Super Cooper 0 Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 this has been raised before and I'm not sure it was defined. In football Does normal reporting of Ratio of wages to income only include first team squad? I may be wrong but I thought this figure included all wages (or at least all football related)?? The whole thing is fairly new i think, i don't recall Murray or McCann shouting about wages/turnover ratio. Whatever way we look at it, £5/6/7/8m in wages for players at this level is repugnant and we clearly cannot afford it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 Aye but a manager demanding a fair proportion of the turnover be spent on players..........that's ok by me you've got to entertain the fans as best you can where would that money have gone otherwise....................? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 The whole thing is fairly new i think, i don't recall Murray or McCann shouting about wages/turnover ratio. Whatever way we look at it, £5/6/7/8m in wages for players at this level is repugnant and we clearly cannot afford it. We need to find a way to tripple it sustainably. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
williamite1 0 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 I think the biggest issue is that we don't get value for the amount we spent. High wages for shit players under a manger who has proven himself inept in the job. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 We need to find a way to tripple it sustainably. Even then an £18m wage bill against Celtics £30m one we can't expect to challenge them over the course of the seasons ahead. They just turnedover £65m again. We can't get near that, we just ain't big enough. We would need to add about £30m onto our revenue next year, and then for every season after. It's unrealistic. Our normal turnover as an SPL club was only around £40m and we ran at a £10m loss carrying the huge squads that we did. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,834 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 The ET has learned something from the report, loosely mixed Rangers accounts: 10 key facts 1. Rangers made an operating loss of £8.3million last season - an improvement of £6million on the previous campaign. 2. Recently-departed chief executive Graham Wallace earned £378,000 in less than eight months and also secured a £100,000 pay-off. 3. Wallace's predecessor, Craig Mather, received a £350,000 severance package. 4. Rangers need up to £8million of debt or equity finance in the next 12 months - starting from January. 5. Retail revenue almost quadrupled to £7.6million but retail costs were the main cause of a £3million rise in operating charges. 6. Former finance director Brian Stockbridge received a £216,000 severance package and made £189,000 on a share option but handed back £98,000 bonus money. 7. Staff costs fell from £17.9million to £14.7million - staff numbers dropped from 196 to 175. 8. Total revenue rose almost a third to £25.2million. 9. The club's first-team wage bill was 26 per cent of turnover - down from 43 per cent the previous season. 10. Former director Philip Nash made £131,412 in consultancy fees in six months. At least the wage bill is (or was) right in line ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 The ET has learned something from the report, loosely mixed At least the wage bill is (or was) right in line ... Has anyone any idea how much the club received from the merchandise deal yet after cost deductions? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 Even then an £18m wage bill against Celtics £30m one we can't expect to challenge them over the course of the seasons ahead. They just turnedover £65m again. We can't get near that, we just ain't big enough. We would need to add about £30m onto our revenue next year, and then for every season after. It's unrealistic. Our normal turnover as an SPL club was only around £40m and we ran at a £10m loss carrying the huge squads that we did. These wage bills shouldn't be required to win the SPL and be cannon fodder in Europe. To put it into consideration, only 5 teams in Spain pay as much as that on wages. Though with the shambles that we are we'd probably need to spend far more than Celtic. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 7,266 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 would help if we had a decent scouting system to get the very best of talent some decent coaching staff to rear our own at sensible wages then sell at a first class profit this could help us no end 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 These wage bills shouldn't be required to win the SPL and be cannon fodder in Europe. To put it into consideration, only 5 teams in Spain pay as much as that on wages. Though with the shambles that we are we'd probably need to spend far more than Celtic. Spanish teams generally don't need to use cash as an incentive to encourage players to play in their league, their league is incentive in itself. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.