The point is Man City does not have the income to warrant the purchases you make, it just so happens you have crazy billionaire owners who are willing to bankroll you...for now
Trying to defend City on spending and wages is like trying to defend that the Willam sisters and actually female
At the end of the day, what a club decides to pay will be influenced by the ambition of that club.
---
No, it depends on club's financial limits. Spurs are small club they can't afford big wages. STAT
Warning - contradiction alert.
"Clubs pay players according to the players worth." Contradicted by:
"Marketing principle of demand and supply drives prices either up or down."
Contradicted by:
"At the end of the day, what a club decides to pay will be influenced by the ambition of that club."
Give it a rest Mich for the love of God, Spurs and Arsenal are in similar financial limits when it comes to wages
Jesus
"No city player earns that much."
Indeed. No Citeh players are that good.
"Also, marketing principle of demand and supply drives prices either up or down."
Citeh Sugga Daddy has distorted the PL wage/transfer market.
In UK industry, entities that attempt to distort the supply/demand market in their favour in such a way would expect investigation by the OFT etc.
RDBD
"No city player earns that much."
Indeed. No Citeh players are that good.
--------------
You beat me to it!
Manchester City made a financial loss of £121m in the 12 months to 31 May 2010, the first full year of ownership by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the club will announce today. Their income of £125m was entirely eclipsed by the wage bill which, for all staff, rose to £133m, up from £83m. That meant the club spent £8m more than their entire turnover on wages alone
Defend that, and thats over a year ago now, my guess is the numbers have increased even further
the OP is moving into the field of economics, which is dangerous for him as i dont think he fully understand whats going on.
the laws of demand and supply do not apply to a situation whereby you are bankrolled by a billionaire.
the concept of demand and supply and their effect on price is that price (in this case wages) is driven up by either an excess of demand, or a lack of supply.
so lets take the example of yaya toure... who is on, what, about 280 k a week.
if your statements hold true then carlos tevez, a man who there was more demand for (more clubs wanted him) should be on more than yaya toure ( a man that had less suitors). but he isnt...
you can pay whatever you want....
demand and supply as you mean it may happen in a market where there is some competition, but the amount of money you have makes you more or less a monopoly in terms of paying players... thus you need to look at a completely different set of economic situations.
in other words.. you are talking nonsense
I'd back Silva against Iniesta or Xavi any day of the week this season, and Aguero against Ronaldo this season.
Wouldnt argue about Messi though
City is a business model. The owners are pouring in money to raise its profile and thereafter, it's income. It's like pre incorporation cost for any business. All losses made today will be recouped once we start making profits. Remember, we are not bound to follow spurs business model. Can you for example, quantify the financial impact of our win over our neighbours? The whole world now know that there is a man city. And we are not in debt.
I would also like to add that professionally, I can personally tell you very well how skills and the price they have secured have varied according to market demand, and how "City" (sic) -esque behaviour has affected a market.
Well if you say thats what they earn and that no one at City earns that much then you must be right....why would we not believe you.
Most report Tevez & Augero & Toure as earning £200+ /wk but if you say thats not correct then you must be right.
Most report Adebayor as being on +£150k a week (£7.5m pa) but if you so thats not true then it must be true.
Last season City's wage bill alone was 107% of income. If you are trying to make a case that your wages are sustainable then you a crazy! City lost £121m in that year to add to about £95m the season before.
While you can afford to do this because of the bottom less pockets of the owner, its no great acheivement
City is a business model. The owners are pouring in money to raise its profile and thereafter, it's income. It's like pre incorporation cost for any business. All losses made today will be recouped once we start making profits
-----------------------------------------------------------------
You will never re-coop the money you have spent, take Man UTD for example, most successful club in the PL era...how much debt do they have?
City haven't got the highest wage bill in England and it will be even less when dead wood like Adebayour, RSC and Tevez have been moved on. With income rising by 20-25% annualy things are looking good and will be even better when the stadiun naming rights and shirt deal kick in.
Of course, if Tottenham win their game in hand and beat us at Eastlands, they will only be 3 points behind and in pole position to win the league.
City haven't got the highest wage bill in England and it will be even less when dead wood like Adebayour, RSC and Tevez have been moved on
--------------------------------------------------
You will just bring in more players on similar/higher wages
I give it a year until your paying a player £300k a week
"City is a business model. The owners are pouring in money to raise its profile and thereafter, it's income."
It's like pre incorporation cost for any business."
What utter nonsense !!!
The cost of registering with Companies House, HMCE etc is peanuts.
Have you EVER DONE ANY of the above (I have) ??
"All losses made today will be recouped once we start making profits."
That depends on your "business model" does it not.
Which is (what is the break-even point - in years etc) ... ??
"Remember, we are not bound to follow spurs business model."
Spurs don't have a "business model" , beyond general business prudence (who wouldn't) .
THFC is however a *PLC* .
PLCs are constrained by much stricter governance than a mere Ltd. Which has probably been the biggest blessing in disguise for Spurs' future.
