Footballers and wages
Discussion
robmlufc said:
Black can man said:
the £63.00 ticket price
Now I am an Arsenal fan and lucky enough that I could afford that if I really wanted but it's just totally the wrong price. I've just bought tickets for this years Ashes series which are less than that...that's a one on every two or three year event, an all day ticket and the pinnacle of the sport.
I believe the stat about Arsenal's season tickets is that for the cheapest season ticket you can buy a season ticket at Man City, Newcastle and Sunderland and get change.
The ironic thing about Man City supporters protesting is that Arsenal's season tickets have gone up to TRY and compete with clubs like City and Chelsea who are losing tens of millions of pounds every year thanks to massive external backing.
Arsenal's wage bill over the last few years (courtesy of Arseblog)
2007 – £89.7m 2008 £101.3m – 2009 £104m – 2010 -£110.7m 2011 – £124.4m 2012 – £143.4
Since Mansour bought Man City Arsenal's wage bill has gone up 38% in an attempt to compete.
If the game in this country was run properly with the long term health of the game in mind there would be proper controls about owners being able to inject huge sums of money....ultimately it will end in tears. Look at Serie A if you want an example.....gone from being the greatest league in the world to a disgrace.
So if we had FFP in this country which ironically the smaller clubs have just voted against along with Chelsea and Man City (Arsenal and Man U voted for it) Arsenal's ticket prices would be lower.
Why can Arsenal charge that much? Because they have a big fan base and a very long season ticket waiting list.
I have an old school friend who plays for certain club in Berkshire (dont speak to him regularly, but the odd facebook message here and there). Not the greatest of players by any stretch. He has played against the top sides though (and it was surreal watching his v Arsenal after we all used to skin him up in the playground)
Judging by the house he has just purchased (it looks a little like Wayne Manor), the short answer is no.
Judging by the house he has just purchased (it looks a little like Wayne Manor), the short answer is no.
MadMullah said:
phil-sti said:
Rob Heyes? He wouldn't know his ass from his elbow. I would attend said club every week if they price was right but I won't pay the prices they want for a ground with hardly any weather cover and poor facilities.
but thats what the lower leagues is - without a well off set of fans to pay in and low capacity they have to be competitive somehow. they're priced what is the average for league two. give a few seasons even rovers tickets will begin to suffer.
te as he crown ground. I used to go lads as a kid as I lived near he ground but not a chance I would pay £17.Black can man said:
robmlufc said:
Black can man said:
the £63.00 ticket price
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=m...
DSLiverpool said:
OK lets try and get this off the ground - national no support week - need to form a action group (with a witty name) and get some PR - anyone here do PR?
I'd prefer national no Premiership week where fans turned out for their local football league team - or even better - non league team.markh1973 said:
Terminator X said:
A lot of players (perhaps all) are self employed so their income is in the public domain.
TX.
Where do you get the idea from that the income of self employed people is in the public domain?TX.
Highly unlikely.
They have limited companies and self employment duties for their activities outside of football, but amounts paid from clubs are most definitely PAYE salaries.
What they can do, is obtain contracts from their clubs which enable them to receive 'image rights' which entitles them to non PAYE income from sales of merchandise etc (royalties), so their income is split, take loans from their companies at corporation tax rates, rather than the 50% upper rate.
This is in the process of review from HMRC and won't last much longer.
dirty boy said:
More to the point, what on earth makes you think a lot of players are self employed?
Highly unlikely.
They have limited companies and self employment duties for their activities outside of football, but amounts paid from clubs are most definitely PAYE salaries.
What they can do, is obtain contracts from their clubs which enable them to receive 'image rights' which entitles them to non PAYE income from sales of merchandise etc (royalties), so their income is split, take loans from their companies at corporation tax rates, rather than the 50% upper rate.
This is in the process of review from HMRC and won't last much longer.
They already have a few footballers under investigation. I suspect they will get no where with it. Also, several agents have said that european talent won't see the premiership so attractive if they are going to get taxed to the hilt. Not a bad thing IMHO as it should mean that our youth players get given more of a chance but it will certainly impact on the viewing figures of the "most popular league in the world".Highly unlikely.
They have limited companies and self employment duties for their activities outside of football, but amounts paid from clubs are most definitely PAYE salaries.
What they can do, is obtain contracts from their clubs which enable them to receive 'image rights' which entitles them to non PAYE income from sales of merchandise etc (royalties), so their income is split, take loans from their companies at corporation tax rates, rather than the 50% upper rate.
This is in the process of review from HMRC and won't last much longer.
Sexual Chocolate said:
They already have a few footballers under investigation. I suspect they will get no where with it. Also, several agents have said that european talent won't see the premiership so attractive if they are going to get taxed to the hilt. Not a bad thing IMHO as it should mean that our youth players get given more of a chance but it will certainly impact on the viewing figures of the "most popular league in the world".
