Be interesting to see which home grown players we will sell to make the sufficient profits to cover our expenses. They are here to make money, the least they could do is not get the club in trouble from the finance.

3 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

They have one in this country for the Premier League in Rugby Union ... potentially another thing football could learn from that sport, along with their use of video technology and standard of (and respect for) the referees !

From a long gone era in football.

3 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

In terms of the Top 5 leagues across Europe, there is definitely scope to cut wages in the PL and still be more attractive than the European Leagues : 

Won't be able to compete with the Saudis, but that's probably only going to appeal to players nearing the end of their careers, and it may well all go tits up like China eventually anyway. 

 

 

Thing is that graph doesn't take into consideration the disproportionate distribution of wages in Spain, Germany, and France.  Slap a wage cap on the Premier League and every top player will move to Real, Barca, Bayern, and PSG.  Even some of the big Italian clubs are not far off.  The only way a salary cap would work is if it was a blanket European/World football wage cap, but the Premier League and other major European clubs wouldn't want to lose that advantage so most likely will never happen.

Estimated wage bill 23/24:

1. Paris Saint-Germain – €290,790,000
2. Real Madrid – €282,650,000
3. Bayern Munich – €255,820,000
4. Manchester Utd – €236,221,435 (£206,796,000)
5. Manchester City – €229,221,472 (£200,668,000)
6. Barcelona – €204,710,000
7. Arsenal – €189,661,611 (£166,036,000)
8. Chelsea – €177,425,378 (£155,324,000)
9. Atletico Madrid – €164,660,000
10. Liverpool – €155,625,874 (£136,240,000)

11. Aston Villa – €133,648,175 (£117,000,000)
12. Tottenham – €128,896,240 (£112,840,000)
13. Borussia Dortmund – €126,600,000
14. Juventus – €121,592,000
15. Inter – €115,170,000
16. West Ham Utd – €107,393,733 (£94,016,000)
17. Roma – €102,920,000
18. RB Leipzig – €101,040,000
19. Newcastle Utd – €96,523,683 (£84,500,000)
20. Everton – €90,215,947 (£78,978,000)

Fair point, but I think you're talking about a handful of players at most that would be wanted by the big 4 or 5 in Europe. 

Those clubs have already signed most of the players they would want. 

If the estimate for us is correct and we are down to £155m then that is spectacular work from Boehly and team - less than half what it was in our last published accounts.

When you look at our highest paid players they are not really justifying what they are getting anyway, so what's the loss if they leave ?

James, Fofana, Chilwell, Nkunku typically miss most of the season with injuries, Sterling most fans on here would drive to the airport themselves if you take the comments in the Sterling thread at face value, Cucurella is crap, and then you have Enzo and Caicedo who again most people complain about every game ... 

 

Shocking waste of money when you think about it ... 

Yeah for salary cap to work it would need to be all leagues. 

6 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Yeah for salary cap to work it would need to be all leagues. 

You'd think all the big clubs in Spain and Italy that are effectively beyond broke would be leading the way !

 

5 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

You'd think all the big clubs in Spain and Italy that are effectively beyond broke would be leading the way !

 

Hence them pushing for the super league and drooling over that 'loyalty bonus'. 

19 hours ago, dkw said:

But how is that possible with such moronic American owners, that's surely impossible......

It's possible with such moronic owners by spending record amounts and giving extra long contracts ( another 7.5 years of Jackson) and partially offsetting the spend by selling academy players.

Meanwhile plunging the actual football side of the club to its lowest ever in the PL.

Still, our billionaire owners look to be on track to eventually suck money from our club once the trading shares and paying dividends embargo ends.

But I'm hopeful that their experiment will eventually work  , we have a lot of apparently youngsters who might be  great players for Chelsea and we have to accept we don't have RA anymore, or even Ken Bates and his teams of his final 7 seasons.

I don't like slagging off the team, so I'll always take my frustration out on owners, programme sellers, hot dog vendors etc instead 😁😁😁

Phew ! Apologies for the wall of text mate

5 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

Fair point, but I think you're talking about a handful of players at most that would be wanted by the big 4 or 5 in Europe. 

Those clubs have already signed most of the players they would want. 

If the estimate for us is correct and we are down to £155m then that is spectacular work from Boehly and team - less than half what it was in our last published accounts.

When you look at our highest paid players they are not really justifying what they are getting anyway, so what's the loss if they leave ?

James, Fofana, Chilwell, Nkunku typically miss most of the season with injuries, Sterling most fans on here would drive to the airport themselves if you take the comments in the Sterling thread at face value, Cucurella is crap, and then you have Enzo and Caicedo who again most people complain about every game ... 

 

Shocking waste of money when you think about it ... 

is this real?

1 minute ago, El regreso said:

is this real?

It's from capology ...

https://www.capology.com/club/chelsea/salaries/  

They say their data is "verified" when it has the green circled tick against it (so all apart from Nkunku in that list), which means : 

A player's wage is "verified" if provided directly by the club or agent, and/or confirmed by +2 sources.

