[Archived] Turnover to wages of premiership/championship clubs

[Lie_still_Rover]

http://www.qprdot.org/viewtopic.php?t=68094

Check the link out. If that was us in the Premiership... Yikes!!

Last one out turn the lights off!!

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Further emphasises the stellar work Allardyce and Williams were doing. Know its the season after they were disposed of but I can't imagine the figures being greatly different. Allardyce achieved a top 10 finish on probably the 16th/17th highest wage bill, and Williams masterfully navigated the club along the cliff edge of financial ruin just to stop Allardyce's wage bill from being the 19th/20th highest. In my opinion remaining in the PL for as long as we did after Jack's death is as big an achievement as winning the league in '95. We really have gone from the very best to the very worst in club management.

[Majiball]

16th 17th highest wage bill my arse, we were always in the top 10-12 clubs for wages as Williams felt paying wages of that ilk allowed us to finish in the top 10. Wages to finishing place used to have a correlation.

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/how-do-blackburn-rovers-stay-afloat.html

[M-K]

Spending over 90% of your turnover on wages doesn't equate to stellar work.

[Majiball]

No there's nothing stella about keeping a club with one of the lowest incomes in the league in the top 10 and the league for over 10 years and winning a cup.

Any fool could do it!!!!

Oh wait.

[M-K]

Walking that tightrope, spending almost every penny the club makes on players it can barely afford - that was financial suicide, as we seem to be finding out now.

It means that when you go down, you go down with millstones like MGP on huge wages.

It means that you're reliant on handouts from rich owners / the former owner's estate.

Those graphs show Swansea with a similar turnover but only spending 50% on wages. That's more like stellar management.

[Majiball]

What @#/?, John Williams would never have appointed steve 'bullshit' Kean or let agents run our club. Swansea have been in the league 2 years, lets see what their wages are in 8 years time, they will increase as top 10 finishes will result in players asking for more.

You do JW and the others who ran our club very very well a disservice, we are where we are because of the loons from pune and the retards they've let in and their moronic decisions.

We'd never have gone down under Sam and JW.

[M-K]

Fine, I'm just disputing that running a business with so little breathing room can in any way be described as stellar management. I wasn't aware that Sam + JW = relegationproof 4ever.

Over 90% of turnover on wages plus a substantial annual handout from the Trust. The financial fair play rule might have got Rovers in the end even if Kean and Venky's hadn't.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

16th 17th highest wage bill my arse, we were always in the top 10-12 clubs for wages as Williams felt paying wages of that ilk allowed us to finish in the top 10. Wages to finishing place used to have a correlation.

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/how-do-blackburn-rovers-stay-afloat.html

Excellent article that but I can't see anywhere in it that says we had the 10-12th highest wage bill. The original article says it was the 16th highest in 2011-12, and considering Kean signed about 13 players in his first 2 transfer windows, I can't imagine it decreased much from 2010-11. Our wage bill might have been around mid-table under Hughes, but Hughes had a higher budget to work with than Allardyce, just as Souness had a higher budget than Hughes.

M-K, its a necessary evil to keep a small club with a tiny turnover in the PL. As Majiball says, come back and slag it off when any club the size of Rovers spend a decade in the PL. That original article shows we aren't even as big as most fans think we are, we're a smaller club with a smaller turnover than the likes of Bolton and West Brom. Given that Wigan have Dave Whelan's muscle, we had no equals in terms of stable PL clubs with our spending power. Getting the best out of what you've got is the whole point of football, Williams was a genius.

Fine, I'm just disputing that running a business with so little breathing room can in any way be described as stellar management. I wasn't aware that Sam + JW = relegationproof 4ever.

Without a shadow of a doubt. The best small club manager in the country and the best chairman in the country. If we'd kept that combination we'd have had as much chance of getting relegated as Man U have of not qualifying for the Champions League.

[Majiball]

Under the RSC pic:

However,
this has produced what the club itself describes as an “uncomfortable
ratio of wages to turnover” of 91%, which is, needless to say, one of
the worst in the Premier League. The problem is not so much the absolute
level of the wage bill – it’s only the 12th highest in the Premier
League – but the disproportionately low turnover, which is very
difficult to address. There is a clear correlation between a club’s wage
bill and its success on the pitch, so Blackburn are unwilling to reduce
their wages, which means that they have to invest a greater proportion
of their income than their competitors.

Under the RSC pic:

However,
this has produced what the club itself describes as an “uncomfortable
ratio of wages to turnover” of 91%, which is, needless to say, one of
the worst in the Premier League. The problem is not so much the absolute
level of the wage bill – it’s only the 12th highest in the Premier
League – but the disproportionately low turnover, which is very
difficult to address. There is a clear correlation between a club’s wage
bill and its success on the pitch, so Blackburn are unwilling to reduce
their wages, which means that they have to invest a greater proportion
of their income than their competitors.

