Indeed as SP said we have an Income not dissimilar to Nuneaton Town.
Any part of the wage bill in excess of income will be funded through transfer fees. That would be sensible.
Also I think Waggott's comment starts from a lower base I.e. considering the wage bill minus the players we've lost (as without the Wilson money I suspect not so many signings would be made).
The shame is that the new found recognition that wages must be controlled would put us in a much stronger footing at the Ricoh you'd imagine.Indeed as SP said we have an Income not dissimilar to Nuneaton Town.
The shame is that the new found recognition that wages must be controlled would put us in a much stronger footing at the Ricoh you'd imagine.
not without F+B revenues
Rubbish. Utter rubbish.
Even on the old deal the Ricoh pulls in far more cash than Sixfields.
FP is absolutely right, the crying shame about the move to Sixfields is that we've finally got the wage budget under control (it seems).
Rubbish. Utter rubbish.
Even on the old deal the Ricoh pulls in far more cash than Sixfields. You can argue a new ground would be better, but no-one in their right mind would suggest that we're better off now than we were in our last season at the Ricoh, let alone on a lower rent deal.
FP is absolutely right, the crying shame about the move to Sixfields is that we've finally got the wage budget under control (it seems).
Maybe I should have put a smiley in my post :facepalm:
Purely tongue in cheek comment
"Reel 'er in boy, she's a big un!"
Around 25% of what It was 3 seasons ago. Couldn't have happened without a Relegation IMO.
Don't even. Not funny.
(OK you got me)
You're probably right, and the real question is: How possible is it to carry this strategy over to the Championship?
I worry that the Championship is the new Prem and to compete you've got to pretty much bankrupt yourself.
If we didn't pay agent fees we would make no signings.
Bournemouth did okay though. Didn't go mad, invested where it was needed. They did have a few financial windfalls from sell on clauses, but they didn't bankrupt themselves.
Basically, a well managed club can achieve anything.
your usual drivel and lack of knowledge
Just how much does an agent get from placing a player who is a free agent?
I await your genius inside info reply
Indeed as SP said we have an Income not dissimilar to Nuneaton Town.
your usual drivel and lack of knowledge
Just how much does an agent get from placing a player who is a free agent?
I await your genius inside info reply
Bournemouth are backed by mentalist Russian cash.
AFC Bournemouth lost £15.3m in the financial year ending July 2013, the season in which they were promoted to the Championship.
The figure is in stark contrast to the £3.4m loss they posted for 2011-12.
your usual drivel and lack of knowledge
Just how much does an agent get from placing a player who is a free agent?
I await your genius inside info reply
Was gonna say!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27224806
It's almost like I didn't post up the actual figures from the FL about agents' fees at this level (average £10k) or the fact that the vast majority of transfers at this level don't involve an agent.
For anyone else interested: http://www.football-league.co.uk/pu...hes-201213-agents-fees-report_2293631_3446970
How many as a percentage involve a transfer fee in this league out of interest?
If we ever do build a new ground, give the club a call when they sort the pitch.
You're brilliant at moving goalposts.
The football league report for 12/13 shows that 19% of player transactions in league 1 involved an agent, I thought it would be much higher than that.
We paid £252k to agents, the second highest in the league, only Bournemouth spent more, a huge £689k.
There's a link to the full report on this bbc page... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23987048
Edit, I see shmmeee had the same idea.
That would make an average of around £15k_£20K. per transaction on the recent level of deals during our last couple of Summers .
Isn't that about the average transfer fee? Excluding the 95% of free transfers?
Not at all, I believe there are only about 15 transfer fees a season in this league.
I think far more attract agent fees.
I would also say we are easily in the top 10 wage bills in this league.
Not at all, I believe there are only about 15 transfer fees a season in this league.
I think far more attract agent fees.
I would also say we are easily in the top 10 wage bills in this league.
Isn't that about the average transfer fee? Excluding the 95% of free transfers?
There will be some story about it being used to pay wages rather than transfer fees.....
SP will obviously have a budget. I would imagine there is a sliding scale between what is spent on wages and what is spent on transfer fees i.e the more spent on one means the less available for the other.
That's without question the case. That stated, and to come back to the central point of the thread, and the clubs claims of the Wilson fee; it's not going to be given to the playing squad.
The wage bill must already by way, way down on last season. So even if we do sign more players, it'll only bring things back closer to last seasons wage budget. But that is not the Wilson fee being reinvested.
Signing on fees or agents fees,, unless we sign Ronaldinho, won't be more than 10% of the Wilson fee.
So, there is no conclusion, other than we've been misled. Yet again.
Misled? Who still believes their crap publicity?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?