Apologies if this has been 'threaded' before, but why are we so skint ? We are now selling Zi Zi because the 'future of the club is at stake' according to Pards, so where did all the money go ?
We had debt when we were in the Prem, we made a loss of £9m the year we were relegated, we then lost a huge chunk of TV income (over £20m PA) if I remember rightly.
We sold players (£11.5m for D Bent after we paid Ipswich) but still had very high player wages costs for this division and a large squad plus we spent more money on new players last summer and at Xmas (ZZ, Varney, Gray etc)
As T said simple case of income being lower than outgoings and need to be balanced
I can't find the article, but I did find a few 'wages to turnover' stats from the 2006/07 relegation season.
The average Premier League club spent 63% of it's turnover on wages. Spurs were the thriftiest club, spending only 42%. Charlton spent 95% of their dough on wages and got relegated, and that is going to cause some issues (we're currently seeing them).
[quote][cite]Posted By: Paddy Powell[/cite] The average Premier League club spent 63% of it's turnover on wages. Spurs were the thriftiest club, spending only 42%. Charlton spent 95% of their dough on wages and got relegated[/quote]
I'm sorry but that's just criminal. If we really had a wage bill that high i think those responsible should hang there heads in shame. It's all very well fans shooting off about taking it to the next level but when the board and management lose there sense of relity in this way it's very depressing.
to compete you have to raise your levels and offer more incentives and raise your income. the fans complain about being ripped off, stung for prices, stung in the shop for rubbish items. to not purchase big players on big money they get accused of not being ambitious enough to spend too much on players making a gamble they are accused of losing their sense of reality
surely we have to take into account that spurs are one of the most expensive season tickets in the premiership, surely this goes somewhere to helping ease the blow of the high wages.
there are only so many things clubs can surely do to attract players. its another vicious circle. Spurs have a history, they have good players playing for them, and a sell out crowd. players would want to play there if given the opportunity. there are clubs that aren't as successful that have to use other means to attract players, either by wages, or incentives etc, and that is where smaller clubs get slightly out of their league by aiming to compete. Thats just the way it goes, every season the same.
Its easy to say in retrospect, and I don't mean it as a criticism but I think perhaps we could have brought more in from lower leagues to help keep the wage bill down, instead of some of the journeymen we picked up, I guess that will be the policy in future and if we go up possibly.
I imagine the club knew they had high value assets when they went to 95% wages vs turnover, this was a gamble to stay in the PL for the new Sky deal which might well have dropped the percentage down to something around 70% if we stayed up. Bent was always insurance against relegation.
Totally agree Suzi, who'd want to be a football chairman?!
[cite]Posted By: Chunes[/cite]What position would we be in if we never had Darren Bent to sell? Administration by the sounds of it.
On the other hand if we'd kept Darren Bent maybe we'd have been promoted last year?
The stupid wages and signing on fees that footballers "earn" is strangling the game. I admire everything the board have done, but as soon as we accomplish something the goalposts move and we are back to chasing the game. Many people have criticised the acquistions of Faye, Traore and JFH etc (and correctly so), but at the time they were the only type of player with prem experience that we we could realistically afford. Even with Andy reid we took a punt - not on his skill but he had an injury record that dropped his price, if he'd had a couple of good seasons with Spurs after his transfer from Forest he'd have been out of our league. You might say buy from the lower leagues and train up and as a Premiership team we struck gold with Darren Bent, but not every lower league purchase works out -eg McLeod etc.
[cite]Posted By: Chunes[/cite]What position would we be in if we never had Darren Bent to sell? Administration by the sounds of it.
off course not, as we wouldn't have aquired players by loan or purchases that were offset by the sale. if we'd have gone up or stayed up we'd have been quids in and none the wiser.
this seasons sale is to prepare for the non parachute payment for next season. there is money moving in and out of the club on a monthly basis because of purchases and sales of players going back ages due to appearances, moving on percentages all sorts. I think people still think when you agree a deal for say 5k for a player, you hand over the player for a suitcase of 5k cash!
I know we were running at higher than the recommended percentage of 60% wages to turnover when Curbs was at the helm. I believe it was approaching 75% at one point. I think the topic got discussed in a rare sensible moment on netaddicks.