"Of course, if Tottenham win their game in hand and beat us at Eastlands, they will only be 3 points behind and in pole position to win the league."
I'm sure the UEFA FFP committee have factored that into their views on Citeh.
I don't know how much City players earn (the figures banded around vary too much), but I would say that we don't pay our players as much as people seem to think. If we did, our first team wage bill alone would be almost double what our wage bill was last year. And that's not even taking into consideration all the boardroom staff, management team, reserve squad, youth players, administration staff, catering staff, cleaning staff, etc etc.
25-30 first team players, averaging out at £100k per week, still comes to more than what our total wage bill was last year.
Still, no matter what our players are paid, one of two things has to happen - either our wage bill comes down, or our revenue increases. Or preferably both.
I don't know how much City players earn (the figures banded around vary too much), but I would say that we don't pay our players as much as people seem to think
------------------------------------------------------------
Tevez is being fined 4 weeks wages...£800-£1 million fine
the only problem i have with city is that they spend far more than they generate... because they effectively have won the lottery.
thats fair enough and thats how it goes, but please be humble about it.
your only justification for paying such ridiculous wages can be "because we can" rather than because the players are worth it, or because we generate the money so we can spend it as we wish.
Did you not see some our youngsters last night? We won't be spending what clubs like man u an Liverpool did again our squad as it is doesn't need any more players other than to replace leaving ones, also once our new accademy is up an running I am sure we will produce amazing players, our owners want our accademy to mirror barca's!
"I don't know how much City players earn (the figures banded around vary too much)"
Actually, you DO know.
Go to Companies House, and request the accounts for Citeh. Wages have to be shown in the expenditure sheet. If the value is N million, tis safe to say the majority of that is not going to the bloke running the hotdog stand.
AFAIK, the Spurs wage bill is announced in the public releases (as a significant operating expenditure for a PLC) .
"Did you not see some our youngsters last night?"
Have you not seen ours, setting the NextGen tournament alight ??
STINKY
Do one you classless clart
Despite all the arguments above I though Toure was meant to be on somewhere between £185k to £200k a week? This is anywhere between £9.62m & £10.4m a year meaning he should be in your list no?
Sign in if you want to comment
Players wages - the facts
Page 1 of 14
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 27/10/11
The point is Man City does not have the income to warrant the purchases you make, it just so happens you have crazy billionaire owners who are willing to bankroll you...for now
Trying to defend City on spending and wages is like trying to defend that the Willam sisters and actually female
posted on 27/10/11
At the end of the day, what a club decides to pay will be influenced by the ambition of that club.
---
No, it depends on club's financial limits. Spurs are small club they can't afford big wages. STAT
posted on 27/10/11
Warning - contradiction alert.
"Clubs pay players according to the players worth." Contradicted by:
"Marketing principle of demand and supply drives prices either up or down."
Contradicted by:
"At the end of the day, what a club decides to pay will be influenced by the ambition of that club."
posted on 27/10/11
Give it a rest Mich for the love of God, Spurs and Arsenal are in similar financial limits when it comes to wages
Jesus
posted on 27/10/11
"No city player earns that much."
Indeed. No Citeh players are that good.
"Also, marketing principle of demand and supply drives prices either up or down."
Citeh Sugga Daddy has distorted the PL wage/transfer market.
In UK industry, entities that attempt to distort the supply/demand market in their favour in such a way would expect investigation by the OFT etc.
posted on 27/10/11
RDBD
"No city player earns that much."
Indeed. No Citeh players are that good.
--------------
You beat me to it!
posted on 27/10/11
Manchester City made a financial loss of £121m in the 12 months to 31 May 2010, the first full year of ownership by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the club will announce today. Their income of £125m was entirely eclipsed by the wage bill which, for all staff, rose to £133m, up from £83m. That meant the club spent £8m more than their entire turnover on wages alone
Defend that, and thats over a year ago now, my guess is the numbers have increased even further
posted on 27/10/11
the OP is moving into the field of economics, which is dangerous for him as i dont think he fully understand whats going on.
the laws of demand and supply do not apply to a situation whereby you are bankrolled by a billionaire.
the concept of demand and supply and their effect on price is that price (in this case wages) is driven up by either an excess of demand, or a lack of supply.
so lets take the example of yaya toure... who is on, what, about 280 k a week.
if your statements hold true then carlos tevez, a man who there was more demand for (more clubs wanted him) should be on more than yaya toure ( a man that had less suitors). but he isnt...
you can pay whatever you want....
demand and supply as you mean it may happen in a market where there is some competition, but the amount of money you have makes you more or less a monopoly in terms of paying players... thus you need to look at a completely different set of economic situations.
in other words.. you are talking nonsense
posted on 27/10/11
I'd back Silva against Iniesta or Xavi any day of the week this season, and Aguero against Ronaldo this season.
