it leapt that season because of the CL. I read somewhere that CL prize money goes directly to players as bonuses.
Wage costs leapt from £67m in 2009-10 to £91m in 2010-11. But wage costs haven't increased greatly thereafter:
In 2009-10, our turnover was £120m. Wages were £67m or, in other words, 56% of turnover
In 2010-11, our turnover was £164m. Wages were £91m or, in other words, 55% of turnover.
In 2011-12, our turnover was £144m. Wages were £90m or, in other words, 63% of turnover.
In 2012-13, our turnover was £147m. Wages were £96m or, in other words, 65% of turnover.
In 2013-14, our turnover was £181m. Wages were £99m or, in other words, 55% of turnover.
What's important to note is that, although wage costs remained high in the years immediately following our Champions League season, revenues did not. Hence the sudden leap in the wage to turnover ratio. But when the huge, new TV deal kicked in, the relatively high wage to turnover ratio was slashed. The overall wage bill increased modestly but the wage to turnover ratio was normalised back to the magic 55% level.
If that level is maintained (and I believe that it will be, as far as possible) and assuming greater income from subsequent TV deals and the new stadium etc, then even if Spurs' wage bill will inevitably rise over the coming years, so too will the money we have available to spend on other costs - including transfer fees.