-
Interesting article re: Wagebill
https://www.planetfootball.com/quick...er-southampton
Seems to back up Dalmans assertion that we are top 6 for wagebill.
One in the eye too for Bulut and his cult followers who like to make out we are operating like a Rotherham or Plymouth.
Goes to show what a fantasatic job Mckenna and Robins are doing at Ipswich and Coventry and also playing some terrific stuff, especially Ipswich.
Hes got to be manager of the year Mckenna.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J R Hartley
Absolutely.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
values are from the capology website, I've seen some on there previously that were highly dubious
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rjk
values are from the capology website, I've seen some on there previously that were highly dubious
Our own Chairman has also stated that we are top 6 for wagebill but still people want to make out we are the poor relation in the division :shrug:
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J R Hartley
Our own Chairman has also stated that we are top 6 for wagebill but still people want to make out we are the poor relation in the division :shrug:
I'm prepared to believe we are upper half in wages easily, 6th is entirely plausible, especially as we were under a transfer embargo so brought in a number of free transfers and loans .
I'm not sure capology is accurate at all though - it has us down as paying nat Phillips £65k a week? does anyone think that's likely?
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
The wage bill may be high but you would imagine that our ongoing payments regarding historical transfer fees should be lower than many of the teams in our division.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rjk
I'm prepared to believe we are upper half in wages easily, 6th is entirely plausible, especially as we were under a transfer embargo so brought in a number of free transfers and loans .
I'm not sure capology is accurate at all though - it has us down as paying nat Phillips £65k a week? does anyone think that's likely?
No, but if you put together a table headed "clubs most likely to get value for what they spend on players' wages", then we'd be very close to the bottom..
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rjk
I'm prepared to believe we are upper half in wages easily, 6th is entirely plausible, especially as we were under a transfer embargo so brought in a number of free transfers and loans .
I'm not sure capology is accurate at all though - it has us down as paying nat Phillips £65k a week? does anyone think that's likely?
I actually think that loans like this even at an extorniate wage, works far better than a depreciating asset on the books.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
If we're 6th, that puts us top of the teams that are not on parachute payments. I can't see it. I'm not saying it's not true, but there's definitely room for doubt. It's not like Siopis and Goutas are star players.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NYCBlue
If we're 6th, that puts us top of the teams that are not on parachute payments. I can't see it. I'm not saying it's not true, but there's definitely room for doubt. It's not like Siopis and Goutas are star players.
the site has us paying the full whack of Nat Phillips wage, even though he's only here for 5 months, you can probably knock a couple of million off the total for him alone (unless we got completely screwed over on that deal)
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
I was actually going to post last night about player wages.
I've heard Swansea have recently agreed £16k a week for a contract from their youth setup. Compare that to LRZ who was only making about 5k at his best in rugby which is in dire straits financially does make me worry.
Clubs are stuck between a rock and a hard place, either risking losing a future star or paying wages that will inevitably cripple them so when I hear a kid is getting £16k a week (if true) £50k for Ramsey doesn't seem too farfetched.
However the article is from October and is based on estimates and when you look at actual accounts on companies house, for 2023, we were only at 14,227,000 then.
https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/d...283af1e417cbcf
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WJ99mobile
I was actually going to post last night about player wages.
I've heard Swansea have recently agreed £16k a week for a contract from their youth setup. Compare that to LRZ who was only making about 5k at his best in rugby which is in dire straits financially does make me worry.
Clubs are stuck between a rock and a hard place, either risking losing a future star or paying wages that will inevitably cripple them so when I hear a kid is getting £16k a week (if true) £50k for Ramsey doesn't seem too farfetched.
However the article is from October and is based on estimates and when you look at actual accounts on companies house, for 2023, we were only at 14,227,000 then.
https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/d...283af1e417cbcf
16k a week for an academy player is ridiculous for the championship, that's basically a top championship player salary range. some clubs don't have anyone on that much
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Take out Aaron Ramsey and that's got to knock down the wage bill quite considerably
Robinson is on a good whack too
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rjk
16k a week for an academy player is ridiculous for the championship, that's basically a top championship player salary range. some clubs don't have anyone on that much
I don’t think 16k a week has been a “top championship player salary” for a while now.
Wolves had someone on 100k a week when they went up and that was nearly 7 years ago.
Whilst that is no doubt an exceptional outlier, I wouldn’t be surprised if top end championship players are in the 30k-50k a week range.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Did I hear right today that Leeds owe £190 million in transfer fees at this time? How can that be right, basically they’ve bought a whole team but not paid for anyone yet? Great gamble for promotion, but if it’s doable why don’t we all do it?