Wouldnt argue about Messi though
posted on 27/10/11
City is a business model. The owners are pouring in money to raise its profile and thereafter, it's income. It's like pre incorporation cost for any business. All losses made today will be recouped once we start making profits. Remember, we are not bound to follow spurs business model. Can you for example, quantify the financial impact of our win over our neighbours? The whole world now know that there is a man city. And we are not in debt.
posted on 27/10/11
I would also like to add that professionally, I can personally tell you very well how skills and the price they have secured have varied according to market demand, and how "City" (sic) -esque behaviour has affected a market.
posted on 27/10/11
Well if you say thats what they earn and that no one at City earns that much then you must be right....why would we not believe you.
Most report Tevez & Augero & Toure as earning £200+ /wk but if you say thats not correct then you must be right.
Most report Adebayor as being on +£150k a week (£7.5m pa) but if you so thats not true then it must be true.
Last season City's wage bill alone was 107% of income. If you are trying to make a case that your wages are sustainable then you a crazy! City lost £121m in that year to add to about £95m the season before.
While you can afford to do this because of the bottom less pockets of the owner, its no great acheivement
posted on 27/10/11
City is a business model. The owners are pouring in money to raise its profile and thereafter, it's income. It's like pre incorporation cost for any business. All losses made today will be recouped once we start making profits
-----------------------------------------------------------------
You will never re-coop the money you have spent, take Man UTD for example, most successful club in the PL era...how much debt do they have?
posted on 27/10/11
City haven't got the highest wage bill in England and it will be even less when dead wood like Adebayour, RSC and Tevez have been moved on. With income rising by 20-25% annualy things are looking good and will be even better when the stadiun naming rights and shirt deal kick in.
Of course, if Tottenham win their game in hand and beat us at Eastlands, they will only be 3 points behind and in pole position to win the league.
posted on 27/10/11
City haven't got the highest wage bill in England and it will be even less when dead wood like Adebayour, RSC and Tevez have been moved on
--------------------------------------------------
You will just bring in more players on similar/higher wages
I give it a year until your paying a player £300k a week
posted on 27/10/11
"City is a business model. The owners are pouring in money to raise its profile and thereafter, it's income."
It's like pre incorporation cost for any business."
What utter nonsense !!!
The cost of registering with Companies House, HMCE etc is peanuts.
Have you EVER DONE ANY of the above (I have) ??
"All losses made today will be recouped once we start making profits."
That depends on your "business model" does it not.
Which is (what is the break-even point - in years etc) ... ??
"Remember, we are not bound to follow spurs business model."
Spurs don't have a "business model" , beyond general business prudence (who wouldn't) .
THFC is however a *PLC* .
PLCs are constrained by much stricter governance than a mere Ltd. Which has probably been the biggest blessing in disguise for Spurs' future.
posted on 27/10/11
"Of course, if Tottenham win their game in hand and beat us at Eastlands, they will only be 3 points behind and in pole position to win the league."
I'm sure the UEFA FFP committee have factored that into their views on Citeh.
posted on 27/10/11
I don't know how much City players earn (the figures banded around vary too much), but I would say that we don't pay our players as much as people seem to think. If we did, our first team wage bill alone would be almost double what our wage bill was last year. And that's not even taking into consideration all the boardroom staff, management team, reserve squad, youth players, administration staff, catering staff, cleaning staff, etc etc.
25-30 first team players, averaging out at £100k per week, still comes to more than what our total wage bill was last year.
Still, no matter what our players are paid, one of two things has to happen - either our wage bill comes down, or our revenue increases. Or preferably both.
posted on 27/10/11
I don't know how much City players earn (the figures banded around vary too much), but I would say that we don't pay our players as much as people seem to think
------------------------------------------------------------
Tevez is being fined 4 weeks wages...£800-£1 million fine
posted on 27/10/11
the only problem i have with city is that they spend far more than they generate... because they effectively have won the lottery.
thats fair enough and thats how it goes, but please be humble about it.
your only justification for paying such ridiculous wages can be "because we can" rather than because the players are worth it, or because we generate the money so we can spend it as we wish.
posted on 27/10/11
Did you not see some our youngsters last night? We won't be spending what clubs like man u an Liverpool did again our squad as it is doesn't need any more players other than to replace leaving ones, also once our new accademy is up an running I am sure we will produce amazing players, our owners want our accademy to mirror barca's!
posted on 27/10/11
"I don't know how much City players earn (the figures banded around vary too much)"
Actually, you DO know.
Go to Companies House, and request the accounts for Citeh. Wages have to be shown in the expenditure sheet. If the value is N million, tis safe to say the majority of that is not going to the bloke running the hotdog stand.
AFAIK, the Spurs wage bill is announced in the public releases (as a significant operating expenditure for a PLC) .
posted on 27/10/11
"Did you not see some our youngsters last night?"
Have you not seen ours, setting the NextGen tournament alight ??
posted on 27/10/11
STINKY
Do one you classless clart
posted on 27/10/11
Despite all the arguments above I though Toure was meant to be on somewhere between £185k to £200k a week? This is anywhere between £9.62m & £10.4m a year meaning he should be in your list no?
Page 1 of 14
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10