Let's talk about the wage bill

[RichieS]

When you look at it from a European perspective our wages are bang on where they should be for the quality we have. People talk about the market rate for Rose being £160k... that's £80k more than Marcelo reportedly earns.

If we give in to the obscene English pay grade we will always be overpaying for average ability compared to the rest of Europe.

It's a ridiculous situation in England right now where every journalist is writing that Tottenham underpay rather than pointing out that Jesse Lingard earns more than players like Isco, Asensio, Carvajal, and Navas.

The English game has lost all sense of value.

Danny Rose is the best left back in the PL and some people believe that because the money clubs would pay him £150k p/w then we are deliberately undervaluing him. These people (and it seems Danny himself, sadly) conveniently ignore the fact that at his current salary he's already one of the highest paid LB's in the world.

The players in our squad worth rocking the boat for are Eriksen, Alli and Kane. Perhaps Toby too. Not Kyle Walker and Danny Rose.

 

[riggi]

Really not sure how I feel about this. I'm with @Dougal but I also feel that if it just takes one summer of splashing the cash and then we have a tittle... then surely it's worth it?

Whens the bubble supposed to be bursting? I've heard that being said for 10 odd years now.

 

[worcestersauce]

Next year we move into our new ground and at least double our match day income and from that point Daniel Levy will have to reassess players wages, in fact I will be absolutely astonished if he hasn't already started planning for this process, after all, what is the point of having the big new stadium if not to challenge at the top, there is none and I don't believe the club think there is either.
I posted about this months ago, with the additional revenue we must increase wages and what I asked was do we wait until then or begin the process now, either way it must be done otherwise we will lose all the goodwill of the players.
It's no coincidence that the players who seem to be asking questions are the players at their peak earning age, Walker and Rose are 27 and Alderwiereld is 28, for them it is jam today or possibly jam tomorrow but not much chance of the day after tomorrow so it concentrates their mind.
I'll make a prediction, Christian Eriksen is 25 so within the next two years we will have the same situation with him, no doubt when we start negotiating his contract extension; I think he is a good man and very respectful and so will not cause bad feeling but if he feels he is not seeing the rewards for his commitment he will not sign it and we had better get used to it.
Dele Alli is 21 and, I genuinely believe, loving his football at Spurs but when he is 27 if we haven't embraced our new found income and used it to pay our players well he will be off, as it happens with him it will come sooner because he is just so special.
The other angle is that if we don't address this then we will never bring in players at the top of their game, we'll always be on the cusp with a team full of young talent and potential that leaves when it starts to peak, plus, of course, we won't have Pochottino. I'm not sure some of our fans get this but when there were reports that Barkley wanted £120k there was uproar, it wasn't true but had it been it wouldn't have been outrageous, not in todays climate and we need to accept that.
Please don't think I am pessimistic about this, on the contrary I am optimistic because I believe Levy reads this the same way as me, we obviously won't try to beat the wages they pay at the money spunkers but we will compete, certainly with the Arsenals and Liverpools of this world rather than the West Hams and Crystal Palaces.
I have supported our wage structure but it has to lift itself up, incresing due to the additional revenue but also maybe loosening the percentage of turnover too, the stakes are higher now, no guts no glory and the game, as we all know, is all about the glory.

 

[Donki]

Really not sure how I feel about this. I'm with @Dougal but I also feel that if it just takes one summer of splashing the cash and then we have a tittle... then surely it's worth it?

Whens the bubble supposed to be bursting? I've heard that being said for 10 odd years now.

I honestly don't think winning the league will do much for players wanting to leave, call me cynical but until we can offer our stars around £200K a week we can't expect to buy or keep them long term.

 

[riggi]

I honestly don't think winning the league will do much for players wanting to leave, call me cynical but until we can offer our stars around £200K a week we can't expect to buy or keep them long term.

That'll do it for me. We can get relegated after that, get rid of the glory hunters and get back to moody away trip up norf

 

[noggen]

I honestly don't think winning the league will do much for players wanting to leave, call me cynical but until we can offer our stars around £200K a week we can't expect to buy or keep them long term.

We can pay 14 players 200k a week just with the tv-money gained every year.

 

[Donki]

We can pay 14 players 200k a week just with the tv-money gained every year.

Do you honestly believe it's as simple as that? Look at how the TV money has increased transfer fees? What ever it gave us it gave the rest of the PL the same.

