For the past four years we’ve been inundated with the financial gulf and disparity between Rangers and Celtic.
That the green and whites’ budget above anything else was a reason there was a chasm between the two, and it would be hard or even impossible to bridge.
Obviously this argument ignores football not being played in the bank but on a football pitch – ask Leicester and Atletico, to name but two.
But more importantly, this argument now appears to be outright false.
While Celtic have had numbers to spend, a look at their incomings suggests they may not be as far ahead as most people fear.
If we look at their 17/18 incomings, it’s filled with the likes of £1M man Jonny Hayes, similar amount for now-departed Martin Compper, and Jack Hendry from Dundee in a fee barely more than that. In short, nothing scary at all.
18/19 isn’t all that more overwhelming. Edouard obviously is the big one at £9M, but aside him the expenditure really doesn’t scream at us.
And then this summer has seen £7M man Julien, £3M Bolingoli and £2M man Greg Taylor among a few others.
Now we know Rangers have spent around £12M each transfer window since 2017. So what’s the difference here.
Well the big shouty neon sign has been the stunning numbers Celtic have sold for, not bought for. Multimillions have come in for the Armstrongs, Dembeles and Tierneys – £50M for those three, give or take.
But the money isn’t clearly going straight back into the squad.
No, Celtic’s spending isn’t really that much more frightening than Rangers’.
Indeed, Rangers’ acquisition of Kent was the third biggest transfer fee in Scottish history behind only Flo and Edouard, while this summer we also spent big on Filip Helander.
It doesn’t seem like the spending actual between the two Old Firm clubs is really that far apart, only the actual budget.
Celtic have their megamillions to spend, but they don’t actually do it.