95% does seem incredibly high though and presumably is that high because of the signings made by Messrs Dowie and Mills at the start and prior to season 2006/7.
That said presumably somebody at Board level sanctioned a budget for them and they didn't have complete autonomy to act on their own initiative in running up that poor ratio.
One can only surmise that the carrot of £30 million plus Sky money made the Board less prudent than normal and encouraged them to take a gamble on paying big wages in the hope of staying up and cashing in.
As we know it didn't work and we have to dust ourselves down and go again from where we are now.
[cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite]what do you suggest then?
That none of the moaning that has gone on over the summer break has actually achieved anything. Stop looking back people, you can't change or go back to the past.
We all care about the club, but short of having lots of cash and injecting into the set-up we'll just have to our bit by supporting the team on a match day* and spending a few bob on tickets, food & drink and if we like, merchandise.
*As I understand it, the main purpose of being a supporter.
Im as pi55ed off as the next fan that we aint got a brass farthing, and teams like Blackpool and Plymouth are spending etc, but moaning aint going to get us more money.
People should look back at the past. Not an awfull long time ago the club used to ask people to spend time and their own money on painting various bits of the Valley. Now that truely is skint !!
Agree with you there GH. I can and I'm sure many others can remeber back 10 - 20 years or more.
This current squad aint that bad compared to some seasons. We've had 6/7 years in the sun and now its back to what most of really know.
If some think its bad today remember back to Selhurst.
Because- metaphorically speaking- the club has taken an involuntary pay cut since being relegated, and because of one or two bad signings the season before last. Yes, our options may have been limited but they still seem rushed in retrospect, and why buy a player that is in the twilight of his career with little to prove (I'm referring to JFH here)? If we were promoted last season, this would be a non issue though.
As Suzi rightly suggested, we need to pre-empt the lack of a parachute payment otherwise profligacy will lead to more debt, high and unnecessary hikes in the cost of admission, merchandise e.t.c.... And besides, even a whole new team of galacticos is no guarantee of promotion.
We spent 95% of our income on wages? That's frightening. But £8m isn't mortal when you think about it. The problem is, the board seem to realise that if left untreated then this can easily become £15 or £20 mil and this will escalate rapidly if -in the worst-case scenario- we find ourselves quagmired in this division for some time.
I don't really care what other clubs are doing around us, I'm only concerned about who we're buying, what we're saving, etc etc. Who cares if blackpool spend over 5m this summer, chances are if the gamble they make pays off or doesn't pay off they'll find themselves in a 'balancing the books period' like all clubs find themselves in.
every club has had a dry - non spending period. I don't know why people think we're anything unusual. I know its just because we love our club and we don't pay much attention to anyone else.
Stone Church gremlin - JFH scored 20 goals the season before for M'boro a side at the time who was in our 'mini league' it didn't work out for us *but* only in hindsight was is a bad signing.
West Brom were in exactly the same situation to us now at the start of last season, and sold Davis, Koumas, Kamara, McShane, Kouszak and Ellington. Granted both Davis and Kouszak were on loan for a season before but they recouped over £20million in their second season in the CCC
Comments
I'll see if I can find the article.
It's not like we were sitting on pots of gold
We sold players (£11.5m for D Bent after we paid Ipswich) but still had very high player wages costs for this division and a large squad plus we spent more money on new players last summer and at Xmas (ZZ, Varney, Gray etc)
As T said simple case of income being lower than outgoings and need to be balanced
The average Premier League club spent 63% of it's turnover on wages. Spurs were the thriftiest club, spending only 42%. Charlton spent 95% of their dough on wages and got relegated, and that is going to cause some issues (we're currently seeing them).
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Football/documents/2008/05/29/deloitte.pdf
The average Premier League club spent 63% of it's turnover on wages. Spurs were the thriftiest club, spending only 42%. Charlton spent 95% of their dough on wages and got relegated[/quote]
I'm sorry but that's just criminal. If we really had a wage bill that high i think those responsible should hang there heads in shame. It's all very well fans shooting off about taking it to the next level but when the board and management lose there sense of relity in this way it's very depressing.
to compete you have to raise your levels and offer more incentives and raise your income. the fans complain about being ripped off, stung for prices, stung in the shop for rubbish items.
to not purchase big players on big money they get accused of not being ambitious enough
to spend too much on players making a gamble they are accused of losing their sense of reality
surely we have to take into account that spurs are one of the most expensive season tickets in the premiership, surely this goes somewhere to helping ease the blow of the high wages.
there are only so many things clubs can surely do to attract players. its another vicious circle. Spurs have a history, they have good players playing for them, and a sell out crowd. players would want to play there if given the opportunity. there are clubs that aren't as successful that have to use other means to attract players, either by wages, or incentives etc, and that is where smaller clubs get slightly out of their league by aiming to compete. Thats just the way it goes, every season the same.