It's a little bit different with foreign players, It's not that complex to be honest, but enough for me not to be bothered writing about it. There's a good reason a fair few foreign players only rent 'modest' (to them) pads, and leave their families and assets abroad. Each one is different though.WRT the above investigations, HMRC will unlikely be able to do anything retrospectively in most cases, but the loophole is being closed.
Boydie88 said:
DSLiverpool said:
OK lets try and get this off the ground - national no support week - need to form a action group (with a witty name) and get some PR - anyone here do PR?
I'd prefer national no Premiership week where fans turned out for their local football league team - or even better - non league team.Its not the football players fault they are paid such obscene amounts, and I don't blame them 1 bit for taking it. I don't think there can be a salary cap put on wages either and why should there be? I'd expect Bill Gates would be pretty pissed off is Microsoft put a limit on his salary.
Ultimately, until a clubs attendences start to reduce consistently and over a long period of time, clubs aren't gonna drop prices. While they are stil selling out, there's only one way the prices are going.
I also think that out of all professional footballers, it probably is only a relatively small number that are on the 80, 90, 100k a week. If you look closely at the teams in the premier league, I'd expect there are probably 5 or 6, who realistically don't have a player on more than 50k, your Norwichs, WBA, Reading, Wigan, Swansea, Stoke. Then you've got the middle clubs, Fulham, Sunderland, Newcastle, Everton who probably have a clutch of 5 or 6 players who earn 60-80k a week. Then the CL challengers like Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool, where most of the first team, so probably 15-20 players all earn somewhere between 50-80k. Then your top teams like Man C, Chelsea and Man U, who pay top dollar to their first 18-20 players.
So realistically, there's probably around 100-125 players who earn over 100k in my estimates? I think its quite an elite group really who earn the mega bucks.
Ultimately, until a clubs attendences start to reduce consistently and over a long period of time, clubs aren't gonna drop prices. While they are stil selling out, there's only one way the prices are going.
I also think that out of all professional footballers, it probably is only a relatively small number that are on the 80, 90, 100k a week. If you look closely at the teams in the premier league, I'd expect there are probably 5 or 6, who realistically don't have a player on more than 50k, your Norwichs, WBA, Reading, Wigan, Swansea, Stoke. Then you've got the middle clubs, Fulham, Sunderland, Newcastle, Everton who probably have a clutch of 5 or 6 players who earn 60-80k a week. Then the CL challengers like Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool, where most of the first team, so probably 15-20 players all earn somewhere between 50-80k. Then your top teams like Man C, Chelsea and Man U, who pay top dollar to their first 18-20 players.
So realistically, there's probably around 100-125 players who earn over 100k in my estimates? I think its quite an elite group really who earn the mega bucks.
dirty boy said:
markh1973 said:
Terminator X said:
A lot of players (perhaps all) are self employed so their income is in the public domain.
TX.
Where do you get the idea from that the income of self employed people is in the public domain?TX.
Highly unlikely.
They have limited companies and self employment duties for their activities outside of football, but amounts paid from clubs are most definitely PAYE salaries.
What they can do, is obtain contracts from their clubs which enable them to receive 'image rights' which entitles them to non PAYE income from sales of merchandise etc (royalties), so their income is split, take loans from their companies at corporation tax rates, rather than the 50% upper rate.
This is in the process of review from HMRC and won't last much longer.
The thing that p155es me off the most is that the sole reason football generates all this interest and therefore revenue is the fans who have become nothing more than an inconvenience nowadays. It's about willy waving and hobbyism.
The amount of money is so obscene and so other-worldly that without Sky money, sponsorship and sugar daddy's it wouldn't survive - its essentially on a knife edge whilst the deals are thrashed out and agreed. I blame the owners of the so called 'top' teams for this and their insistence on paying ridiculous wages to their players, which bumps the premium up throughout the leagues.
I'm at a point now personally that I wouldn't care if the whole thing stopped, many clubs went to the wall selling their stadiums/assets along the way and we all start again at grass roots.
It's become an obscene and predictable monster where the only chance of silverware is by buying your way to the top. This was illustrated perfectly when Man City 'won' the FA cup in 2011. Seeing how much money was stood on the pitch celebrating was farcical (not the players fault I know) and it seemed false.
The amount of money is so obscene and so other-worldly that without Sky money, sponsorship and sugar daddy's it wouldn't survive - its essentially on a knife edge whilst the deals are thrashed out and agreed. I blame the owners of the so called 'top' teams for this and their insistence on paying ridiculous wages to their players, which bumps the premium up throughout the leagues.
I'm at a point now personally that I wouldn't care if the whole thing stopped, many clubs went to the wall selling their stadiums/assets along the way and we all start again at grass roots.
It's become an obscene and predictable monster where the only chance of silverware is by buying your way to the top. This was illustrated perfectly when Man City 'won' the FA cup in 2011. Seeing how much money was stood on the pitch celebrating was farcical (not the players fault I know) and it seemed false.
