No ... that's just wrong ... the revenue comes in across the year
If the stadium increases our revenue by 150m a year for 20 years that's 3 billion more to spend, but it's still only 150m a year, when you consider we've already upped our salaries by some 75m a year then half of that increase is spent already, give Eriksen a 100k payrise and that's another 5m
Buy just one player for 50m on 200k a week and that's pretty much the money spent ....
It's not that hard to follow ...
Utd have a revenue of €666m, City €568.4m, Liverpool €513.7m, Chelsea €505.7m, Woolwich €439.2m and we had a huge increase to €428.3m .... with luck, and CL football in NWHL, we can grow that to €500+ .... we will be able to match our rivals not jump ahead of them, on the pitch we are already there, so don't expect miracles .....
Well broken down when looking at the added revenue. It also shows more evidence as to how unsustainable football has become. If you haven't got a sugar daddy, you need to be wise with your spending. Even that lot down the road are reliant on loans at the moment after doing all their money and where has it got them compared to the last couple of years? Still nowhere near even seriously challenging for a top 4 position.
Get the stadium done, get the extra revenue in but don't expect miracles. It's a long term project that will slowly grow, slowly attract more supporters, slowly and naturally create a buzz and naturally allow us stronger options compared to every other team bar the ones lightyears ahead of us at the moment. We've secured most of our long term playing staff, a few more shrewd additions when the likes of Chelsea, City, PSG go into lunatic mode and we will be fine.
Personally I'd rather see us invest in our scouting network as opposed to our immediate delivery of playing staff. Focus on the foundations of it all so we are able to pinch them before they get big. For me that's the best way we start to genuinely compete, by focusing on the Kanes, Deles & Foyths of the world