ok, if we don't spend on transfer fees as you imply, how do we sign the players exactly? Buy them a birthday cake or serenade them?
Lower transfer fees isn't the only way to cut down on your net spend, just look at what good Southampton have done with all their profit.
What if Wolves had sold Doyle after that first Premier League season, his stock was at an all time high and his contribution declined from there on, if you could've doubled your money on Doyle that would've paid for Fletcher in the same summer and given equal money as a boost to the wage budget too. Think the big problem in that respect was that so few of Mick's Premier League signings had any subsequent value, some were bought at well above their actual value and others just flopped to an extent that they become worthless.
To go with the comparison against Wigan again you can see a huge difference in that respect, they had their spate of South American signings like Palacios and Valencia who were a fair gamble but both proved themselves in the Premier League and created a healthy profit for Wigan further down the line giving them extra spending power of the likes of Wolves who could only boost their coffers with the loose change picked up from offloading people like Surman.
Let's not forget that Wolves also built a new stand during that 3 year period, which was funded purely through existing cashload I believe? Now whilst that won't be reflected in my net spend table, if anything it makes Wolves high placement more impressive that they were able to fork out for both players and stadium work simultaneously without going into the red overall. It's also a huge chunk of money that would freed up, potentially for extra wages, should Wolves once again find themselves in the Premier League.
To reiterate the point, it wasn't the lack of spending that undid Wolves in the Premier League, it's how the money was spent.