TangerinePool said:
The thing that p155es me off the most is that the sole reason football generates all this interest and therefore revenue is the fans who have become nothing more than an inconvenience nowadays. It's about willy waving and hobbyism.
The amount of money is so obscene and so other-worldly that without Sky money, sponsorship and sugar daddy's it wouldn't survive - its essentially on a knife edge whilst the deals are thrashed out and agreed. I blame the owners of the so called 'top' teams for this and their insistence on paying ridiculous wages to their players, which bumps the premium up throughout the leagues.
I'm at a point now personally that I wouldn't care if the whole thing stopped, many clubs went to the wall selling their stadiums/assets along the way and we all start again at grass roots.
It's become an obscene and predictable monster where the only chance of silverware is by buying your way to the top. This was illustrated perfectly when Man City 'won' the FA cup in 2011. Seeing how much money was stood on the pitch celebrating was farcical (not the players fault I know) and it seemed false.
The teams don't insist on paying the wages, the players insist on it. Because they can! Because they are good enough to win them trophies.The amount of money is so obscene and so other-worldly that without Sky money, sponsorship and sugar daddy's it wouldn't survive - its essentially on a knife edge whilst the deals are thrashed out and agreed. I blame the owners of the so called 'top' teams for this and their insistence on paying ridiculous wages to their players, which bumps the premium up throughout the leagues.
I'm at a point now personally that I wouldn't care if the whole thing stopped, many clubs went to the wall selling their stadiums/assets along the way and we all start again at grass roots.
It's become an obscene and predictable monster where the only chance of silverware is by buying your way to the top. This was illustrated perfectly when Man City 'won' the FA cup in 2011. Seeing how much money was stood on the pitch celebrating was farcical (not the players fault I know) and it seemed false.
obob said:
The teams don't insist on paying the wages, the players insist on it. Because they can! Because they are good enough to win them trophies.
Which is fine when you have a seemingly endless pot of cash to throw at the best players. Rinse and repeat each season. Fun!But not every club can do this and there are so many who throw their very existence into serious danger for a shot at the jackpot (parachute payments) in order to compete and it's so horrible and wrong.
Ironically at Blackpool we've had the opposite problem in that our Chairman has pocketed all the cash from the Premier League and won't spend any of it.
andyjo1982 said:
Its not the football players fault they are paid such obscene amounts, and I don't blame them 1 bit for taking it. I don't think there can be a salary cap put on wages either and why should there be? I'd expect Bill Gates would be pretty pissed off is Microsoft put a limit on his salary.
Ultimately, until a clubs attendences start to reduce consistently and over a long period of time, clubs aren't gonna drop prices. While they are stil selling out, there's only one way the prices are going.
I also think that out of all professional footballers, it probably is only a relatively small number that are on the 80, 90, 100k a week. If you look closely at the teams in the premier league, I'd expect there are probably 5 or 6, who realistically don't have a player on more than 50k, your Norwichs, WBA, Reading, Wigan, Swansea, Stoke. Then you've got the middle clubs, Fulham, Sunderland, Newcastle, Everton who probably have a clutch of 5 or 6 players who earn 60-80k a week. Then the CL challengers like Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool, where most of the first team, so probably 15-20 players all earn somewhere between 50-80k. Then your top teams like Man C, Chelsea and Man U, who pay top dollar to their first 18-20 players.
So realistically, there's probably around 100-125 players who earn over 100k in my estimates? I think its quite an elite group really who earn the mega bucks.
The US sports apply salary caps. So it can be done...I just don't think there is the appetite over here to want to implement one. Ultimately, until a clubs attendences start to reduce consistently and over a long period of time, clubs aren't gonna drop prices. While they are stil selling out, there's only one way the prices are going.
I also think that out of all professional footballers, it probably is only a relatively small number that are on the 80, 90, 100k a week. If you look closely at the teams in the premier league, I'd expect there are probably 5 or 6, who realistically don't have a player on more than 50k, your Norwichs, WBA, Reading, Wigan, Swansea, Stoke. Then you've got the middle clubs, Fulham, Sunderland, Newcastle, Everton who probably have a clutch of 5 or 6 players who earn 60-80k a week. Then the CL challengers like Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool, where most of the first team, so probably 15-20 players all earn somewhere between 50-80k. Then your top teams like Man C, Chelsea and Man U, who pay top dollar to their first 18-20 players.
So realistically, there's probably around 100-125 players who earn over 100k in my estimates? I think its quite an elite group really who earn the mega bucks.
Linesman tells City players to go and see their fans as they paid £62: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_CEQV1DODs
TangerinePool said:
But not every club can do this and there are so many who throw their very existence into serious danger for a shot at the jackpot (parachute payments) in order to compete and it's so horrible and wrong.
That's not just football. Any business that spends money it can't afford to try and compete at a higher level is doomed. That shouldn't effect those that can afford to pay fortunes to compete at the top level. Good luck to them. Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff