thetrees Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Wage bill, last 5 years accounts (2012-2008) £69,609,000 -16.5% £83,395,000 4.3% £79,974,000 13.3% £70,577,000 39.9% £50,447,000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Wage bill, last 5 years accounts (2012-2008)£69,609,000 -16.5% £83,395,000 4.3% £79,974,000 13.3% £70,577,000 39.9% £50,447,000 You may or may not be concerned that this post is virtually unreadable on a smartphone. It might help to indicate which year each figure relates to. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Descending. The first figure is 2012 (£69609000) through to the last figure, which is 2008 (£50447000) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romavillan Posted January 3, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted January 3, 2014 That coupled with the increased TV revenue and (finally) the shedding of the last of the dead wood next summer should put us in a really good position Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulver Posted January 3, 2014 Author Share Posted January 3, 2014 Oh yeah, I remember all that 'wait a few years and we'll be well placed to take advantage' bollocks from the Ellis era BREAD TODAY, JAM TOMORROW 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Oh yeah, I remember all that 'wait a few years and we'll be well placed to take advantage' bollocks from the Ellis era BREAD TODAY, JAM TOMORROW We were in such a good position to kick on in the early 90s, all it would have taken was a bit of foresight and investment and we could easily have risen with the big clubs. Even after missing the boat we were still around the mark in the late 90s and early 2000s but we just pissed it away by not striking while the iron was hot. If we'd gotten in, invested well, and built a global brand, like Man U, Liverpool and Arsenal did as the Premier League started and football became all about money, we could be a big club now. That said we could also be Leeds Utd I guess. I wasn't old enough to follow football over the other side of the world in the early 90s, but it feels to me like we missed the boat big time. Now with the absolute horseshit that is FFP and post Abramovich and Abu Dhabi injecting silly money into football, we're under a big glass ceiling and our best hope is probably to be like Everton, constantly competitive but never actually winning anything or playing in the CL. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldendays Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Thunder-power your right.. but lets be honest about this, competition effectively ended once Abramovic et al entered the game. Further more, the financially doped 4 clubs are the only ones able to win the league and this cannot change in my lifetime unless some other multi billionaire throws an immoral amount of money at it. Aside from Liverpool, Spurs and Everton, the remaining 13 clubs to more or less of a degree, are effectively fighting not to go down (to be fair even Everton are only there due to loan deals that skew the numbers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 If we'd gotten in, invested well, and built a global brand, Simple as that. No idea why they didn't think of doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 If we'd gotten in, invested well, and built a global brand, Simple as that. No idea why they didn't think of doing it. Not simple at all. But some ambition and investment in the 90s could have made a lot of difference. If Randy Lerner had come along a decade earlier who knows where we might be now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Where has the £51m figure come from, the latest accounts haven't been released yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 If we'd gotten in, invested well, and built a global brand, Simple as that. No idea why they didn't think of doing it. Not simple at all. But some ambition and investment in the 90s could have made a lot of difference. If Randy Lerner had come along a decade earlier who knows where we might be now. Kind of pointless entertaining it, though isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 If we'd gotten in, invested well, and built a global brand, Simple as that. No idea why they didn't think of doing it. Not simple at all. But some ambition and investment in the 90s could have made a lot of difference. If Randy Lerner had come along a decade earlier who knows where we might be now. Kind of pointless entertaining it, though isn't it? Pointless AND depressing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 So it's not worth fretting over really - we've got enough on our plate to deal with at the minute! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 I've seen that point made before and its stupid. We didn't know what was happening in terms of finances and how it would effect the future of the club. Now all the info is out then yes its clear he was idiotic allowing spending to spiral out of control. Some did, and it was questioned at the time. Interesting that those who feel qualified to condemn with hindsight actually wouldn't, by their own admission, have any clue as to how to manage the financial end of any football club. Several people questioned it at the time, but were told by that idiot Krulak not to worry our pretty little heads about it, and that "spending is where we planned it to be" and that the "5 year plan is still on schedule". Then when it was clear that spending was wildly out of control, he disappeared into the night without a word, shamelessly taking the "Proud History, Bright Future" bollocks with him. