It's a bit blurry and tbh I can't be arsed with it, but is the crux of his argument that our turnover to wages ratio to low?
Surely the reason for that is that we sold/moved on a lot of senior high wage players last window?
You can't replace all those high earners in one swoop, so is it not just timing?
Yes the whole article is based off the wage to turnover ratio which seems to be the topic of the day lately (used to be net spend, wonder what has changed...) and of course there's a logical explanation behind it.