EPL wage bill table

[Dharmabum]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...y-with-Premier-Leagues-highest-wage-bill.html



http://www.london24.com/sport/footb..._the_premier_league_wage_bill_table_1_4043074


Chelsea and Southampton are punching above their weight this season as the latest Premier League wage bill figures are released.

The Saints are only ranked 16th in the top flight in terms of their wage bill - £55.2million - and yet are currently seventh in the Premier League.

Chelsea are 10 points clear at the top of the table but are only the third-highest payers with a wage bill of £192.7million behind Manchester United (£215.8million) and Manchester City (£205million). Bottom-club Burnley’s wage bill is just £21.5million including £6million in promotion bonuses, one-tenth the size of United’s.

The biggest under-achievers are QPR, with a £75million wage bill even from a season when they were in the Championship making them the eighth-highest payers yet they are down at 19th in the table. QPR’s salary bill was almost twice what the club earned in total last season.

The wages costs and profits or losses of all top-flight clubs for 2013/14 have now been confirmed via annual accounts posted at Companies House and overall there is a close correlation between total salary bill and league position, with the current top four in the Premier League also the four biggest payers.

The combined accounts of the 20 clubs shows over overall turnover rose to £3.07billion from £2.3billion in 2012/13 with wages increasing too but at a slower rate and totalling £1.84billion compared with £1.65billion. The latest figure shows salaries account for 59.9 per cent of turnover compared with 71.7 per cent for the same 20 clubs a year before.

The increase in income is mainly down to the Premier League’s lucrative television deal that came into effect for the first time last season. The cash injection has led to six clubs who were in the red in 2012/13 now being in the black.

Apart from those clubs who were promoted from the Championship last season, only Manchester City, Aston Villa and Sunderland ended the 2013/14 season having made a financial loss.

Premier League director of communications Dan Johnson said the clubs’ decision two years ago to introduce spending controls had also contributed to a positive financial outlook

Johnson said: “There are two reasons for this. The first is increasing revenues and the second is the financial criteria the clubs have voted in two seasons ago which put financial sustainability at the heart of how they want to go forward.”

The measures introduced by the clubs capped the amount they could use television money to pay for player costs. It also put a long-term limit on a club’s overall losses.

The figures also show Sunderland are the ninth-highest payers but are 16th in the table.



Premier League clubs’ financial figures for 2013/14 (2012/13 in brackets), in order of wage bills, all sums in £ sterling.



Manchester United: wages 215.8m (180.5m); turnover 433.2m (363.1m); wages to turnover ratio 50 per cent (50 per cent); profit after tax 23.8m (146.4m).

Manchester City: wages 205m (233.1m); turnover 346.5m (271m); wages to turnover ratio 59 per cent (86 per cent); loss after tax -22.9m (-51.6m loss).

Chelsea: wages 192.7m (172.6m); turnover 319.8m (255.8); wages to turnover ratio 60 per cent (67 per cent); profit after tax 18.4m (-49.4m loss).

Arsenal: wages 166.4m (154.5m); turnover 298.7m (242.8m); wages to turnover ratio 56 per cent (64 per cent); profit after tax 7.3m (5.8m).

Liverpool: wages 144m (131m); turnover 256m (206m); wages to turnover ratio 56 per cent (63 per cent); profit after tax 0.4m (-49.9m loss).

Tottenham: wages 100.4m (96.1m); turnover 180.5m (147.4m); wages to turnover ratio 56 per cent (65 per cent); profit after tax 65.3m (1.5m).

Newcastle: wages 78.3m (61.7m); turnover 129.7m (66.5m); wages to turnover ratio 62 per cent (91 per cent); profit after tax 18.7m (9.9m).

QPR: wages 75.3m (78m); turnover 38.7m (60.6m) ; wages to turnover ratio 195 per cent (129 per cent); loss after tax -9.7m (operating loss 65.3m but £60m debt write off as one-off income injection) (-65.4m loss).

Sunderland: wages 69.5m (57.9m); turnover 104.4m (75.5m); wages to turnover ratio 67 per cent (77 per cent); loss after tax -17.1m (-13m).