I used the article as back-up, originally it came from John Williams mouth as it was a topic we discussed as I think 91% is a bit high.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Yep fair enough, apologies.

[Majiball]

No need to apologise, I just knew something you didn't.

[M-K]

I remember reading an article in the Guardian in the mid-90s - a pre-season preview after the title win, I think - that had the prophetic line "The feeling persists that Ewood Park is a house of cards."

Credit to the management that they postponed the collapse for as long as they did, but it all came crashing down very quickly after the Walker funding dried up. A similar thing might happen to Wigan one day, but the figures suggest they're maybe slightly better prepared for the demise of their sugar daddy (70% of turnover on wages) than Rovers ever were.

[Stuart]

What @#/?, John Williams would never have appointed steve 'bullshit' Kean or let agents run our club. Swansea have been in the league 2 years, lets see what their wages are in 8 years time, they will increase as top 10 finishes will result in players asking for more.

You do JW and the others who ran our club very very well a disservice, we are where we are because of the loons from pune and the retards they've let in and their moronic decisions.

We'd never have gone down under Sam and JW.

The bit in bold is interesting. Higher finishes should not be grounds for increased basic wage demands but should be rewarded through bonuses.

Finish 10th and they should get a share of the placement money, once the club's bills are paid. Increasing the basic wage would cause all massive problems in the event of finishing 17th the following season.

If I owned a club, I'd set my wage budget out at 60% of turnover (or whatever was affordable) and run a 'Pimlico Plumbers' scenario. Might encourage a bit of team spirit if nothing else!

[LeChuck]

The bit in bold is interesting. Higher finishes should not be grounds for increased basic wage demands but should be rewarded through bonuses.

In theory, yes. But the reality is that if they're good enough to get Swansea into the top 10 then other top 10 clubs will start sniffing round and will offer higher wages. Swansea then have to decide whether to match what's on offer elsewhere or let them go and get cheaper replacements.

The bonus thing can only work if there is a culture of it throughout the league. At the moment almost all clubs are happy to offer huge basic wages so the incentive to go on a bonus system just isn't there.

[Baz]

Fine, I'm just disputing that running a business with so little breathing room can in any way be described as stellar management. I wasn't aware that Sam + JW = relegationproof 4ever.

Over 90% of turnover on wages plus a substantial annual handout from the Trust. The financial fair play rule might have got Rovers in the end even if Kean and Venky's hadn't.

What substantial annual handout was that then? The funding from the Trust went many years ago (around the time Duff left i think) The club was left to run itself on its own budget. What Williams and team did was brilliant for us as a club, we had a relatively small squad of quality players on decent wages, we sold assets when we needed to (warnock, rsc etc) and bought cheaply. The model worked as most seasons we finished above our target (based on prize money to pay wages), of 12/13th. Dont remember anyone really complaining when we played in Europe most season, had some real top quality players (Bellamy, thin Benni, RSC, Bentley, Tugay etc..).

[krypton1980]

I remember Williams once saying that the club was being kept afloat by roughly £3 million being invested by the walker trust each year. Think he's said it around the time of the club being up for sale just before the venkys interest became public.

Edit:read this link for info on investment several paragraphs down

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/how-do-blackburn-rovers-stay-afloat.html?m=1

"Since Jack Walkers death in 2000, the club has been owned by the Jack Walker Settlement Trust, which is based in Jersey, where Walker was a tax exile. The Trust has invested well over £100 million, most notably converting £14 million of loans into share capital in 2006, followed by the conversion of £80 million preference shares into equity in 2007. They also provided annual funding of £3 million for six years, but the money has now all but dried up. In fact, in 2007/08 the trustees discontinued this support, arguing that there was no requirement to invest further, given the new TV deal, though they were persuaded to provide a £3 million loan for the 2008/09 campaign."

[Stuart]

I remember it as an annual £3m 'loan', which they stopped at least 2 years before selling.

[Majiball]

Rovers would have been fine in the EPL as the new TV deal is more than enough to cover the loses previously made. Prize money increases as well.

[M-K]

So that's "well over £100m" - on top of parachute payments, TV money, gate receipts and all other turnover - to get promotion and then stay mostly secure in the top half of the Premier League. Surely the kind of result you'd expect from an investment of that size. It's not Champions League money but it's more than most mid-table sides had.

The funding dries up in 2009. The club is relegated three years later and administration and/or a second relegation is a possibility. This is despite once again having wealthy owners, but those owners aren't prepared to sink the kind of money into the club that the Trust used to.

