After years of cautious investment, Liverpool have exploded into the summer 2025 transfer window with a show of financial might few expected. The signings of Florian Wirtz and Hugo Ekitike the former a club-record £100million arrival, the latter signed from Eintracht Frankfurt for £79million headline a spree that has already passed the £300m mark in fees alone.
With further additions like Jeremie Frimpong, Milos Kerkez and the belated arrival of Giorgi Mamardashvili, it’s fair to ask: how exactly can Liverpool afford this level of spending, especially under the watch of their traditionally risk-averse owners, Fenway Sports Group?
The answer lies in record revenues, strategic financial planning, and a club now operating at full throttle both on the pitch and in the balance sheets.
Record revenues fuelling record ambition
Liverpool are generating more money than ever before. In 2023–24, despite only playing in the Europa League and finishing third in the Premier League, they crossed the £600m mark in total revenue for the first time. That figure is expected to rise well above £700m in 2024–25 following their 20th English league title and return to the Champions League.
A fully open Anfield Road Stand, increasing stadium capacity to 61,000, contributed significantly to matchday revenue, while the club also hosted five music concerts in June. Commercial income has soared too. Liverpool have overtaken Manchester United for the first time in the Premier League era in this department. On 1 August, they will begin a new kit deal with Adidas that could dwarf their previous agreement with Nike, which generated roughly £60m a season when bonuses were included.
All of this comes during a fresh Premier League TV cycle worth £12.25bn over three years, a 17% rise on the previous agreement. As a result, Liverpool earned an estimated £181.5m from their title-winning campaign. In short, this is a club riding a wave of unprecedented financial power.
Not reckless spending, but carefully planned investment
Despite the appearance of lavishness, Liverpool insist their core principles remain intact. Chief executive Billy Hogan, speaking in Hong Kong this week, emphasised that the club’s self-sustaining model or “virtuous circle” has not changed.
“It doesn’t just happen; it’s been years in the making,” Hogan told The Athletic. “One of the things we’re constantly focused on is that ‘virtuous circle’. Trying to run the club in the right way to generate as much revenue as possible. That obviously helps in terms of being able to put more back into the team, which is incredibly important from our perspective.”
Hogan pointed to the combined work of the football and business sides of the club and stressed that their global fanbase filling stadiums in Hong Kong and Japan expects Liverpool to operate like the global powerhouse it now is. “We want to make sure we’re behaving like one,” he said.
The structure of the deals for Wirtz and Ekitike also reflects a sustainable model. The amortised cost of Wirtz’s £100m deal, with agent fees and a 4% Premier League transfer levy included, adds about £21.4m to this season’s books, and £22.7m annually through 2029–30. Ekitike’s six-year deal, with its fee spread over five years for PSR purposes, brings an additional £13.4m this year and £15.7m per season thereafter.
Overall, Liverpool have added about £54m per year to their amortisation costs a big leap, but one that still places them below Chelsea and only marginally above Manchester City in 2023–24.
Wage bill rising but still under control
Adding Wirtz and Ekitike to the wage bill will cost Liverpool an estimated £25m a year. Wirtz is understood to be earning around £200,000 per week, with Ekitike expected to be in a similar bracket. Still, Liverpool’s wages-to-revenue ratio has remained between 62% and 65% for the past four seasons, a healthy margin for a modern superclub.
And it’s not all additions. The departure of Trent Alexander-Arnold alone will reduce the wage bill by about £12m per year. Other high-profile exits Darwin Nunez, Luis Diaz or Harvey Elliott among them could provide both salary relief and significant transfer income to further offset this summer’s costs.
No PSR issues and no cash crunch either
From a Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR) standpoint, Liverpool are in the clear. Their 2024–25 season is projected to return to profitability after a rare pre-tax loss of £57.1m in the previous campaign, the worst in the club’s history but an anomaly in FSG’s tenure. Liverpool could have lost up to £75m last year without breaching PSR.
In fact, The Athletic estimates that even with bonuses taking the wage bill to £400m, Liverpool could still post a £30m profit for 2024–25. When compared to domestic rivals, Liverpool’s spending has historically been relatively restrained. At the end of 2023–24, their squad cost £749.4m to assemble seventh worldwide and trailing Chelsea (£1.4bn), Manchester City (£1.1bn), Manchester United (£943.9m) and Arsenal (£882.4m).
From a cashflow perspective, Liverpool are even more secure. Their £83.7m operating cash flow in 2023–24 was achieved without Champions League revenue. The club also recently refinanced a revolving credit facility, expanding it from £200m to £350m, with only £116m drawn as of May 2024. Transfer debt is minimal too just £69.9m net as of last summer, well below the £308.9m owed by Manchester United in March 2025.
In short: Liverpool have cash, low debt, increasing income, and strategic flexibility.
Could they still go for Alexander Isak?
The latest indication of Liverpool’s financial strength? Despite having already spent over £300m this summer, they are seen as one of the few realistic destinations for Alexander Isak if, that is, Newcastle United are serious about selling.
Isak could cost in excess of £250m over a five-year period when considering a £150m fee, agent commissions, transfer levies and wages of £250,000–300,000 a week. The annual accounting cost of such a deal would be around £50m a stretch, certainly, but not impossible for Liverpool.
Clubs like Chelsea or Manchester United would struggle either due to UEFA restrictions or cashflow issues. Arsenal’s pending deal for Viktor Gyokeres likely rules them out, while Manchester City may have little tactical need for Isak.
Liverpool, by contrast, have the revenue, manageable wage structure, and potential sales to make room. While a deal of this magnitude would push them to their limits, it would not be out of step with the new level they are operating at nor the ambitions they now clearly harbour.
It would be wrong to interpret this summer’s spree as a sudden change in philosophy. Rather, it is a logical outcome of long-term planning, on-field success, and strategic restraint in previous windows. Liverpool’s net spend dropped to zero in 2019–20 and did so again last year. Seven English clubs have outspent them in total over the last five years.
Now, having balanced the books and expanded the stadium, Liverpool are reaping the rewards of a model built to grow sustainably. It has enabled them to deliver a statement summer and potentially more without fear of financial collapse or regulatory reprisal.
This is what behaving like one of the biggest clubs in the world looks like.