|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,824
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,824 |
From generally reported finances, Man City's first team last year, including the manager, cost the club around £135m on salaries alone. This would not include any potential wages requiring payment while away on loan. 25 Players + 1 Manager. Man City then have a further 124 football staff, and 170 Commercial and Administration.
In the same period, Liverpool spent £105m on salaries. This includes some wages requiring payment while away on loan. 30 Players + 1 Manager. Liverpool then have a further 561 staff members responsible in ground, maintenance, admin, commercial and other. 27 Part time scouting staff, 1,496 part-time temporary staff and 108 other players, managers and coaches.
As previously stated, this figure will also include the pay-offs for Rodgers and supporting staff alleviated from their positions in the October. If you consider this cost in the region of £15.7m alone, the equivalent of 3 players on £100k a week salaries, is it that surprising that we might have spent more given the omissions from Man City's list. The notable difference is in the placement of all staff member costs. If, for example, Man City pay a company to undertake commercial ventures/stadium costs etc, then these would not fall under the umbrella of staff costs with which they fail to have listed part-time staff, amongst scouting etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054 |
From generally reported finances, Man City's first team last year, including the manager, cost the club around £135m on salaries alone. This would not include any potential wages requiring payment while away on loan. 25 Players + 1 Manager. Man City then have a further 124 football staff, and 170 Commercial and Administration.
In the same period, Liverpool spent £105m on salaries. This includes some wages requiring payment while away on loan. 30 Players + 1 Manager. Liverpool then have a further 561 staff members responsible in ground, maintenance, admin, commercial and other. 27 Part time scouting staff, 1,496 part-time temporary staff and 108 other players, managers and coaches.
As previously stated, this figure will also include the pay-offs for Rodgers and supporting staff alleviated from their positions in the October. If you consider this cost in the region of £15.7m alone, the equivalent of 3 players on £100k a week salaries, is it that surprising that we might have spent more given the omissions from Man City's list. The notable difference is in the placement of all staff member costs. If, for example, Man City pay a company to undertake commercial ventures/stadium costs etc, then these would not fall under the umbrella of staff costs with which they fail to have listed part-time staff, amongst scouting etc.
Yes, allot of football clubs are hiding away figures with FFP, using subsidiary companies etc, I saw a report City were under investigation for not declaring player image income etc, so the figures published and the actual figures could be quite different. You can say what you want about FSG and how they do not know football, but they know how to run businesses, so I am guessing the amount of people we have and what we pay them is correct, or FSG would change it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 7,291
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 7,291 |
You can say what you want about FSG and how they do not know football, but they know how to run businesses, so I am guessing the amount of people we have and what we pay them is correct, or FSG would change it.
Good point, bearing in mind they are tight when it comes to LFC I cannot see them paying over the odds for members of staff.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
From generally reported finances, Man City's first team last year, including the manager, cost the club around £135m on salaries alone. This would not include any potential wages requiring payment while away on loan. 25 Players + 1 Manager. Man City then have a further 124 football staff, and 170 Commercial and Administration.
In the same period, Liverpool spent £105m on salaries. This includes some wages requiring payment while away on loan. 30 Players + 1 Manager. Liverpool then have a further 561 staff members responsible in ground, maintenance, admin, commercial and other. 27 Part time scouting staff, 1,496 part-time temporary staff and 108 other players, managers and coaches.
As previously stated, this figure will also include the pay-offs for Rodgers and supporting staff alleviated from their positions in the October. If you consider this cost in the region of £15.7m alone, the equivalent of 3 players on £100k a week salaries, is it that surprising that we might have spent more given the omissions from Man City's list. The notable difference is in the placement of all staff member costs. If, for example, Man City pay a company to undertake commercial ventures/stadium costs etc, then these would not fall under the umbrella of staff costs with which they fail to have listed part-time staff, amongst scouting etc.
Yes, allot of football clubs are hiding away figures with FFP, using subsidiary companies etc, I saw a report City were under investigation for not declaring player image income etc, so the figures published and the actual figures could be quite different. You can say what you want about FSG and how they do not know football, but they know how to run businesses, so I am guessing the amount of people we have and what we pay them is correct, or FSG would change it. Yes they will change this and one of the significant ways to cut personnel is through merging of activities. This is probably why closing Melwood will reduce costs, the more facilities you run, the more people you need.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,088
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,088 |
There is the obvious example of us paying the likes of Lucas and Sturridge obscene weekly wages. One is a loyal servant, as is a bar tender or housekeeper, and the other is a slacker who is only fit when it is time to go clubbin with his "homies".
Stupid holidays in Spain mid-term also is stupid waste of money and certainly is not a way of inspiring the troops to take anything seriously, yet still get paid.
Also I am sure that Man City have clever ways of diverting their expenses to hides much of their wage bill.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,936
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,936 |
Getting back to the original article in the Liverpool Echo, it's just another propaganda tool being used to appease fans upset at the lack of funding to the area that matters most to them...on the players who take to the pitch. The Liverpool Echo are always complicit in this subterfuge.
Whilst we as fans point to the lack of money being invested into the team over the past 3 transfer windows...having a gross nett spend of MINUS 11 mill...The Echo are posting ridiculous headlines like this>>> "Liverpool's wage bill rockets by 25% as they out-spend Man City"!
Do we honestly believe that FSG are going to suddenly give Klopp what he wants this summer, in order to make us competitive for the coming next season ahead, with more games on the horizon?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Getting back to the original article in the Liverpool Echo, it's just another propaganda tool being used to appease fans upset at the lack of funding to the area that matters most to them...on the players who take to the pitch. The Liverpool Echo are always complicit in this subterfuge.
Whilst we as fans point to the lack of money being invested into the team over the past 3 transfer windows...having a gross nett spend of MINUS 11 mill...The Echo are posting ridiculous headlines like this>>> "Liverpool's wage bill rockets by 25% as they out-spend Man City"!
Do we honestly believe that FSG are going to suddenly give Klopp what he wants this summer, in order to make us competitive for the coming next season ahead, with more games on the horizon? Well, it is their money so nobody can really force them to put it in the teamM they did say they wanted a self sustaining team...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,936
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,936 |
[/quote] Well, it is their money so nobody can really force them to put it in the teamM they did say they wanted a self sustaining team... That's a very dangerous way of thinking if that is how FSG see it. It's the fans who are paying the lions share of this money and don't forget about the commercial partners who want to be associated to a successful team. The fans patience has eroded and it's only a matter of time before those big commercial sponsorships become harder and harder to come by! Success will always be measured by silverware and this past 7 years has been an absolute disaster!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,088
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,088 |
The echo always have "disneyland" spin on everything LFC. The propaganda is so rediculous.
|
|
|
|
|