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danishlad Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Q. Is there another club in the Premier League right now that has a lower wage bill to turnover ratio than ours ? (well apart from the mega rich ones with unbelievable income revenues of course) I think our last published turnover income was 75/80m, this will now be boosted by a further 20m ish from the new Sky deal (i believe) and some hopeful improvements that the club will have made on the commercial side to earn their salaries. So lets say it'll be near 100m next time around. As we all know, our current 25 man squad wage bill must be tiny these days, especially given that our ITK man claims a lot of Lambert's signings are earning between 5-15k a week. Lets estimate the current squad wages, i've also included our players that are out on loan Guzan 30k Steer 5k Given 25k (not sure what percentage of his wage we're paying so i'm guessing 25k is half) Donacien 1k Hutton 30k Baker 10k Clark 15k Bennett 15k Vlaar 25k Okore 20k Luna 15k Lowton 15k Stevens 5k N'Zogbia 40k Bacuna 15k El Ahmadi 15k Albrighton 15k Westwood 15k Delph 30k Herd 5k Sylla 10k Gardner 5k Tonev 10k Carruthers 2k Johnson 2k Ireland 30k (not sure what percentage of his wage we're paying so i'm guessing 30k is half) Benteke 30k Agbonlahor 50k Weimann 25k Kozak 20k Bowery 2k Delfouneso 5k (not idea what Blackpool are contributing) Burke 1k Helenius 10K Bent 30k (not sure what percentage of his wage we're paying so i'm guessing 30k is half) So that's around 578,000 per week, or around 30 million a year. obviously that's all based on guess work but even so it can't be that far off. In summation, i think we can finally put this 'we need to get our wage bill in order' bollocks as an excuse for not spending to bed once and for all. UTV How about this, a new way to pay your players. A sliding scale on a weekly basis. If you are in the match day team you receive say, 30k plus bonuses or reductions (point etc, reductions for lost games) If your picked for the match day bench 10k If your not picked for either a stable wage of 5k per squad member Let's say Benteke plays a game for Villa and we win. He would get 30k plus match win bonus 10k. If we lose, then minus 10k he gets only 20k. This would be same for all in the starting line up. Lets say Beteke is on the bench and Weimann starts in. Weimann would get 30 k and Benteke only 10k. Seems fair enough to me. I'm not sure how this would work in reality but I'm fed up with players ripping the club off getting big wages and not giving a xxxx. This would be a you play, you perform, you win, you get rewarded. If your injured you get the standard 5k regardless of who you are. If you don't perform then your easy to replace as you are only on 5k a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danwichmann Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Q. Is there another club in the Premier League right now that has a lower wage bill to turnover ratio than ours ? (well apart from the mega rich ones with unbelievable income revenues of course) I think our last published turnover income was 75/80m, this will now be boosted by a further 20m ish from the new Sky deal (i believe) and some hopeful improvements that the club will have made on the commercial side to earn their salaries. So lets say it'll be near 100m next time around. As we all know, our current 25 man squad wage bill must be tiny these days, especially given that our ITK man claims a lot of Lambert's signings are earning between 5-15k a week. Lets estimate the current squad wages, i've also included our players that are out on loan Guzan 30k Steer 5k Given 25k (not sure what percentage of his wage we're paying so i'm guessing 25k is half) Donacien 1k Hutton 30k Baker 10k Clark 15k Bennett 15k Vlaar 25k Okore 20k Luna 15k Lowton 15k Stevens 5k N'Zogbia 40k Bacuna 15k El Ahmadi 15k Albrighton 15k Westwood 15k Delph 30k Herd 5k Sylla 10k Gardner 5k Tonev 10k Carruthers 2k Johnson 2k Ireland 30k (not sure what percentage of his wage we're paying so i'm guessing 30k is half) Benteke 30k Agbonlahor 50k Weimann 25k Kozak 20k Bowery 2k Delfouneso 5k (not idea what Blackpool are contributing) Burke 1k Helenius 10K Bent 30k (not sure what percentage of his wage we're paying so i'm guessing 30k is half) So that's around 578,000 per week, or around 30 million a year. obviously that's all based on guess work but even so it can't be that far off. In summation, i think we can finally put this 'we need to get our wage bill in order' bollocks as an excuse for not spending to bed once and for all. UTV How about this, a new way to pay your players. A sliding scale on a weekly basis. If you are in the match day team you receive say, 30k plus bonuses