• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Daniel Levy - Chairman

Grays_1890 said:
The TV money is not forever though and there is this obsession to spend it as soon as you get it, even in football that has no economical sense thats just stupid.

Alli is on more than half of Toure at Emirates Marketing Project and is twice the player, so what does it mean for us? End of the world? Match their wages to keep him just in case? Or do you accept that some clubs are spending mental money that we will never match.

Compare apples with apples mate, we will never match Emirates Marketing Project, Man United and Chelsea for wages and equally they pay over the odds for their talent in the same way West Ham do. Walkers wage is not a good benchmark in that he is in the minority in terms of what he earns. I would say if you look over Europe Rose is in good company for what he earns if not on slightly more than a number of left backs.
Click to expand...

Well for now, the money coming into the game shows no signs of slowing down, it's increasing every year! Biding our time in the hope that UEFA decide to clamp down on the financially doped clubs is a fallacy, by the time if happens (if it ever does) we will have lost the majority of our key players. UEFA's actions have shown they have no interest in kicking out the worst/repeat offenders, yes Emirates Marketing Project, PSG I'm looking at you. There will always be ways to circumvent the rules as the two clubs I mentioned have done so time and time again.

I accept we will never match certain clubs spending, take a look at my post again, I said we should try to close the gap i.e. get closer by increasing our wage bill. I accept we won't ever be able to fully close the gap but standing still is not the solution either.

I suppose players like Rose may look at clubs in Europe in regards to what other LB's earn but he would be more concerned with what his peers in the same league as him earn. If I was earning less than someone who performed a similar role to me and I was performing at a much higher level, I may not immediately look to hand in my notice and look for another job but I would rightly start to ask questions.
 
galeforce said:
for now we have to suck it up, have a sensible wage structure and do the best we can with it, losing players is inevitable, doesn't mean we can't continually move forward though
Click to expand...

No one is saying it doesn't have to remain sensible though, just increase it in accordance to the rise in revenue, player sales and tv money.
 
Jurgen the German said:
No one is saying it doesn't have to remain sensible though, just increase it in accordance to the rise in revenue, player sales and tv money.
Click to expand...

Rose had a pay rise and a 5 year contract, he knew the TV money was coming in as did he agent because we all knew, if he decided to sign a contract for 65k a week he should not expect to look at an increase a year later....that for me is the long and short of it
 
Jurgen the German said:
No one is saying it doesn't have to remain sensible though, just increase it in accordance to the rise in revenue, player sales and tv money.
Click to expand...

I think thats happening, Walker didn't leave for another 20%, he's doubled his wage, and we'll always be at risk of that because there are three teams in our league with limitless funds, our budget is in a bubble because thats our business plan. We've massively overachieved in the last few years, we shouldn't let that distort our expectations.
 
Gazzasrightboot said:
It is though. Our wage to turnover ratio has stayed the same which means that wages have risen in line with our turnover.
Click to expand...

we wont know that until the last years wages get released/leaked whatever tbf - i looked in to it myself on the numbers available (swiss ramble iirc) and if we keep our wages to turnover ratio at the same percentage as last season then theoretically we should have some money to play with...

off the top of my head our turnover has risen from 209m to 279m which means 48% of turnover increases from 100m to 134m - 34m/52 weeks is 650k - we had some new contracts last year but certainly not 650k per weeks worth, probably not even close to half of that


obviously this is all back of fag packet working out but there's enough numbers out there to get a good idea of whats what and based on the numbers seen so far i would not be surprised to see our wages to turnover % decrease somewhat - depending on new signings/new contracts signed from here on in
 
Last edited:
Gazzasrightboot said:
It is though. Our wage to turnover ratio has stayed the same which means that wages have risen in line with our turnover.
Click to expand...

We pay in line with our earnings, which actually makes us one of the higher paying teams in world football.

That said, we can and will never compete with the doped and super rich clubs (nor should we) so there will always be another level of wages players can earn beyond us.

Sadly its just a fact of life.

Its worth pointing out though, that on balance that pool of potential clubs to earn a fortune past Spurs is actually fairly limited. Rose doesn thave a huge amount of choice in a move to get the big bucks. Realistically it will be but one or two clubs even interested.
 
We can keep hungry players with potential on our wage levels the issue is (nice problem to have) we now have Top Class players in every position and they will be looking to be paid as such. We will keep on increasing wages as our Turnover increases but this will not allow us to compete with the 5 richer English clubs above us on wages.

We just don't earn as much.
 
Gazzasrightboot said:
It is though. Our wage to turnover ratio has stayed the same which means that wages have risen in line with our turnover.
Click to expand...

the issue is whether we can raise the wage turnover ratio from the current 50% to lets say between 55 to 60%

the club is still being properly run, we are not doing a Leeds or whatever, just paying our top players a little more to keep them happy. At some point anyway the likes of Dele, Eriksen, Alderweireld are going to leave, the wage ratio will come back down and we will bank over 300 mill in transfer fees from them 3 alone. There is nothing to lose in increasing the ratio at least 5-10%
 
The issue is it looks like we have money to increase out wage limit but it hasn't happened.
2015/16 revenue - £210m wages - £100m wages to turnover - 48%

Looking at the figures out there for TV money increases. We made £45m more from the Premier League TV money and £20m more from CL even though we went out at the groups

2016/17 revenue estimate - £275m if we keep wages to turnover at 48% we have wages now at wages at £132m

Have the players have a 32% wage increase since summer 2015/16?
 
