Arsenal lashed a reported 12-13 mill on Arshavein, less then we payed for Fellaini.
Yes, but they did that
(1) without selling 2 strikers;
(2) with cash up front, as opposed to paying over the next x years;
(3) on a player who is on £80k a week (£4m a year), probably more than twice what Fellaini is on, possibly three times;
(4) In the middle of the season, when they identified an urgent need.
Also Fellaini cost 15m euros, not pounds. Are we sure Arshavin was £13m? I've seen reports as high as £16.5m.
I don't think this is an argument that Arsenal have less money than us. They don't have too much more (certainly not United levels), but they certainly have some.
The reason Milan sold is because they are in deep [Poor language removed] due to the economic crisis, they needed it.
They aren't in deep [Poor language removed], they just don't have money like Chelsea and City. Three months ago they were trying to obtain Beckham and his incredible wages.
Nor were they in deep [Poor language removed] when they sold Shevchenko. It was just a sensible financial decision.
Seriously, sometimes top teams sell their best players. It happens.