Mikel apparently spoke to Boehly. Mikel should probably look at the squad first. Not living in reality Mikel 

 

6 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

If the estimate for us is correct and we are down to £155m then that is spectacular work from Boehly and team - less than half what it was in our last published accounts.

Not sure I agree with that. There's almost perfect correlation between a clubs wage bill and where they finish in the football pyramid because the top players demand the top wages.

If a team can remain at the top while trimming the wage bill that's fantastic, cutting a few players on big money who aren't contributing much is fantastic work. replacing top players with less talented players on less money and getting worse results isn't a particularly genius strategy unfortunately. 

Don't forget many of our players salaries got cut because we didn't qualify for the Champions league, we're not going to qualify this season either and that's a financial hole that will outdo any wage savings.

15 minutes ago, Whats_The_Mata? said:

Not sure I agree with that. There's almost perfect correlation between a clubs wage bill and where they finish in the football pyramid because the top players demand the top wages.

If a team can remain at the top while trimming the wage bill that's fantastic, cutting a few players on big money who aren't contributing much is fantastic work. replacing top players with less talented players on less money and getting worse results isn't a particularly genius strategy unfortunately. 

Don't forget many of our players salaries got cut because we didn't qualify for the Champions league, we're not going to qualify this season either and that's a financial hole that will outdo any wage savings.

Well, the data is the data. Feel free to find some better data if you think it is wrong !

Our wage bill is about 4th in the PL based on the table that DarkMata posted, which sounds about right. I think we'd be Top 4 if we had the injuries under control. If you took 3 Liverpool defenders out of their team, including both first choice full backs, plus Salah, they'd probably be dropping a boat load of points as well ... just like they did a couple of seasons back when they lost 6 successive home games. 

27 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Well, the data is the data. Feel free to find some better data if you think it is wrong !

Our wage bill is about 4th in the PL based on the table that DarkMata posted, which sounds about right. I think we'd be Top 4 if we had the injuries under control. If you took 3 Liverpool defenders out of their team, including both first choice full backs, plus Salah, they'd probably be dropping a boat load of points as well ... just like they did a couple of seasons back when they lost 6 successive home games. 

It's not the data I think is wrong just the interpretation. 

in any industry you can always find less talented or experienced people to do a job for less than a quality professional but it's a stretch to say it's a positive if the job isn't done anywhere near as well.  It's hard to spin our players getting 30% wage cuts for missing out on the CL as a positive but I suppose this is one way of doing it. 

16 minutes ago, Whats_The_Mata? said:

It's not the data I think is wrong just the interpretation. 

in any industry you can always find less talented or experienced people to do a job for less than a quality professional but it's a stretch to say it's a positive if the job isn't done anywhere near as well.  It's hard to spin our players getting 30% wage cuts for missing out on the CL as a positive but I suppose this is one way of doing it. 

I think the figures are just base salaries anyway, so no bonuses or performance-related element included.

 

 

1 hour ago, evissy said:

Mikel apparently spoke to Boehly. Mikel should probably look at the squad first. Not living in reality Mikel 

 

That Pys thing  is full of sh*te... usually 

13 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

I didn't say it was easy but clubs all over are struggling with finances, and the main reason is they all pay too much in salaries. Surely it is in their collective best interests to do something about it ? It shouldn't require the creation of a Super League to run a club properly ... 

Sorry but I need to correct you clubs aren’t struggling with finances they are struggling to comply with FFP.

 

 

I have never been a fan of FFP. When it was first mooted it was sold about sustainability and debt.

What we now have is a mechanism whereby an owner can not put what they want into a club (  name any other type of business where you are restricted from investing your own capital into your own business) 

But it’s even worse than that when it comes to application of things like the £105 m ceiling allowed by way of equity funding over  3 year period . By that say in Evertons case their turnover is approx £180m  per annum or £540 million over a 3 year cycle. Their owner like all owners could put in £105 m so in Evertons case that means their income was boosted by just under 20%. In our case we earn circa £480 m per annum over three years that’s about £1.4 billion means our income could be boosted by around 8%. 
 

Irrespective that £105m when introduced in todays money would be in excess of £200 million

As I said a while ago we have absolutely no idea what our P&S submission were we simply don’t know if we squeaked or breezed through . The 2023 numbers in the statutory accounts will be interesting but for me two areas of income  I will be following is the commercial and sponsorship because these  areas were sadly neglected under RA and if you look at how for instance Liverpools and Spurs numbers have grown in this area we fall massively down

 

 

8 hours ago, terraloon said:

Sorry but I need to correct you clubs aren’t struggling with finances they are struggling to comply with FFP.

 

 

Most of them are losing money and not making a profit - you think that's all fine and dandy ?

Obviously if the owners are happy, like Roman was, to accept huge losses every year as a "hobby" business, and they an afford it, then sure ... but those types of owners are few and far between.

42 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Most of them are losing money and not making a profit - you think that's all fine and dandy ?

Obviously if the owners are happy, like Roman was, to accept huge losses every year as a "hobby" business, and they an afford it, then sure ... but those types of owners are few and far between.

