Wages/Turnover relationship

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/graphics/2008/05/29/sfnpre129cbig.gif

How have Everton and Villa managed to be higher than us?

Spurs are only using 42% of turnover on wages!

No wonder they are chucking money around this summer. Have comparatively little debt compared to every other side at the bottom of that table, Source, and they have plenty of room to maneuver when it comes to transfer spending. Granted they bought a few players last summer but they'll still have a sizable chunk spare.

How old are those stats ffs.

Football Genius wrote:How old are those stats ffs.

They're the stats for last season.

I'm sick of them telling us we have £70m of debt. We have zero debt motherfuckers, keep up! Also i think this is from before the new TV deal came in, so it is quite out of date and next years will be very different.


Dwarf, Spurs have a big operating income, but the sums still don't add up, they're still spending well over what they should be. Current rumours say they're close to signing Bostock for £5m and Dunne for £6m(grr) which would take them up to around £90m for the last 12 months!

Kimbo wrote:
I'm sick of them telling us we have £70m of debt. We have zero debt motherfuckers, keep up! Also i think this is from before the new TV deal came in, so it is quite out of date and next years will be very different.

Was it cleared when Ashley came to the club? If it is then that's why as it's last years stats.

Dwarf wrote:

Kimbo wrote:
I'm sick of them telling us we have £70m of debt. We have zero debt motherfuckers, keep up! Also i think this is from before the new TV deal came in, so it is quite out of date and next years will be very different.

Was it cleared when Ashley came to the club? If it is then that's why as it's last years stats.

Yeah he wiped it out, although they claim it was nearer £100m overall.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/ashley-reveals-newcastle-had-pound100m-debt-395156.html

"So I paid £140m for the club with the expectation that there was a debt of £70m. Actually it was around £100m so there was suddenly an extra £30m to find. But I just thought: 'Shut up about it'. I'm a big boy and I didn't cry.

"To me the real issue was this: Was the debt bigger than I thought? Yes. Would I have changed my mind if I'd known the full extent of the debt? Not one iota."

Football Genius wrote:How old are those stats ffs.

It says, relatively clearly, that they're from the 2006/7 season.


Nothing there really surprises me. If you want someone to blame for ludicrous ticket prices, don't let it be foreign investors looking to fleece people, let it be footballers getting paid 10s of thousands every week for very mediocre performances.

Fidel wrote:

Football Genius wrote:How old are those stats ffs.

It says, relatively clearly, that they're from the 2006/7 season.


Nothing there really surprises me. If you want someone to blame for ludicrous ticket prices, don't let it be foreign investors looking to fleece people, let it be footballers getting paid 10s of thousands every week for very mediocre performances.

that is true but the players are seeing clubs making alot of money and they want in aswell.

Dwarf wrote:Spurs are only using 42% of turnover on wages!

No wonder they are chucking money around this summer. Have comparatively little debt compared to every other side at the bottom of that table, Source, and they have plenty of room to maneuver when it comes to transfer spending. Granted they bought a few players last summer but they'll still have a sizable chunk spare.

People still believe Darren Bent is on £94k p/w

Scott McClellan wrote:

Dwarf wrote:Spurs are only using 42% of turnover on wages!

No wonder they are chucking money around this summer. Have comparatively little debt compared to every other side at the bottom of that table, Source, and they have plenty of room to maneuver when it comes to transfer spending. Granted they bought a few players last summer but they'll still have a sizable chunk spare.

People still believe Darren Bent is on £94k p/w

I bet you looked at that article and thought every players wages were about right, all 49 of them, BUT Bents. Am i right TS?

Super Madrid wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Football Genius wrote:How old are those stats ffs.

It says, relatively clearly, that they're from the 2006/7 season.


Nothing there really surprises me. If you want someone to blame for ludicrous ticket prices, don't let it be foreign investors looking to fleece people, let it be footballers getting paid 10s of thousands every week for very mediocre performances.

that is true but the players are seeing clubs making alot of money and they want in aswell.

Part of the reason they make so much money is because the ticket prices are so high. I don't think we should scapegoat anyone, we should just all try to have a more realistic appraisal of what football is worth economically. And kill all the football agents. Or just frame them as pedophiles.

Fidel wrote:

Super Madrid wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Football Genius wrote:How old are those stats ffs.

It says, relatively clearly, that they're from the 2006/7 season.


Nothing there really surprises me. If you want someone to blame for ludicrous ticket prices, don't let it be foreign investors looking to fleece people, let it be footballers getting paid 10s of thousands every week for very mediocre performances.

that is true but the players are seeing clubs making alot of money and they want in aswell.

Part of the reason they make so much money is because the ticket prices are so high. I don't think we should scapegoat anyone, we should just all try to have a more realistic appraisal of what football is worth economically. And kill all the football agents. Or just frame them as pedophiles.

I agree. everyone on all levels should see that wages above 65k/week is more then enough. if players could do that there should be big profits that should given to lower levels or more important things.
i like the way Real are run(in theory at least) that the fans own the club and the directors and president dont get paid. hopefully something will be done in the future perhaps a wage cap like in America.

Kimbo wrote:

Football Genius wrote:How old are those stats ffs.

Dwarf, Spurs have a big operating income, but the sums still don't add up, they're still spending well over what they should be. Current rumours say they're close to signing Bostock for £5m and Dunne for £6m(grr) which would take them up to around £90m for the last 12 months!

Are you saying Levy & co. a White-Collar criminals ?

Kimbo wrote:

Dwarf wrote:

Kimbo wrote:
I'm sick of them telling us we have £70m of debt. We have zero debt motherfuckers, keep up! Also i think this is from before the new TV deal came in, so it is quite out of date and next years will be very different.

Was it cleared when Ashley came to the club? If it is then that's why as it's last years stats.

Yeah he wiped it out, although they claim it was nearer £100m overall.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/ashley-reveals-newcastle-had-pound100m-debt-395156.html

"So I paid £140m for the club with the expectation that there was a debt of £70m. Actually it was around £100m so there was suddenly an extra £30m to find. But I just thought: 'Shut up about it'. I'm a big boy and I didn't cry.

"To me the real issue was this: Was the debt bigger than I thought? Yes. Would I have changed my mind if I'd known the full extent of the debt? Not one iota."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7426717.stm

Is that nutwing about 1min17secs in?