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WJ99mobile
I was actually going to post last night about player wages.
I've heard Swansea have recently agreed £16k a week for a contract from their youth setup. Compare that to LRZ who was only making about 5k at his best in rugby which is in dire straits financially does make me worry.
Clubs are stuck between a rock and a hard place, either risking losing a future star or paying wages that will inevitably cripple them so when I hear a kid is getting £16k a week (if true) £50k for Ramsey doesn't seem too farfetched.
However the article is from October and is based on estimates and when you look at actual accounts on companies house, for 2023, we were only at 14,227,000 then.
https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/d...283af1e417cbcf
The idea we're paying 50k for Ramsey is extremely far fetched, as is the idea Swansea are paying an academy player 16k a week. Most of their first team aren't even on that
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SLUDGE FACTORY
Take out Aaron Ramsey and that's got to knock down the wage bill quite considerably
Robinson is on a good whack too
Let’s just take everyone out and then we will have a zero wage bill.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NYCBlue
If we're 6th, that puts us top of the teams that are not on parachute payments. I can't see it. I'm not saying it's not true, but there's definitely room for doubt. It's not like Siopis and Goutas are star players.
I reckon we're probably around about that. You have the relegated teams and then I imagine West Brom and Norwich above us, I'd assume we spend less than Boro and Hull as well. Beyond that I imagine the differences aren't that massive until you get to the newly promoted clubs
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
We paid £22 million in wages the season before according to https://swissramble.substack.com/p/c...r%20impairment.
The majority of our wages are on players that Bulut didn't bring in. We won't be paying £65k a week for Phillips and I expect we will be having a big clear out this Summer.
Has a single Cardiff fan said we're like Rotherham when it comes to finances? The OP is talking nonsense.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Canton Kev
I don’t think 16k a week has been a “top championship player salary” for a while now.
Wolves had someone on 100k a week when they went up and that was nearly 7 years ago.
Whilst that is no doubt an exceptional outlier, I wouldn’t be surprised if top end championship players are in the 30k-50k a week range.
I know for a fact that a middling championship team had to push the boat out a couple of seasons ago to prevent their best 2 players leaving on a free, and they increased their highest salary to 17.5k to keep them.
outside the parachute payment clubs 16k is still a high wage for the championship
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WJ99mobile
£50k for Ramsey doesn't seem too farfetched.
he isnt on anywhere near that if what ive been told is true, not even close
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
I still don’t believe it but I think most of us knew the wages would shoot up while under the embargo, the flip side I’ve seen an article saying we are one of the best for points v transfer fee over the season. As usual truth somewhere in between.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
here you go 2b2bdoo
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Sorted by money spent <a href="https://t.co/DzF15j5Wh2">pic.twitter.com/DzF15j5Wh2</a></p>— luke (@louorns) <a href="https://twitter.com/louorns/status/1778347597717016684?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 11, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Thanks, yeah that’s what I seen. I don’t think either article paint a fair reflection tbh.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MOZZER2
here you go 2b2bdoo
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Sorted by money spent <a href="https://t.co/DzF15j5Wh2">pic.twitter.com/DzF15j5Wh2</a></p>— luke (@louorns) <a href="https://twitter.com/louorns/status/1778347597717016684?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 11, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Thats a fascinating analysis. I'm a bit pissed without my specs but if I read that right based on cost per victory us and QPR should be promoted and the Owls should win the play-offs.
I'd like to see the one for PL. Luton would've walked it.no doubt.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J R Hartley
Let’s just take everyone out and then we will have a zero wage bill.
Probably score more goals too
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
I don’t get how anyone can know current wage figures for each player in this season’s Championship when we’re months away from getting the Accounts of the clubs involved in the public domain. Are we really to believe that we’re spending more than £7 million than Hull? However, I’m in agreement with those who say the embargo had only a limited impact on our workin the summers transfer.window and, although I can’t prove it, I firmly believe that the money Bulut had available last summer was enough to have led to a much more attractive style of football, and equally successful in terms of results, than we’ve seen since late October if he was so minded.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Madassa
Thats a fascinating analysis. I'm a bit pissed without my specs but if I read that right based on cost per victory us and QPR should be promoted and the Owls should win the play-offs.
I'd like to see the one for PL. Luton would've walked it.no doubt.
Amazing with an embargo too and lost the three best players, what a job!
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
North Cardiff Blue
Amazing with an embargo too and lost the three best players, what a job!
