No it wasn't....it was the 4th highest behind Utd City and Chelsea.
£160m more than Arsenal????? Are you fucking off your rocker? There's not even that big a difference between the bottom club and us.
Summer rebuild 2023
- Thread starter Hansern
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
No it wasn't....it was the 4th highest behind Utd City and Chelsea.
£160m more than Arsenal????? Are you fucking off your rocker? There's not even that big a difference between the bottom club and us.
Not sure how accurate, but…
1. Manchester United – £222,984,000
2. Chelsea – £169,720,000
3. Manchester City – £163,060,000
4. Liverpool – £141,782,000
5. Tottenham – £101,344,000
6. Arsenal – £85,490,000
7. Leicester City – 78,780,000
8. Aston Villa – £75,232,000
9. West Ham – £70,160,000
10. Newcastle United – £62,610,000
11. Crystal Palace – £59,180,000
12. Everton – £43,120,000
13. Wolves – £38,310,000
14. Fulham – £37,610,000
15. Southampton – £35,380,000
16. Bournemouth – £32,044,000
17. Nottingham Forest – £28,590,000
18. Brighton – £28,340,000
19. Leeds United – £17,300,000
20. Brentford – £15,240,000
That’s nearly double Arsenal’s wage bill.
1. Manchester United – £222,984,000
2. Chelsea – £169,720,000
3. Manchester City – £163,060,000
4. Liverpool – £141,782,000
5. Tottenham – £101,344,000
6. Arsenal – £85,490,000
7. Leicester City – 78,780,000
8. Aston Villa – £75,232,000
9. West Ham – £70,160,000
10. Newcastle United – £62,610,000
11. Crystal Palace – £59,180,000
12. Everton – £43,120,000
13. Wolves – £38,310,000
14. Fulham – £37,610,000
15. Southampton – £35,380,000
16. Bournemouth – £32,044,000
17. Nottingham Forest – £28,590,000
18. Brighton – £28,340,000
19. Leeds United – £17,300,000
20. Brentford – £15,240,000
That’s nearly double Arsenal’s wage bill.
We all know however that City's wage bill is roughly double that stated. It's just that the offshore portion, paid in goats, won't register until said goats are sold.
It’s more like the contract renewals for high performing players.
Trent is due one this season.
That and bonuses.
Our wage bill in the 2022 accounts was £366m. Arsenal's was £205m. So the £160m difference is accurate, or at least it was in 2022.
Even before the renewals, Jota went from 30k a week to 120k, Darwin went from 60k a week to 150k, Ibou went from 25k to 70k.
Should also cut down on all the bonuses, we’re too giving as a FC.
Fact checked - @bluebell is correct.
You do realise you've just broken SCM right? BB being right is new ground, I imagine certain posters are having heart palpitations even as I type this.
"Some people just want to watch the world burn".
You're right! I don't think he will get the game time do it. He will do 16 but have a goal to game ratio of 1:2
Largely explains why Arsenal can afford those transfers that we can’t, eh?
For info, |Big Six" reported wages for 2022, plus Everton for the lols.
[xtable=border:0|cellpadding:0|cellspacing:0|232x@]
{colgroup}
{col=140x@}{/col}{col=92x@}{/col}
{/colgroup}
{tbody}
{tr}
{td=140x21} {/td}
{td=92x@}£'000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Man Utd{/td}
{td} 372,533{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Liverpool{/td}
{td} 366,092{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Man City{/td}
{td} 353,881{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Chelsea{/td}
{td} 313,794{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Arsenal{/td}
{td} 205,482{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Tottenham{/td}
{td} 205,088{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Everton{/td}
{td} 162,010{/td}
{/tr}
{/tbody}
[/xtable]
[xtable=border:0|cellpadding:0|cellspacing:0|232x@]
{colgroup}
{col=140x@}{/col}{col=92x@}{/col}
{/colgroup}
{tbody}
{tr}
{td=140x21} {/td}
{td=92x@}£'000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Man Utd{/td}
{td} 372,533{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Liverpool{/td}
{td} 366,092{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Man City{/td}
{td} 353,881{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Chelsea{/td}
{td} 313,794{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Arsenal{/td}
{td} 205,482{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Tottenham{/td}
{td} 205,088{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td=@x21}Everton{/td}
{td} 162,010{/td}
{/tr}
{/tbody}
[/xtable]
How can our wage bill be 366m a year? For a 25 man squad that would mean the average player is on 15m a year…..we only have 1 player who earns more….the rest earn a lot lot less.
Yes and no. Arsenal's turnover is much lower than ours (£342m v £594m) so I expect they're still taking risks with all this spending (and possibly relying on ownership funding).
Any break down on this?
Is it related to bonuses or just mainly base?
I bet Arse has gone up by a third in 2023, there’s been some big renewals.
Some of it will be staff (included in both ours and Arsenal's figures) plus bonuses (2022 was the nearly quad year).
Both numbers will also include player agent fee payments.
Manager and coaches earn big wedge too.
The gap will have narrowed in 2023, but the only available, reliable, official numbers are the ones I've quoted (although City's is probably bullshit for FFP-manipulating reasons we've discussed previously).
I'd imagine it includes coaches etc, as well as players outside that 25 man squad, as well as players who are on loan
No. Most companies in the UK make only the minimum required disclosures, football clubs are no different (and if anything inclined to be more secretive if they can). You can't even get a split between players and staff. As I've just said in a previous post, there's likely some chunky bonuses in there in 2022, although the win bonuses for domestic cups won't be much, finishing second and RU in Champs League will be more significant. But a lot of bonuses will be goals / clean sheets etc. and will trigger regardless of whether we win stuff.
As per above, I expect the gap to have narrowed this year.
Seems fucking crazy to me we’re spending more on academy/loan players and club staff than the whole senior squad….so there’s a 220m difference between what our whole senior squad get to what we’re paying in bonuses/club staff and academy players….*agent fees may or may not be factored in. Fucking shambles tbh.
It will, for both clubs.
Loans are a bit odd as the structure around wage payment can be very different from one loan to another. In some cases, loan fees will be netted off wage costs, sometimes shown in the player trading line. But unless a club has a load of highly paid players loaned in / out, it won't make a huge difference.
We won't be paying more on staff and academy. First team will account for 70-80% of the total wage bill. I think you're just under-estimating how much it costs to employ someone.
Example:
Player earns £200k per week. Wage cost is £200k x 1.143 (social security and apprenticeship levy) x 52 weeks = £11.9m.
Agent fee: probably 6%-8% player share. £200k x 52 weeks x 5 years = £3-4m. So 3 instalments of £1-1.33m, plus VAT (20%) = £1.2m - £1.6m
Loyalty bonus (to pay the tax on the agent fee) - £1.26m - £1.68m x 3.
So even ignoring a signing on fee or performance bonus, the £200k per week contract will cost, at the low end of the agent fee range (over 5 years):
£11.9m x 5
£1.2m x 3
£1.26m x 3
Total of £66.9m
Average of £13.4m per annum
You can probably add £1-2m of bonuses on top of that.
Thanks.
You know we give bonuses for being successful don’t you - so last season is a good example of us cutting down on bonuses.
Well I don't know every breakdown of what bonuses are triggered every season which is why there's a big asterix beside it, but I'm sure there are as many individual bonuses paid to what we achieve as a club.
But if we specifically say the wage bill for players only (senior/loan/academy) then that table you posted is accurate.
Something drastic needs to be done to cut out all the agent fees.
We could stop signing players - that would cut down agent fees.
As stated, I would take the figures I had as accurate - they’re from a site called Capology - no idea of the accuracy.
This is another :
https://www.spotrac.com/epl/
Suggests Arsenal have probably overtaken us - and there are some toe curling salaries in there - Utd’s is hilarious.
Ours doesn’t seem right - Diaz us very low and Alisson is listed twice.
Does support Beamrider’s suggestion that Arsenal are gambling a bit - £200k a week for Partey!!!! WTF!!!!
Anyway - isn’t there a new FFP rule coming I that ties wages and spending to a fixed percentage of income more clearly - that’ll mean more teams “doing a City” or it might a force teams to operate to a budget.
Ok easy Stevie, no room on SCM for this kind of loon talk.
The agent fees you pay comes with the profile of player you're signing right + the number of players you're signing? How are we paying the most if our spending is far below the likes of Chelsea Utd City and Arsenal as a whole & we don't sign near as many players as the,? It doesn't make sense.
We give big fuck off contracts to wasting assets which require big fuck off agent fees for their leeching agents.
- Status
Similar threads
