Yeah, I saw that.
So Arsenal have spent roughly 200m this window. I reckon that is more than Klopp's net spend during his whole time at Liverpool.
I just checked, in late Jan 2023 so I don't know if that includes Gakpo or not, Pool under Klopp had a net spend of £240m. Utd's was £795m, City's was £572m, Arsenal's was £515m, Chelsea's was £463m and Spurs' was £370m.
Obviously that will have changed as it may or may not include Gakpo, the 721 players Chelsea signed or any signing this summer. Even if we add the £35m for Gakpo on, Pool are still £100m LESS than the nearest other member of the big 6 in Spurs. That's one hell of a gap, especially considering the on pitch success Pool have had and I would assume the increased revenue (tv money, prize money and merchandise sales) they have earned.
Genuinely, WHERE THE **** HAS THE MONEY GONE?
The above also doesn't include Newcastle who apparently have spent over 200m since the take over, but the article (twas in The Mirror) doesn't give a net spend figure for them.
And yes, I know 'net spend' blah blah blah, my point is more the fact that Pool shouldn't be sitting at the bottom of that big 6 league, and definitely not bottom by £100m. For context, that hundred million buys them Jude Bellingham.