 

[Graysonti]

Well what we are doing is investing in infrastructure that means we will be eventually be able to compete with the likes of Chelsea, Man City etc (Well. Partially, we're never going to be bankrolled like they are).

If you look at this report by the telegraph earlier this year you will see the financial disparity there is between us and arsenal currently.

Arsenal Revenue £350million
Tottenham Revenue £209million.

That is what we are currently up against, again, that is higher when you take in to context the proper big three clubs - Utd, Chelsea, City.

Half of turnover is going on wages. We could debate how much of that percentage should be spent, but we don't know what pressures that places on other aspects of the club and its day to day running. 2016 resulted in a 38 million profit before tax.

For teams below us, they have less than us. Where up to 75% of their turnover go on their wages. But they are also posting significant losses too. Which is no way to run a football club.

The guardian did a piece on a club by club basis and their financial position which can be found here. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jun/01/premier-league-finances-club-by-club

Historical information.

Revenue diffs this year, next and going forward will narrow significantly.

More fans paying tickets, new AIA, CL appearance, Nike will all narrow that.

 

[CrazyConrad]

Well it is that simple. Either do it or don't. Build on what we have or lose it.

Liverpool's turnover isn't that much more than ours but their wage bill is £120m per season higher than ours. We have the lowest wages to turnover in the league, so there's clearly plenty of room for manoeuvre.

I suspect DL will be putting the club on the market as soon as the stadium's built so I don't think he really cares that much about anything else.

Others have already pointed towards the inaccuracy of this statement but I would like to post the following:

Wage Bill for 2016/17 season
Man City - 225m
Man Utd - 220.8m
Chelsea - 218m
Arsenal - 200.5m
Liverpool - 165.6m
Tottenham - 121.2m
Everton - 83m

 

[Graysonti]

Seriously - people need to stop looking at the statutory accounts - they are historical information docs that are out of date and produced for CT purposes.

Think of the ramp and differences between then and now.

One example, 18,000 more Season Ticket holders paying serious £

2nd place finish producing performance £

Nike deal - ramp of what £15m pa ?

AIA - £35m per annum and third biggest - £20m ramp ?

CL appearance money and tickets.

All year on year uplifts

 

[Arthur Hucksake]

Give every member of the first team squad a 10k a week bump, except Danny Rose.

 

[SlickMongoose]

Seriously - people need to stop looking at the statutory accounts - they are historical information docs that are out of date and produced for CT purposes.

Think of the ramp and differences between then and now.

One example, 18,000 more Season Ticket holders paying serious £

2nd place finish producing performance £

Nike deal - ramp of what £15m pa ?

AIA - £35m per annum and third biggest - £20m ramp ?

CL appearance money and tickets.

All year on year uplifts

And half the squad have signed new contracts over the last year, and CL bonuses will have been paid. Lots of extra money out as well as in. People use the published accounts because everything else is guesswork.

Really not sure how I feel about this. I'm with @Dougal but I also feel that if it just takes one summer of splashing the cash and then we have a tittle... then surely it's worth it?

Whens the bubble supposed to be bursting? I've heard that being said for 10 odd years now.

If only spending money to win the league was a sure thing.

We could spend £100m this window and go backwards. You just don't know.

 

[thebenjamin]

Others have already pointed towards the inaccuracy of this statement but I would like to post the following:

Wage Bill for 2016/17 season
Man City - 225m
Man Utd - 220.8m
Chelsea - 218m
Arsenal - 200.5m
Liverpool - 165.6m
Tottenham - 121.2m
Everton - 83m

It was reported recently in the Telegraph that Liverpool's wage bill for this season was the equal highest in the league

 

[thekneaf]

It was reported recently in the Telegraph that Liverpool's wage bill for this season was the equal highest in the league

Yet Coutinho is only on £150k a week. How are they getting to £220m?

 

[thekneaf]

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/pics/sp...player-s-weekly-wages-revealed-sportgalleries

 

[Shadydan]

Like I have said, I think the TV/CL money could be used based upon the figures I have seen to increase wages where needed in order to keep our best players happy, once again, I am not claiming to be a financial wizard but it seems like this is a solid argument that holds up when looking at the figures and our profit.

I am not advocating for every single player getting a raise, I am however saying that, if we wish to keep our best players and not have this squad be dismantled we need to do one of two things...

1. Win trophies on a consistent basis (even this may not be enough to keep players who consider themselves to be underpaid in regards to the market but it gives us a better chance.)