Totally agree Suzi, who'd want to be a football chairman?!
On the other hand if we'd kept Darren Bent maybe we'd have been promoted last year?
The stupid wages and signing on fees that footballers "earn" is strangling the game. I admire everything the board have done, but as soon as we accomplish something the goalposts move and we are back to chasing the game. Many people have criticised the acquistions of Faye, Traore and JFH etc (and correctly so), but at the time they were the only type of player with prem experience that we we could realistically afford. Even with Andy reid we took a punt - not on his skill but he had an injury record that dropped his price, if he'd had a couple of good seasons with Spurs after his transfer from Forest he'd have been out of our league. You might say buy from the lower leagues and train up and as a Premiership team we struck gold with Darren Bent, but not every lower league purchase works out -eg McLeod etc.
off course not, as we wouldn't have aquired players by loan or purchases that were offset by the sale. if we'd have gone up or stayed up we'd have been quids in and none the wiser.
this seasons sale is to prepare for the non parachute payment for next season. there is money moving in and out of the club on a monthly basis because of purchases and sales of players going back ages due to appearances, moving on percentages all sorts. I think people still think when you agree a deal for say 5k for a player, you hand over the player for a suitcase of 5k cash!
: )
:o(
95% does seem incredibly high though and presumably is that high because of the signings made by Messrs Dowie and Mills at the start and prior to season 2006/7.
That said presumably somebody at Board level sanctioned a budget for them and they didn't have complete autonomy to act on their own initiative in running up that poor ratio.
One can only surmise that the carrot of £30 million plus Sky money made the Board less prudent than normal and encouraged them to take a gamble on paying big wages in the hope of staying up and cashing in.
As we know it didn't work and we have to dust ourselves down and go again from where we are now.
Get rid of them on freecycle!
http://uk.freecycle.org/
That none of the moaning that has gone on over the summer break has actually achieved anything. Stop looking back people, you can't change or go back to the past.
We all care about the club, but short of having lots of cash and injecting into the set-up we'll just have to our bit by supporting the team on a match day* and spending a few bob on tickets, food & drink and if we like, merchandise.
*As I understand it, the main purpose of being a supporter.
Im as pi55ed off as the next fan that we aint got a brass farthing, and teams like Blackpool and Plymouth are spending etc, but moaning aint going to get us more money.
People should look back at the past. Not an awfull long time ago the club used to ask people to spend time and their own money on painting various bits of the Valley. Now that truely is skint !!
This current squad aint that bad compared to some seasons. We've had 6/7 years in the sun and now its back to what most of really know.
If some think its bad today remember back to Selhurst.
As Suzi rightly suggested, we need to pre-empt the lack of a parachute payment otherwise profligacy will lead to more debt, high and unnecessary hikes in the cost of admission, merchandise e.t.c.... And besides, even a whole new team of galacticos is no guarantee of promotion.
We spent 95% of our income on wages? That's frightening. But £8m isn't mortal when you think about it. The problem is, the board seem to realise that if left untreated then this can easily become £15 or £20 mil and this will escalate rapidly if -in the worst-case scenario- we find ourselves quagmired in this division for some time.
every club has had a dry - non spending period. I don't know why people think we're anything unusual. I know its just because we love our club and we don't pay much attention to anyone else.
We still a relatively large player budget compared to too many clubs in this division. Much of that is going on wages however but it is still a cost
Or padded seats had been installed in the Dirctors area (now its padded cells !)
West Brom were in exactly the same situation to us now at the start of last season, and sold Davis, Koumas, Kamara, McShane, Kouszak and Ellington. Granted both Davis and Kouszak were on loan for a season before but they recouped over £20million in their second season in the CCC