I struggle to remember any time that football has ever made any noticeable profit  it’s actually not beneficial to show a profit as you get hit for Corporation Tax or players and agents look at the bottom line and what an. Even bigger slice and those that do like Utd have any surplus syphoned out by their owners. There are significant “ lost leaders” paid for by clubs such as Woman’s Football  that would be abandoned if the bottom line was the be all and end all in football. 

Cash is awash in the PL and many , like us, haven’t got even close to exploiting the commercial opportunities that exist particularly because of the fair value and related party restrictions that are currently in place which are in place  for no other reason that to stop owners putting money in either by way of say advertising and partially because of historical restrictions regarding dividends .

Debt is the issue that should be addressed and that would require one simple restriction namely based on the statutory accounts  all debt show within the accounts must not exceed say 40% of gross turnover and if it reaches that level the owners either have to sell their “ golden share” or increase their equity .

Edited January 17, 20242 yr by terraloon

9 hours ago, terraloon said:

I have never been a fan of FFP. When it was first mooted it was sold about sustainability and debt.

What we now have is a mechanism whereby an owner can not put what they want into a club (  name any other type of business where you are restricted from investing your own capital into your own business) 

But it’s even worse than that when it comes to application of things like the £105 m ceiling allowed by way of equity funding over  3 year period . By that say in Evertons case their turnover is approx £180m  per annum or £540 million over a 3 year cycle. Their owner like all owners could put in £105 m so in Evertons case that means their income was boosted by just under 20%. In our case we earn circa £480 m per annum over three years that’s about £1.4 billion means our income could be boosted by around 8%. 
 

Irrespective that £105m when introduced in todays money would be in excess of £200 million

As I said a while ago we have absolutely no idea what our P&S submission were we simply don’t know if we squeaked or breezed through . The 2023 numbers in the statutory accounts will be interesting but for me two areas of income  I will be following is the commercial and sponsorship because these  areas were sadly neglected under RA and if you look at how for instance Liverpools and Spurs numbers have grown in this area we fall massively down

 

 

FFP was never about looking after clubs lower down the league, it was always about keeping the status quo, keep the big boys at the top and in the CL money. Its all been fed by the G16 clubs, the fact they put it over as some kind of moral crusade now against rich owners is hilariously hypocritical.

2 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

Most of them are losing money and not making a profit - you think that's all fine and dandy ?

Obviously if the owners are happy, like Roman was, to accept huge losses every year as a "hobby" business, and they an afford it, then sure ... but those types of owners are few and far between.

Pretty sure that if Roman had sold us without any regulations, he'd have made a profit no? We were sold for billions and he bought us for millions. The 1.5bn lost is wiped out by how much we were worth when sold. 

The reality is if Newcastle spent 100m excess a year for 10 years, it's likely they would be more than 1bn more valuable than they are now. So they would have fallen massively foul of FFP but it would have been a financially sound decision. 

That's the argument some are making. 

The flip side, is that if those Newcastle owners are wrong, then Newcastle would go out of business and take other clubs down with them. Which is why I actually support FFP. 

The Mail have an article on our player purchases and sales the last couple of years re FFP say we may get into trouble next season though seem ok at the moment.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12968471/Chelsea-billion-players-Todd-Boehly-two-sacked-managers-broken-Premier-League-financial-rules-Everton-Forest.html

 

41 minutes ago, strider6004 said:

The Mail have an article on our player purchases and sales the last couple of years re FFP say we may get into trouble next season though seem ok at the moment.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12968471/Chelsea-billion-players-Todd-Boehly-two-sacked-managers-broken-Premier-League-financial-rules-Everton-Forest.html

 

Wouldn't wipe my arse on the Daily Fascist.

48 minutes ago, strider6004 said:

The Mail have an article on our player purchases and sales the last couple of years re FFP say we may get into trouble next season though seem ok at the moment.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12968471/Chelsea-billion-players-Todd-Boehly-two-sacked-managers-broken-Premier-League-financial-rules-Everton-Forest.html

Chelsea sales under Boehly 
SUMMER 2022

Timo Werner £25.3m

Emerson £15m

Billy Gilmour £10m

Michy Batshuayi £3.5m

Kenedy £500,000

JANUARY 2023

Jorginho £12m

SUMMER 2023

Before June 30

Kai Havertz £62m

Mateo Kovacic £25m 

Kalidou Koulibaly £17m

Edouard Mendy £16m

Ruben Loftus-Cheek £15m

After July 1

Mason Mount £55m

Christian Pulisic £17.1m

Ethan Ampadu £7m

Callum Hudson-Odoi £5m

I've made this point before, but there's also sell-on fees to add to the above. This was what the Telegraph wrote last summer about the sell-on fee for Livramento:

Quote

Having sold the 20-year-old to Southampton for £4million in 2021 it would suggest Chelsea are due at least £13million and up to £15.5million on the deal with Newcastle. Newcastle will pay an initial £30million for the right-back with up to £5million due in add-ons should certain targets be met.3 Aug 2023

£13-15m could prove crucila when doing the sums for FFP. Noone ever seems to remember this amount when drawing up our list of income and spending on players.