I would agree to an extent if I thought we were selling players to buy, but we are selling players who have either decided they don't want to be here and/or are not deemed good enough. So for instance, if Lukaku and Barkley decided to commit their future to Everton, did not want to leave, but were sold so we could buy cheaper players and make a profit. The "Robbing Peter to pay Paul" method of negative net spending, like we've done in the past, with Jeffers, Rooney, even Lineker. But we all know that this is not the case here.
Well, if the maybes don't happen as I say, we could very well end up with an unfit, unmotivated, and unwanted Ross Barkley still here as well, and still a positive net spend of £40m (not including wages).
The additional players you have mentioned may very well be moved on as well, but there may well be other players we bring in, whether that be last minute deals for players under the radar, additional players for the U23 squad, etc. The Vlasic thing only cropped up this week and no one had an inkling about that, despite us playing his team twice this month.
But you agreed with the initial point anyway, so I was just answering the point about my skewed way of looking at it.
In short, we don't know until all the deals are done and the window is closed. Until then, the spend, be it negative or positive, is meaningless. The true reflection is the state of the squad before and after.
And if we make a profit AND improve, to me, that is a positive, and not in any way a reflection of ambition. It's just common sense.
