Championship Wage Bill Table - Leicester Highest

[Bluearmyfox28]

1 hour ago, cityfanlee23 said:

Yeah I think it's much worse than this, from the departures we've had I can only work out roughly 800k a week having left the club at the absolute maximum, that's 40m a year.

Yeah around there, based on a few websites we get to see it’s around £38m a year but then we’ve brought in around £7m a year so looking at something like £31m saved per year.

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, honeybradger said:

Tottenham Hotspur.

Except they have the 5th largest revenue in the league, that is more than DOUBLE ours. And they haven’t done it consistently either. Try again.

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, filbertway said:

 

Babylon: "YOU CAN'T PROVE THAT THEY'VE NOT HAD OIL BARON MONEY!!!!"

Spurs have the 5th highest revenue in the league. The oil baron point is about teams like Man City, Chelsea, Newcastle, who DIDN’T have one of the largest revenues in the league and weren’t considered one of the biggest teams on the league, but got flooded with oil money to make them compete, or in Newcastle’s case, going to compete. 
 

The point is, there is no team outside of the money clubs who has ever broken through constantly. No Everton, Villa, Newcastle, Leeds, Bolton, Saints, Us… competed for a bit and fell away. Because you cannot compete without the money consistently. Some of the money clubs struggle to compete consistently, let alone those dwarfed by them financially.

[honeybradger]

3 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Except they have the 5th largest revenue in the league, that is more than DOUBLE ours. And they haven’t done it consistently either. Try again.

They have the 5th largest revenue because they consistently finish top 6, 15 years ago they were on the same level as Aston Villa, Everton and Newcastle but managed to compete with the big clubs by making the right decisions. You're painting an impossible scenario because any club that consistently finishes at the top of the table will have among the highest revenues, back when Spurs were climbing up the table it was not because of a financial advantage.

[Grebfromgrebland]

At this point its probably worth just giving players away if it means they're off the wage bill.  If they're going to play or don't want to be here then just go. Obviously they need someone willing to take them but this is mental.

 

Having said that about 7m of that is probably Vardys salary

[Babylon]

15 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

They have the 5th largest revenue because they consistently finish top 6, 15 years ago they were on the same level as Aston Villa, Everton and Newcastle but managed to compete with the big clubs by making the right decisions. You're painting an impossible scenario because any club that consistently finishes at the top of the table will have among the highest revenues, back when Spurs were climbing up the table it was not because of a financial advantage.

That simply is not true, our best years revenues are the £230m region (league win aside), top 5 finishes and Europe Our worst £150m in last 5 years. Their worst in the same period is £360m, best £530m

 

Their match day incomes and commercial revenues totally and utterly dwarfs ours, no matter where they finish it will dwarf ours and it always has dwarfed ours. Go back 18 years and they had the 6th highest revenue in the league and 13th in Europe. 

 

Of course they have made good decisions, but their ability to compete is backed by that money. On a scale we don't have. Teams like Villa, Everton and Newcastle have squandered their money advantage by consistent poor ownership. 

Edited 2 August 2023 by Babylon

[honeybradger]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

That simply is not true, our best years revenues are the £230m region (league win aside), top 5 finishes and Europe Our worst £150m in last 5 years. Their worst in the same period is £360m, best £530m

 

Their match day incomes and commercial revenues totally and utterly dwarfs ours, no matter where they finish it will dwarf ours and it always has dwarfed ours. Go back 18 years and they had the 6th highest revenue in the league and 13th in Europe. 

 

Of course they have made good decisions, but their ability to compete is backed by that money. On a scale we don't have. Teams like Villa, Everton and Newcastle have squandered their money advantage by consistent poor ownership. 

Where did you get that information for 18 years ago? I found that they had the 11th highest TV revenue in the 2008 season but couldnt find total club revenue.

[Babylon]

18 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

Where did you get that information for 18 years ago? I found that they had the 11th highest TV revenue in the 2008 season but couldnt find total club revenue.

It was the Deloitte Money League.

 

Spurs did get lucky as their good spell coincided with the number of Champs League and European spots expanding and the income from Europe skyrocketing. But the income was still there. This is 2004/2005 and they were finishing mid table then. 

Edited 2 August 2023 by Babylon

[messerschmitt]

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

Spurs have the 5th highest revenue in the league. The oil baron point is about teams like Man City, Chelsea, Newcastle, who DIDN’T have one of the largest revenues in the league and weren’t considered one of the biggest teams on the league, but got flooded with oil money to make them compete, or in Newcastle’s case, going to compete. 
 

The point is, there is no team outside of the money clubs who has ever broken through constantly. No Everton, Villa, Newcastle, Leeds, Bolton, Saints, Us… competed for a bit and fell away. Because you cannot compete without the money consistently. Some of the money clubs struggle to compete consistently, let alone those dwarfed by them financially.

This is pretty spot on. Since 2014/15 season, only 6 teams have finished in the top 8, apart from the rich 6.

Leicester, West Ham and Everton have done it 3 times,

Southampton and Wolves have done it twice.

Burnley have done it once.

Leicester, Southampton and Burnley have been relegated since.

West Ham, Eveton and Wolves have managed to stay up.

Alan Shearer said on MOTD when we were relegated that the system stops teams like us competing.

As you say, I remember when Chelsea were struggling in the top flight. They got money and joined the rich teams.

Man City were in the 3rd Division not so long ago, they got money and the rest is history.

Newcastle's biggest achievement in recent time is off the pitch, a take over that makes them rich now means they will be around the top as the rich 6 have had to make way for another to join the party.

Newcastle, Brighton and Aston Villa finished in the top 8 last season, it will be interesting to see how each team gets on. I'm guessing Newcastle will be fine but give it a season or 2 and Aston Villa and Brighton will be back struggling.

[Gamble92]

5 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

I would question these figures.

 

According to our accounts for 21/22, our wage bill was 182 million.

 

I don't see how we have reduced it to 62m from then to now. 

 

I assume the 182m included every club employee, and the 62m may only include players, but it still seems unrealistic 

 

The last set of accounts for Cardiff for example has their at 22m and Plymouth were 5.5m (21/22)

 

The other £120m was Susan Whelan's lunch expenses.

[Lambert09]

i hate these things because every time we lose a game other clubs fans will have to highlight it … maybe even the media 

Edited 2 August 2023 by Lambert09

[mozartfox]

16 hours ago, Lambert09 said:

i hate these things because every time we lose a game other clubs fans will have to highlight it … maybe even the media 

You wait - we will hear Premier League your having a laugh ringing out most weeks......