2.Increase our wage bill

What other options do we have here that would not result in us eventually losing our best players and even possibly our manager? I want neither of those things to happen and I know you don't want it to happen either but I really do believe it is inevitiable, like I have said, not every player is Harry Kane and will stay because they support the club or because of loyalty and the truth is, Kane is on a high wage as it stands so he has less room to complain, even if even he could be earning more elsewhere, it's still more incentive.

It's not "wild fantasies" a wild fantasy is beliving we can continue the way we are and still remain competitive, THAT is a wild fantasy, it's a wild fantasy to believe that a stadium is going to keep players here, it's a wild fantasy beliving that footballers will remain loyal because of the project.

I am not saying you believe those things by the way, but many do, that's my concern.

Of course, like I said, business involves risk but we are at a point now where if we refuse to take any risks whatsoever then we risk something even bigger, losing the foundation that Poch has built over the last 3 seasons, I think it's a risk worth taking by backing him and showing more ambition in terms of transfers and wage structure personally.

I am not ignoring Poch's quotes, I have simply seen this happen far too often with Daniel, last minute buys like Sissoko not working out, not getting the managers intended targets, I am simply saying, what Poch says will happen and what Daniel does are two entirely different things.

I am not saying you are wrong for staying calm and I don't want to ignore your posts because I enjoy reading what you have to say and seeing your opinions, it offers a good counterbalance to mine but nonetheless, you must understand why I might be slightly pessmisitic in regards to what we may or may not do in the market before the windows closes?

You must surely understand why I fear this team coming apart if we do not increase our wage structure and support the manager with the targets he wants?

You must also surely understand why I am annoyed that we are going into the season with holes that needed addressing weeks ago in our squad, like RB and have yet to be addressed?

Please show me the figures if you're so sure we can afford to pay out huge wages and sustain such an increase, I know you say that you're not an expert and neither am I, in fact we're probably going off the same sources but you seem so adamant that it's easy to increase the wage without any consequence so I would really like to see what is making you so sure we can do that.

I'm just gonna throw some numbers out there but here's the thing... if you give your best players an increase then you're not being fair to the other members of your squad. If for example we decided to pay Kane, Lloris, Eriksen, Dele etc...£150k a week and have the likes of Janssen, Nkoudou, Wimmer on the low £50's then the squad players will get pissed off and disheartened because your star players are getting preferential treatment. Basically if I'm a squad player and the guy who I'm backing up is getting £150k a week more than me I'm going to fed up and either leave knowing that I'm not going to be a first teamer because I'm getting treated like a 2nd class player or even better still knock on the chairman's door to ask for an increase...in that scenario If I'm Janssen and I know that Kane is getting paid that amount, the next time I negotiate a contract I'm going to be thinking that the club clearly has money and I'm instructing my agent to get another £50k a week.

Oh but it doesn't stop there the youth players who are the bread and butter of our club, Marcus Edwards knows that Kane managed to get the club to pay him £200k and Jannsen managed to double his wage, despite him not starting a league game for Spurs you can bet that him and his agent are pretty sure they can get him £40k a week, I mean this kid's a star and Chelsea and Man City can easily match his wage so if Spurs are paying the big bucks then what's the reason that he can't get paid that kind of money? Josh Onomah thinks hold up if M.E is getting paid that much and he hasn't even kicked a fucking ball for Spurs where as I have then I deserve at least what he's getting paid...and so on.

And this is the problem when you start to hike player's wages up, it has a domino affect on the players and staff and everyone wants more money. Despite TV money on the increase as well as Premiership money it has to go somewhere right? (how else are we going to pay those loans we get from the banks to build the stadium) But what about Champions League money? Well that's not sustainable at all so we can't continue to count on that because there's no guarantees that we'll qualify for the competition year in year out. In fact last season when we qualified for the CL we gave pretty much the majority of our squad increased wages (I'd really like to see how much we spent on wages last year) so the club have done pretty much what you've wished for regardless. This is the exact reason why people cite doing a Leeds in these constant exchanges when we is comes to talk this convo because it sounds like some people are happy to risk money we don't have despite us having to pay off for a huge investment that people either seem to forget about or don't understand how much we are actually shelling out to pay for this stadium.

The harsh truth is that we're dealing with money teams who can outbid us and outspend us so it doesn't matter how much we increase the wage bill by if we decided to pay Rose and Walker £150k a week this summer and they performed like they did last season, If City or Utd came in for them they'd still offer higher wages and their head's will be turned I mean ffs Utd are paying Lukaku £250k a week, how much money do you think that we can offer Kane to ward off interest, there's going to be a club out there who can pay him £300k a week minimum, do you think we'll get anywhere near that? Sure it may get a player to stay another season but when you take into account the above or jeopardising squad harmony just because a player isn't happy at his wage then would you rather risk pissing one player off or risk pissing the whole squad off therefore totally opposing the manager's philosophy of squad harmony and togetherness?

You state that Levy hasn't backed Poch and you presented the Sissoko transfer as an example but you do realise that Sissoko was the manager's target as he was desperately looking for pace in the side, this has been confirmed by the ITK's...Poch wanted him and Levy panicked and got him - again there's evidence there to suggest that Levy has backed the manager to the point where he's actually laying out club record transfers and for the first time since 2008 we were in a negative spend but you know Levy is tight and all and doesn't spend any money whatsoever so we're just go with that rhetoric. to fulfill our agenda shall we.

I think that Pochettino understands the situation we face at present with the finances, he like everyone is desperate to get players in but unlike Conte who's been mouthing off to his board all summer, Poch has come out and backed Levy and the club in public and clearly stated that there will be signings this window, repeatedly! That to me says it all, mutual trust and respect between the chairman and the manager, his body language or his quotes don't strike me as someone willing to pack it in just yet.

In that respect I think Poch has a massive say on transfers but looks at the market and sees players like Gylfi being valued for £50m an Barkley the same despite only having a year left on his contract and actually understands that it's just better to wait until prices go down which will in turn give us a bit more money to play with if we need secure another target or even plan to hike a player's wages, that's not negligence that's just smart business planning and I'm willing to believe the guys who have got us this far actually know what they're doing despite what Talksport want to tell you. For us we're not in great need of strengthening our squad and I think we can afford to wait until the end of the window because our first eleven speaks for itself hence the reluctance to go overboard in the transfer market thus far.

Bottom line is for me I'm staying calm until the window closes when we can actually asses our transfer window and in regards to increasing the wage bill we have and I think we will continue to do so based on performances, if players don't like the way we pay or how much we pay then they shouldn't sign the contract in the first place.

 

[thebenjamin]

Others have already pointed towards the inaccuracy of this statement but I would like to post the following:

Wage Bill for 2016/17 season
Man City - 225m
Man Utd - 220.8m
Chelsea - 218m
Arsenal - 200.5m
Liverpool - 165.6m
Tottenham - 121.2m
Everton - 83m

Liverpool wage bill passes £200m

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.li.../liverpools-wage-bill-rockets-25-12700881.amp

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

I honestly don't think winning the league will do much for players wanting to leave, call me cynical but until we can offer our stars around £200K a week we can't expect to buy or keep them long term.

We can pay our players £200k a week...........and yet, if Chelsea, City or Utd want them they'll offer £300k - unfortunately the only one of those three that we could ever realistically hope to match wagewise is Utd, as City and Chelsea pretty much have a bottomless pit with no real financial constraints.
Getting into a wage race against teams that have endless money would be a fanciful and pointless game.

 

[Donki]

We can pay our players £200k a week...........and yet, if Chelsea, City or Utd want them they'll offer £300k - unfortunately the only one of those three that we could ever realistically hope to match wagewise is Utd, as City and Chelsea pretty much have a bottomless pit with no real financial constraints.
Getting into a wage race against teams that have endless money would be a fanciful and pointless game.

I think you underestimate United, their annual income is absolutely massive. Fuck me they pay Lindgard £100k a week.

 

[spurs9]

Danny Rose is the best left back in the PL and some people believe that because the money clubs would pay him £150k p/w then we are deliberately undervaluing him. These people (and it seems Danny himself, sadly) conveniently ignore the fact that at his current salary he's already one of the highest paid LB's in the world.

The players in our squad worth rocking the boat for are Eriksen, Alli and Kane. Perhaps Toby too. Not Kyle Walker and Danny Rose.

This!! We need to keep Kane and Eriksen at all costs, try hard to keep Alli & Toby, if Dier improves on the pitch I would add him in too and the rest, if they want more money than we can afford, we let them go (for a high fee) and replace them with someone with higher potential but lower status. This is the best we can do within these means.

Luckily, Kane and Eriksen don't appear to be motivated financially at all, as long as we not taking the piss, but we do need to remain competitive and win a trophy or two to keep them IMO and here lies the biggest challenge.