The real world tightens its belt, England's clubs rub their wealthy fingers together in apparent disdain. The EPL winter transfer spending accounts for more than the whole of France, Germany, Italy and Spain combined.
As an example, the Bundesliga in Germany spent just over S$31 million moving around 42 players. But Hamburg alone raked in S$27 million by selling Nigel de Jong to Manchester City.
Italy squealed that there is no money at all in the market (David Beckham excepted). England flaunts the stuff.
Two reasons. On Tuesday, the Premier League settled a new television deal in excess of £1; billion for three seasons from 2010 to 2013. That is with Sky TV for the rights to show on British television 92 of the 138 Premier League games.
There is more to bargain for. Rival channel Setanta is bidding for the remaining matches, and will have new opposition from ESPN for those rights. Then there are the overseas rights to screen English football to 200 countries - currently worth another S$1.3 billion.
Heard enough yet? The EPL hasn't. It is negotiating for Internet and mobile phone revenues that it expects to at least equal the fortune now flowing through the clubs.
This money explains why half the 20 clubs have owners and investors from America, Russia and Asia. If nobody goes bust, the goose is still golden.
To earn it, the teams must stay in the Premier League. And for even more, they aim at the Champions League.
Staying up drives Tottenham Hotspur to the market. Just spending what Abu Dhabi is willing to invest propels Man City. Between the two, they account for half of January's spending.
The sheikhs bought City Craig Bellamy, Wayne Bridge, de Jong, and Shay Given.
Spurs spent over S$103 million on Carlo Cudicini and Wilson Palacios, and buying back three players they sold last year - Jermain Defoe, Robbie Keane and Pascal Chimbonda.
However, Tottenham paid only a fraction of the published prices.
There is little transparency in what the clubs agree on and what the media print. The figures get distorted for publicity reasons.
The only traders actually making cash purchases are City's sheikhs, and once upon a time, Roman Abramovich at Chelsea.
The rest is on deposit and instalment. The banks, it seems, still make loans to the clubs.
Fifa president Sepp Blatter says a lot of silly things, but when he described players as modern slaves, he was right to the extent that they are bought and sold by clubs hoping to profit on their services.
One particular transfer brings the system into question. Andrei Arshavin left his boyhood club Zenit St Petersburg after trying to get away for a year.
Last summer, he dreamed of Barcelona, but Zenit thought the bid derisory. This year, right up to and beyond the deadline, Arsenal and Zenit squabbled before finally cutting a deal.
We do not know how many millions are involved. Zenit are bankrolled by Gazprom, the state-owned Russian energy company which treated Arshavin like a son it did not want to let go. It prevaricated in hopes that the transfer would stall, and Arshavin would have nowhere to run to.
Arsenal persevered and somehow, 23 hours and 52 minutes after the Monday transfer window shut, the deal was announced. Well, two versions of it, anyhow.
Arsenal said it amounts to no more than £12 million. Zenit claimed that they would get £16.9 million when Arshavin meets all the targets set for him over 41/2 seasons.
Time will tell whether Arshavin, at 27, can adapt to English football. He has helped his chances by paying for English lessons twice a week for two years.
'The past weeks have been hard,' he tells us. 'Now I am happy. I like to be a Gunner.'
He knows the nickname, now he will try the boots for size.