Would you take last season as the basis for the next 4 or 5 years worth of wages?

We have one good year, everyone gets a 1/3 pay rise, and a long contract, what happens then if our revenue drops?
 
DeleHarry said:
the issue is whether we can raise the wage turnover ratio from the current 50% to lets say between 55 to 60%

the club is still being properly run, we are not doing a Leeds or whatever, just paying our top players a little more to keep them happy. At some point anyway the likes of Dele, Eriksen, Alderweireld are going to leave, the wage ratio will come back down and we will bank over 300 mill in transfer fees from them 3 alone. There is nothing to lose in increasing the ratio at least 5-10%
Click to expand...
It is quite likely that we can do this after we have moved into and paid for the new stadium. Whether we can do it while having to pay off the new stadium is another question. I think it is very sensible to keep wages as low as possible at the moment to guard against stadium costs rising. Once the costs (and repayment terms) are known then Levy could look at tweaking this.
 
DeleHarry said:
the issue is whether we can raise the wage turnover ratio from the current 50% to lets say between 55 to 60%

the club is still being properly run, we are not doing a Leeds or whatever, just paying our top players a little more to keep them happy. At some point anyway the likes of Dele, Eriksen, Alderweireld are going to leave, the wage ratio will come back down and we will bank over 300 mill in transfer fees from them 3 alone. There is nothing to lose in increasing the ratio at least 5-10%
Click to expand...

This is based on what?
  1. Your super financial seaweed hanging in the kitchen?
  2. You've been analysing our latest profit and loss?
 
Modric THFC said:
The issue is it looks like we have money to increase out wage limit but it hasn't happened.
2015/16 revenue - £210m wages - £100m wages to turnover - 48%

Looking at the figures out there for TV money increases. We made £45m more from the Premier League TV money and £20m more from CL even though we went out at the groups

2016/17 revenue estimate - £275m if we keep wages to turnover at 48% we have wages now at wages at £132m

Have the players have a 32% wage increase since summer 2015/16?
Click to expand...
I don't think it is prudent to consider CL revenue as part of the turnover that we can allocate to wages as it isn't 'guaranteed' enough. However that is counter-balanced by the fact that we have apparently increased our kit manufacturer and shirt sponsor revenues by a combined amount of £35+ million a year.
 
Finney Is Back said:
It is quite likely that we can do this after we have moved into and paid for the new stadium. Whether we can do it while having to pay off the new stadium is another question. I think it is very sensible to keep wages as low as possible at the moment to guard against stadium costs rising. Once the costs (and repayment terms) are known then Levy could look at tweaking this.
Click to expand...

Exactly. How can the ration be increased when we have a huge stadium project to pay for. Those other clubs that have higher ratios, don't have a big stadium to finance (except for Chelsea). Take the stadium out of the equation, and I would agree that we could increase that ratio slightly but I don't think those who are calling for that ratio to be increased are comparing apples with apples.
 
Modric THFC said:
The issue is it looks like we have money to increase out wage limit but it hasn't happened.
2015/16 revenue - £210m wages - £100m wages to turnover - 48%

Looking at the figures out there for TV money increases. We made £45m more from the Premier League TV money and £20m more from CL even though we went out at the groups

2016/17 revenue estimate - £275m if we keep wages to turnover at 48% we have wages now at wages at £132m

Have the players have a 32% wage increase since summer 2015/16?
Click to expand...

Some may have had more. Kane, Alli, Rose, and countless others signed extensions to their contracts. I would imagine that there would be a hike in their salary.
 
billyiddo said:
we wont know that until the last years wages get released/leaked whatever tbf - i looked in to it myself on the numbers available (swiss ramble iirc) and if we keep our wages to turnover ratio at the same percentage as last season then theoretically we should have some money to play with...

off the top of my head our turnover has risen from 209m to 279m which means 48% of turnover increases from 100m to 134m - 34m/52 weeks is 650k - we had some new contracts last year but certainly not 650k per weeks worth, probably not even close to half of that

obviously this is all back of fag packet working out but there's enough numbers out there to get a good idea of whats what and based on the numbers seen so far i would not be surprised to see our wages to turnover % decrease somewhat - depending on new signings/new contracts signed from here on in
Click to expand...

Well according to Graham Roberts, Kane got close to £400k a week in the last two weeks of the season. Admittedly this is an extreme example given the results that we got, but I think that we will probably see that the wages have increased. Whether it is as much as turnover, I don't know but the main reason for that is the £800m bill for the stadium that has to be financed from somewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back