Everton: wages 69.3m (63m); turnover 120.5m (86.4m); wages to turnover ratio 58 per cent (73 per cent); profit after tax 28.2m (1.6m) .

Aston Villa: wages 69.3m (71.9m); turnover 116.9m (83.7.m); wages to turnover ratio 59 per cent (86 per cent); loss after tax -3.9m (-51.8m).

West Brom: wages 65.4m (not available); turnover 86.8m (69.7m) ; wages to turnover ratio 75 per cent (not available); profit after tax 9m (£8,000).

West Ham: wages 63.9m (56.2m); turnover 114.9m (89.8); wages to turnover ratio 56 per cent (63 per cent); profit after tax 10.3m (-3.5m loss).

Swansea: wages 62.3m (48.1m); turnover 98.7 (67.1); wages to turnover ratio 64 per cent (72 per cent) profit after tax 1.7m (15.3m).

Stoke: wages 60.6m (60.3m); turnover 98.3m (75.5m); wages to turnover ratio 67 per cent (77 per cent); profit after tax 3.8m (-31.1m loss).

Southampton: wages 55.2m (41.4m); turnover 106m (71.8m); wages to turnover ratio 59.3 per cent (65.5 per cent); profit after tax 33.4m (-7.1m loss).

Crystal Palace: wages 45.7m (18.7m); turnover 90.4m (14.5m); wages to turnover ratio 50.5 per cent (124 per cent) profit after tax 17.2m (3.6m).

Hull: wages 43.3m (25.9m); turnover 84.5m (11.1m); wages to turnover ratio 64 per cent (72 per cent); profit after tax 9.4m (-25.6m loss).

Leicester: wages 36.3m (26.8m); turnover 31.2m (19.6m); wages to turnover ratio 116 per cent (136 per cent); loss after tax -20.8m (-34m).

Burnley: wages £21.5m (£15.3m); turnover 19.6m (15.2m); wages to turnover ratio 110 per cent (100.6 per cent); loss after tax -4.2m (-7.8m).

 

[chinaman]

So our position in the league table is about right.

 

[nightgoat]

So our position in the league table is about right.

Won't stop the Levy Out moaners.

 

[beats1]

Interesting that United are top with £215m per season YET that doesn't include Di Maria, Falcao, Shaw, Herrera, Rojo, Blind and Valdes

 

[yiddo23]

So our position in the league table is about right.

Money doesn't kick a ball....time to stop letting money cloud our vision, athletico have proved that what counts is what is done on the pitch

 

[Franchise60]

Won't stop the Levy Out moaners.

You seem confused. Levy is ultimately the person who decides where our wage bill lies. This defends Poch's performance more than Levy's.

Nothing to do with Levy out, but how does the chairman get credit for the team performing to the exact spending expectation put forth by the chairman?

 

[Lilbaz]

Interesting that United are top with £215m per season YET that doesn't include Di Maria, Falcao, Shaw, Herrera, Rojo, Blind and Valdes

But did include Giggs, Ferdinand, Vidc, Evra, Kagawa, Fletcher, Anderson, Welbeck, Hernandez, Cleverly and Zaha.

 

[beats1]

But did include Giggs, Ferdinand, Vidc, Evra, Kagawa, Fletcher, Anderson, Welbeck, Hernandez, Cleverly and Zaha.

TBF four of those players could easily be one Falcao lol

 

[Dharmabum]

Money doesn't kick a ball....time to stop letting money cloud our vision, athletico have proved that what counts is what is done on the pitch

Well, errr...for a starter, they beat Spurs to Griezmann (yes they could offer CL footy but they also offered higher salary than Spurs did/could) and - particularly in the past - are known to have spent a lots of money without much to show for. A bit like Espana's Spurs ( they also have a formidable same city rival - theirs being Real M.).
Yes, they don't have/spend the silly money Real M. (and at times Barca) but they sure spend more mony, on salaries and players, than the rest of the teams in La Liga. Chelski, Liverpool, ManU, ManC and Arsenal have way more money availabe than Spurs.
Fortunately for them they got Simeone who's done a remarkable job for them.

 

[Lilbaz]

Money doesn't kick a ball....time to stop letting money cloud our vision, athletico have proved that what counts is what is done on the pitch

Athletico are £500m in debt. They didn't bother paying taxes or debts for the last few years. If we did what they did we would no longer exist as a club.

 

[tototoner]

You seem confused. Levy is ultimately the person who decides where our wage bill lies. This defends Poch's performance more than Levy's.

Nothing to do with Levy out, but how does the chairman get credit for the team performing to the exact spending expectation put forth by the chairman?

And then sack the manager when he doesn't over achieve

 

[allatsea]

Interesting that United are top with £215m per season YET that doesn't include Di Maria, Falcao, Shaw, Herrera, Rojo, Blind and Valdes

Isn't Falcao on around £300,000 per week ?

 

[allatsea]

Well, errr...for a starter, they beat Spurs to Griezmann (yes they could offer CL footy but they also offered higher salary than Spurs did/could) and - particularly in the past - are known to have spent a lots of money without much to show for. A bit like Espana's Spurs ( they also have a formidable same city rival - theirs being Real M.).
Yes, they don't have/spend the silly money Real M. (and at times Barca) but they sure spend more mony, on salaries and players, than the rest of the teams in La Liga. Chelski, Liverpool, ManU, ManC and Arsenal have way more money availabe than Spurs.
Fortunately for them they got Simeone who's done a remarkable job for them.

They are spending someone else's money not their own from income. When they are up to date with payments on their tax and repayments of their borrowings then we can really see the true position. At the moment they are financially cheating.

 

[Dharmabum]

They are spending someone else's money not their own from income. When they are up to date with payments on their tax and repayments of their borrowings then we can really see the true position. At the moment they are financially cheating.

Well, they have to borrow it from somewhere so if it's not their own money it's at least their own debt

 

[Danners9]

The Soccernomics book explains how wages are, in general, the main factor in league position rather than, say, transfer fees.

Looks like Liverpool overachieved last season, primarily because of Suarez I guess, and Chelsea aren't really underachieving - they were 3rd last season.

This season will probably show Southampton overachieving, Man Utd have probably underachieved (early season form), and Arsenal overachieved.

QPR and Sunderland are both shocking examples of terrible recruitment. Both have to pay over the odds to get players to join and they buy the wrong players - or just lots of them with no real plan.

 

[allatsea]

Well, they have to borrow it from somewhere so if it's not their own money it's at least their own debt

Debt which they are not repaying. Only in Spain.

 

[goughie1966]

Money doesn't kick a ball....time to stop letting money cloud our vision, athletico have proved that what counts is what is done on the pitch

1 freak season and it's back to normal in Spain.

 

[goughie1966]

Here's a quick graph showing "£m per point" (dividing those wage bills by points earned this season):

http://www.squawka.com/news/premier-league-wage-breakdown-man-utd-have-the-biggest-bill/360001

 

[Everlasting Seconds]

So our position in the league table is about right.

I suppose "disagree" to your post deserves an explanation. I think it is also about what you get out for your money. We are champions at spending money on players we don't want at the club. I'm not only talking about Adebayor, it runs deeper and longer than only him. A nice, sweet 100M wage budget should entail a world of opportunities, if spent correctly. However, when you have little to spend and spend unwisely, you are your own limitation.

I also find it interesting than one of the arguments stated on SC for hiring Poch was how much he can get out of limited resources. Now, the more common notion is "we are not better than this and that, and thus achieving this and that is quite acceptable".

What these graphs show, is that nobody is really excelling at the club (players or non-players), beyond Hero Kane.

 

[beats1]

Athletico are £500m in debt. They didn't bother paying taxes or debts for the last few years. If we did what they did we would no longer exist as a club.

Actually that figure is from 2011 when they didn't pay players, staff and etc.

I was gutted we didn't sign koke when we were linked with him

The debt as of May 2014 stood at £146 mill. Apparently they have cut that down to £86m already.

So whilst most point to them being poorly run and some might say that they may not own all of their players. They aren't as bad as people think