I don't think that's stellar management, I think it's called spending a load of money.

[thenodrog]

16th 17th highest wage bill my arse, we were always in the top 10-12 clubs for wages as Williams felt paying wages of that ilk allowed us to finish in the top 10. Wages to finishing place used to have a correlation.

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/how-do-blackburn-rovers-stay-afloat.html

Surely Allardyce's way of managemnent was based on high wages but a smaller squad. A number of out and out highly paid specialists like GK and CF with lots of 'lesser' players who could play a number of positions. Eminently sensible for a club like ours (or Notlob for that matter) and the reason that he could attract the likes of Campo, Djorkaeff, Okocha, Salgado etc and/or keep the Samba's and Davies's happy.

Walking that tightrope, spending almost every penny the club makes on players it can barely afford - that was financial suicide, as we seem to be finding out now.

It means that when you go down, you go down with millstones like MGP on huge wages.

It means that you're reliant on handouts from rich owners / the former owner's estate.

Those graphs show Swansea with a similar turnover but only spending 50% on wages. That's more like stellar management.

Any suicide involved clueless numpties getting rid of the senior management at the bidding of that Fat Cuntroller. 'Fools and their money are soon parted'.

[thenodrog]

Fine, I'm just disputing that running a business with so little breathing room can in any way be described as stellar management. I wasn't aware that Sam + JW = relegationproof 4ever.

Over 90% of turnover on wages plus a substantial annual handout from the Trust. The financial fair play rule might have got Rovers in the end even if Kean and Venky's hadn't.

You have a point of sorts BUT imo it would just result in the lesser players taking less money.

For us to lose players they'd have to find another club that would pay them big money and the FFP would mean that there would be less of those around. It would be a buyers market.

BUT as I warned at the time reducing the cost of ST's would bite us on the arse big time should relegation occur and it has. Suffering relegation and having to double the price of ST's as the Prem media money fizzles out will surely have us on the road to disaster. Beware cos if any new owners manage to elbow the Venky's aside we will surely be asked to pay the going rate for ST's.

[Stuart]

Rovers would have been fine in the EPL as the new TV deal is more than enough to cover the loses previously made. Prize money increases as well.

It would until the players and their agents came knocking. Sky are pumping the clubs with unsustainable sums of money which eventually means that clubs turn to borrowing to cover losses due to either overextending themselves, overestimating their final league placing or even relegation.

The other worry is the influx of foreign "investors" who might borrow huge amounts of cash, secured against the future TV money income, to use for their own ends.

FFP is being enforced yet if the clubs could have had self imposed wage bills that were 60% of turnover (average attendance plus prize funds for 17th place) and guaranteed bonuses for league placings it may not have been needed. It could work just as well in principle for Man Utd or City as it would for Rovers.

If owners want to fund a spending spree they should be forced to pump their money on top with no strings attached - for the full length of any agreed player contracts. Wages themselves aren't a problem, unsustainable/high risk debt is.

It seems like the PL want to enjoy the kudos from global popularity of the league but don't want any responsibility to ensure clubs are protected from stupid owners.

[Majiball]

It would until the players and their agents came knocking. Sky are pumping the clubs with unsustainable sums of money which eventually means that clubs turn to borrowing to cover losses due to either overextending themselves, overestimating their final league placing or even relegation.

The other worry is the influx of foreign "investors" who might borrow huge amounts of cash, secured against the future TV money income, to use for their own ends.

FFP is being enforced yet if the clubs could have had self imposed wage bills that were 60% of turnover (average attendance plus prize funds for 17th place) and guaranteed bonuses for league placings it may not have been needed. It could work just as well in principle for Man Utd or City as it would for Rovers.

If owners want to fund a spending spree they should be forced to pump their money on top with no strings attached - for the full length of any agreed player contracts. Wages themselves aren't a problem, unsustainable/high risk debt is.

It seems like the PL want to enjoy the kudos from global popularity of the league but don't want any responsibility to ensure clubs are protected from stupid owners.

This is where the overall ruling bodies need to get involved and make changes across the board. The new FFP rules are @#/? and the new deals will as you say just end up leaving the clubs for players, agents, dark loads and idiot forgein owners. Salary caps need introducing, along with % revenues as per the football league, other wise football will evetually implode. The spainish clubs are screwed as are the english, italians and I'm highly sure most clubs in europe will have large debts as well. It's high time FIFA sorted the game out before it's too late and we see clubs going to the wall. But given their antics and blatant naughtyness it would appear that the majority of the game is bent. The shysters need removing from football asap and they're everywhere!!!