:hehe::hehe::hehe::hehe::hehe:
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J R Hartley
:hehe::hehe::hehe::hehe::hehe:
Hope you're more awake today :hehe::thumbup:
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
the other bob wilson
I don’t get how anyone can know current wage figures for each player in this season’s Championship when we’re months away from getting the Accounts of the clubs involved in the public domain. Are we really to believe that we’re spending more than £7 million than Hull? However, I’m in agreement with those who say the embargo had only a limited impact on our workin the summers transfer.window and, although I can’t prove it, I firmly believe that the money Bulut had available last summer was enough to have led to a much more attractive style of football, and equally successful in terms of results, than we’ve seen since late October if he was so minded.
Exactly. Signing two players on loan last summer that cost their parent clubs £15m and £4m. The EFL really come down hard on us with that embargo. :hehe:
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
The embargo may have done us a favour.
We may have ended up paying out fees for ageing players from abroad.
Didnt Siopsis buy out his contract with his former club? I wonder what his signing on fee was?
I have read that we had to rely on scraps in the summer. Well Bowler , Panzo , Grant would have been taken I reckon by many in this league. Bulut also got that dreadful Runnarson who hed worked with before. Throw in Goutas , Siopsis , Ramsey and its clear hes hardly worked on a shoestring. Hes also been able to extend contracts on certain players.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hilts
The embargo may have done us a favour.
We may have ended up paying out fees for ageing players from abroad.
Didnt Siopsis buy out his contract with his former club? I wonder what his signing on fee was?
I have read that we had to rely on scraps in the summer. Well Bowler , Panzo , Grant would have been taken I reckon by many in this league. Bulut also got that dreadful Runnarson who hed worked with before. Throw in Goutas , Siopsis , Ramsey and its clear hes hardly worked on a shoestring. Hes also been able to extend contracts on certain players.
:thumbup:
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hilts
The embargo may have done us a favour.
We may have ended up paying out fees for ageing players from abroad.
Didnt Siopsis buy out his contract with his former club? I wonder what his signing on fee was?
I have read that we had to rely on scraps in the summer. Well Bowler , Panzo , Grant would have been taken I reckon by many in this league. Bulut also got that dreadful Runnarson who hed worked with before. Throw in Goutas , Siopsis , Ramsey and its clear hes hardly worked on a shoestring. Hes also been able to extend contracts on certain players.
You make some good points, he had to work hard to get players in a massively reduced pot, and we couldn't pay a fee for a player, it was a disadvantage but he made the most of a difficult situation.
Next season he will still be able to sign loans, but will also have the whole transfer market open and will be able to sign actual players from the overseas leagues that he knows so well. It's a much better situation and should lead to fewer duds like Panzo and Runnarson.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
North Cardiff Blue
You make some good points, he had to work hard to get players in a massively reduced pot, and we couldn't pay a fee for a player, it was a disadvantage but he made the most of a difficult situation.
Next season he will still be able to sign loans, but will also have the whole transfer market open and will be able to sign actual players from the overseas leagues that he knows so well. It's a much better situation and should lead to fewer duds like Panzo and Runnarson.
With any luck he wont be here next season to make any signings - loan or permanent.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J R Hartley
With any luck he wont be here next season to make any signings - loan or permanent.
Who would you want as a replacement out of interest , as Bulut is highly regarded apparently
https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/th...ht-now-ranked/
I wouldn’t have thought Bulut wasn’t a cheap appointment and will be more expensive next year if he moves his family over from Germany.
His backroom team must be costing the club a bit aswell when you add on wages , accommodation costs , flights home etc.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TWGL1
Who would you want as a replacement out of interest , as Bulut is highly regarded apparently
https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/th...ht-now-ranked/
I wouldn’t have thought Bulut wasn’t a cheap appointment and will be more expensive next year if he moves his family over from Germany.
His backroom team must be costing the club a bit aswell when you add on wages , accommodation costs , flights home etc.
The problem is it's not who he wants it's who Tan and Dalman appoint, history tells us it's five bad appointments to every good one, Warnock was the last decent appointment before Bulut.
If he gets his wish it will be some daft useless ex-player, and he'll be moaning even more next season.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TWGL1
Who would you want as a replacement out of interest , as Bulut is highly regarded apparently
https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/th...ht-now-ranked/
I wouldn’t have thought Bulut wasn’t a cheap appointment and will be more expensive next year if he moves his family over from Germany.
His backroom team must be costing the club a bit aswell when you add on wages , accommodation costs , flights home etc.
Craig Bellamy.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J R Hartley
Craig Bellamy.
Would be perfectly happy with that.
-
Re: Interesting article re: Wagebill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
A Quiet Monkfish
Would be perfectly happy with that.
It wont happen whilst Tan is here but the question was who would I want.