or reductions (point etc, reductions for lost games) If your picked for the match day bench 10k If your not picked for either a stable wage of 5k per squad member Let's say Benteke plays a game for Villa and we win. He would get 30k plus match win bonus 10k. If we lose, then minus 10k he gets only 20k. This would be same for all in the starting line up. Lets say Beteke is on the bench and Weimann starts in. Weimann would get 30 k and Benteke only 10k. Seems fair enough to me. I'm not sure how this would work in reality but I'm fed up with players ripping the club off getting big wages and not giving a xxxx. This would be a you play, you perform, you win, you get rewarded. If your injured you get the standard 5k regardless of who you are. If you don't perform then your easy to replace as you are only on 5k a week. Would be great, if you could get all the clubs to agree to it. Until that happens we're competing with other clubs and if we want decent players we can't have a system like that. We struggle enough to attract anyone as it is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danishlad Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Q. Is there another club in the Premier League right now that has a lower wage bill to turnover ratio than ours ? (well apart from the mega rich ones with unbelievable income revenues of course) I think our last published turnover income was 75/80m, this will now be boosted by a further 20m ish from the new Sky deal (i believe) and some hopeful improvements that the club will have made on the commercial side to earn their salaries. So lets say it'll be near 100m next time around. As we all know, our current 25 man squad wage bill must be tiny these days, especially given that our ITK man claims a lot of Lambert's signings are earning between 5-15k a week. Lets estimate the current squad wages, i've also included our players that are out on loan Guzan 30k Steer 5k Given 25k (not sure what percentage of his wage we're paying so i'm guessing 25k is half) Donacien 1k Hutton 30k Baker 10k Clark 15k Bennett 15k Vlaar 25k Okore 20k Luna 15k Lowton 15k Stevens 5k N'Zogbia 40k Bacuna 15k El Ahmadi 15k Albrighton 15k Westwood 15k Delph 30k Herd 5k Sylla 10k Gardner 5k Tonev 10k Carruthers 2k Johnson 2k Ireland 30k (not sure what percentage of his wage we're paying so i'm guessing 30k is half) Benteke 30k Agbonlahor 50k Weimann 25k Kozak 20k Bowery 2k Delfouneso 5k (not idea what Blackpool are contributing) Burke 1k Helenius 10K Bent 30k (not sure what percentage of his wage we're paying so i'm guessing 30k is half) So that's around 578,000 per week, or around 30 million a year. obviously that's all based on guess work but even so it can't be that far off. In summation, i think we can finally put this 'we need to get our wage bill in order' bollocks as an excuse for not spending to bed once and for all. UTV How about this, a new way to pay your players. A sliding scale on a weekly basis. If you are in the match day team you receive say, 30k plus bonuses or reductions (point etc, reductions for lost games) If your picked for the match day bench 10k If your not picked for either a stable wage of 5k per squad member Let's say Benteke plays a game for Villa and we win. He would get 30k plus match win bonus 10k. If we lose, then minus 10k he gets only 20k. This would be same for all in the starting line up. Lets say Beteke is on the bench and Weimann starts in. Weimann would get 30 k and Benteke only 10k. Seems fair enough to me. I'm not sure how this would work in reality but I'm fed up with players ripping the club off getting big wages and not giving a xxxx. This would be a you play, you perform, you win, you get rewarded. If your injured you get the standard 5k regardless of who you are. If you don't perform then your easy to replace as you are only on 5k a week. Would be great, if you could get all the clubs to agree to it. Until that happens we're competing with other clubs and if we want decent players we can't have a system like that. We struggle enough to attract anyone as it is! Yes I know what you mean, maybe the win bonuses could be higher, meaning that a full season 38 appearances and a lot of wins means you hit mega bucks. Maybe this system would mean we would have a better all round squad and not some Spanish cheap left back for example. Meaning more points..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danwichmann Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 The bonuses would have to be so generous that they would raise the overall wage bill to persuade players to sign up. Until football implodes (let's hope soon) nothing like this is going to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danishlad Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Yeah it is a long shot.. But I kind of like the idea that it's the shirt that is worth the money and not necessarily the player.... Example if Grealish played against Liverpool here this weekend and won ... Boom 40k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 The issue has always been non-producing large earners spot on....with the emphasis on non-producing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts