Insane, my thoughts exactly. And if the payrise is allegedly £70k pw that would amount to £3.6m more over the year, rather than whatever his full wage would be.

Only worry is if he snaps a cruiciate or given that keeping him means we are depending on him (vs. Signing new players) if he loses form or interest it could cost us CL revenue.

Arrrgh, so much guesswork/speculation

Am I the only one thinking 170k a WEEK is too much for Spurs to pay any player?

Nope. He's top draw. The best players earn good money. Bale is 100% worth 170k per week. If we don't pay him these kind of wages, we may as well admit defeat in keeping him.

Once the top earner level rises, each tier below does too. Footballers are human beings, not commodities, and as such are subject to the same emotions of envy as every other workplace.

Once the next tier know Bale earns 170k, they will think they are worth say 120/140k.

The players on 60k will want 80/90k and so on and so forth.



If you have a 25-man squad and the average goes up by a modest 20k, then that is an extra 25m per season. At a modest estimate with the new TV deal I'd say that is around 15% of turnover.

If we can do it, fine. If not, but Levy can keep a squad happy with such huge disparity in wages, that's fine too.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Insaneintheparklane

Levy has never let the club down financially. If anything, he has strengthened it to a level most clubs (if not all) without CL envy. Why doubt him now?

===================

I dont doubt Levy in terms of keeping THFC financially safe, i'm just thinking of the knock on effect it could have throughout the squad. Could Dembele feel unappreciated for example, will Chadli want parity if he has a decent season? Its this type of stuff that worries me - not so much that Levy doesn't know how to balance the books.

Il trust that Levy has all that in hand

I dont doubt Levy in terms of keeping THFC financially safe, i'm just thinking of the knock on effect it could have throughout the squad. Could Dembele feel unappreciated for example, will Chadli want parity if he has a decent season? Its this type of stuff that worries me - not so much that Levy doesn't know how to balance the books.

------

i reckon we have a good group of level headed lads.. i seems that way anyway... they know that bale is the best player by a mile and one of the best players in the world.. my guess is they would be happy if he signs as they want him to stay.. and make them all better and maybe make us win things

Insane

With respect, i'm not sure even a mastermind that is Levy can know how the entire squad will react to paying one player £170k pw.

If hes even 75% as good as he was last season he will be worth it. A large part of it relates to global marketing and branding. Bale is playing a massive role in Spurs becoming more global / supported etc.

Chronic,

i reckon we have a good group of level headed lads

====================

I'm sorry Chronic but you dont know any of them personally, let-alone suggest to know that they are all level headed guys, totally different to what any other club have.

Footballers are footballers. They all want to earn as much as they possibly can.

And how ironic that you mention how level headed they all are on a discussion about paying one player £170k pw.

If they are all level headed, does this not include Bale, in which case you would be against paying him this wage in the first place?

I'm sure we'll see soon enough

The nag in the back of my mind is the modest profits/losses we have made over the last 3/4 years.

This despite spending nearly nil net since Winter 2009. I think we even sold more than we bought in some windows.

I understand transfer fees are paid in instalments, but even so after some heavy sales over the last few years we should now be seeing the fruit of that in our yearly figures? That hasn't been the case.

Surely that means either wages have been creeping up from the 65% of old, or the new stadium is sucking funds from the club.

Wages increasing further can mean only one of two things - no money for transfers or the stadium in the back burner.

"Wages increasing further can mean only one of two things - no money for transfers or the stadium in the back burner."

Clubs are receiving a lot more TV money this season. That was the key that originally drove wages up, so no doubt it will happen again.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

"Surely that means either wages have been creeping up from the 65% of old, or the new stadium is sucking funds from the club."

Land purchases for new WHL have dented the profits over the past 2 yrs, but for 2010/11 and 2011/12 the wage bill stabilised at ~90m.

But yes, there is one pot marked 'player costs' , and it covers wages and transfers. Once that pot is empty, nothing doing in the REAL world.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Add Comment | Complain about this Comment
comment by The RDBD (demoted to supporting the team manag... (U1062)
posted 2 minutes ago
"Surely that means either wages have been creeping up from the 65% of old, or the new stadium is sucking funds from the club."

Land purchases for new WHL have dented the profits over the past 2 yrs, but for 2010/11 and 2011/12 the wage bill stabilised at ~90m.

But yes, there is one pot marked 'player costs' , and it covers wages and transfers. Once that pot is empty, nothing doing in the REAL world.

------------------------

Is that right, 90m? I assume that is basic as it is over 2yrs, not CL participation incentives bumping it up?

Do you know what turnover was for both years RBDB?

Do we know how much extra the new TV deal is worth per annum?

The last non CL year's figures I seem to remember turnover being 125-130m

"Is that right, 90m?"

Yep.
Was a big jump in wages in the CL season from 2009/10.
But Levy get it static the year after.


"Do you know what turnover was for both years"

From the CL season to 2011/12 the turnover dropped by > 20+ million (from 160 odd to 140 odd) .

If wages are stable at 90m as it stands, then that's ok I suppose. It may be the case it has crept up since last Summer's ins and outs though, which would be a concern.

I thought they were about 70m or so around 2009 so it's quite interesting to see how quickly they can rise in only a couple of years. Food for thought.

Transfers are paid over the course of a contract I believe, and we spent quite heavily in Winters 2008 and 2009. Maybe we will see that settle down in the next figures now we have been pretty even Stevens since that period

looking at the account right now

turnover declined from £163.49m to £144.16m

pre-tax loss of £7.3m

reserves reduced from £70.79m to 66.24m still strong but not great.

Levy does great, but the fact is we cannot generate enough revenue to fight the Sky 4 and the Sugga Daddy FCs.

Even the Poool in this period of mediocrity still bring in 200+ million.

What if he gets injured and is out for a long period we'd be rightly facked wouldnt we?

---

We'd be facked without him if we were paying him 60k a week, if he wants 160k to sign a new deal that's the deal.. I don't think we can afford to say no. If the others want parity great - let them earn it

All your rivals pay that and more for their stars.

Bale has been better than all of them the last 2 years, so even at 170k it is below market rate.