to start in 2004/05, the year that Chelsea where acquired by Roman Abrahamovich. Just by looking at the raw numbers, it is not hard to see why these three teams have dominated English football and had success in Europe. It's also not hard to see why teams enjoyed success in certain periods as they align with high spending around that time. However, I wanted to go a little bit further than just listing what each team has spent, even though they do provide evidence that United have clearly lagged behind our rivals. I think these numbers are somewhat misleading. We all know that transfer fees have gone insane recently. £50m is the new £20m, so my thinking was that by comparing these transfer outlays as percentages against United's outlay, we see the 'real' amount by which our rivals outspent (or not) Utd during each year. Kind of like how bread costs more now than it did in the 80s, so you need to account for inflation when assessing an employees real wages, for example. So, by looking at the percentage figures, you can see that in the space of two transfer windows, City outspent United by 537.59% & 622.72% respectively. To put that in perspective, the most we have outspent City by since the arrival of Sheikh Mansour is 55% - and there are only two years we have outspent City at all in the entire period. Ultimately, my point is that the argument that 'Jose has spent £300m, therefore we should win blah..." is fundamentally flawed. Even at the peak of our spending, we are at best just keeping our heads above the water and matching our rivals. We have had no crazy influx of cash or mega spending bonanza to try and level the playing field. It also highlights how negligible sums like £300m are today. Even if you accept that City started from a much lower base than us in 2008, you still have to acknowledge that City had to outspend us by over 500% & 600% to play catch up. Just one Summer now of outspending City to that effect would cost us over £1BN, based on last Summers window!!!! Clearly, money talks in football and I say we should be thankful that Jose HAS actually performed very well in the transfer market, with the odd bit of help from Louis, Moyseh and SAF, otherwise we really would be in heaps of trouble! We can't sign a keeper for £25m and replace him 1yr later. We can't sign three full backs to cover two positions in one Summer for £130m. I am afraid that is the reality! Just to be clear, I am not complaining. I am not criticizing City or Chelsea. I am not saying it's unfair or ruining football. What I am saying is I want every one of our fans to stop using money spent as a stick to beat Jose, or LvG or Moyes for that matter. Clearly we HAVEN'T kept pace with our rivals spending, both of whom have had huge influxes of cash, and there is or are no other reasons for our recent lack of silverware - in my opinion! Thoughts?