Wages crisis?

[Howaythelads]

 

 

Yes, I know. Which begs the question why you feel the need to "spin" the £35m taken in dividends as a "reward for incompetence." If you were happy with their performance right through to 2003 then I'd suggest those dividends were in fact earned and so you should NOT be quoting this £35m figure in the way you do.

 

As I have said to NE5 I will never approve, and never have, of dividends. He managed to find some article from 1852 that I wrote in the Mag bemoaning the fact that the club were giving money away. I have been consistent in this. I was up against a wall of indifference at that time as the team were in Europe and no one really card how much was being bled from the club. I won't ever change in that view. Shareholders should get their reward by installing directors and managers who make the business more attractive and therefore increase the share price, allowing them to divest of their shares when they feel they have made the return required. I cannot see any justification whatever for dividends of £35m on top of losses of £23m. The business is worth £58m less today than it was when they took over. Some seem to just shrug and say they were unlucky with circumstances, but £58m wort of unlucky is VERY unlucky circumstances.

 

 

 

If the club could not afford to bring in players in 2003 then it was the correct thing not to bring  them in. I absolutely agree with you if that is what you are really asking me. The board judged that the club could afford to spend £8.5m that summer. With hindsight they were wrong. The club could not afford tod spend that £8.5m, it is a major contributor to their being an overdraft now. If it was wrong to spend it on player(s) it was wrong to spend it on pension contributions too.

 

As you know, what I said was that the club as a PLC the club has a plan to allocate 'x' funds to each activity/requirement to run the business. Funds had been allocated for transfers and had been spent by the manager. It was decided to allocate certain funds to dividends. I don't like the club being a PLC but it's now a fact of life. Just as long as they financially back the manager I think they are fulfilling their responsibilities to the manager and also the hopes of the fans. They must also attempt to fulfill their responsiblities to the shareholders, whether you and others like it or not.

 

 

So they had always planned to offer the Halls £4.5m for a chunk of their shares? YOu don't really belive that do you? Why to no one else? Why only in the year that Cameron Hall made such disastrous results? Wy have the dividends suddenly stopped? Why did Shepherd tell us that the signing of Woodgate was from the unexpected windfall from CL success?  Why did the subsequent planning mean we had to have an overdraft for the first time, or that we had to take £8m worth of sponsorship early? I just don't see a plan, or not as you describe it. If they did plan to be in this mes s then they want shooting. I don't believe they did plan it, it just 'happened' withotu them really noticing.  In much the same was as a new manager is appointed on the hoof, they have financial planning on the hoof. Hopefully the new guy wil bring some discipline.

 

 

 

I'm surprised that you view team -building as something that stops when you reach the top 4. Why do Man U and Liverpool keep investing ?

 

Here you go again making things up as you go along. So it's now time to tell you to f*** off. Sorry you had to spoil the post.

Sorry. You seemed to suggest that team-building was complete as we had bought in Woodgate, Ambrose and Bowyer (plus the others over the previous couple of year, but those three in 2003). If I misunderstood what you meant I apologise, but that was how it read.

 

 

Not much to say really, I can't be arsed to talk about dividends as I'm not really that interested. They've backed successive managers with enough money to build a successful team and the managers have failed. That you're totally obsessed with the entire system of companies handing out dividends to shareholders which manifests itself in how you perceive the board of Newcastle United really doesn't interest me in the slightest. Sorry about that.

 

As for the bit about team building. Team building never ends and anybody who has paid any attention to posts I've made since joining this forum would find your comment that I'd think otherwise totally ridiculous.

[macbeth]

As for the bit about team building. Team building never ends and anybody who has paid any attention to posts I've made since joining this forum would find your comment that I'd think otherwise totally ridiculous.

 

I understand that. I do. I read your posts, and know what you believe. That was why I am so confused you justifying stopping it, and the club 'investing' elsewhere instead.

[Parky]

We might even be losing upto £2m a month....I haven't had a chance to go through it yet.

 

 

http://www.nufc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/PLCDetail/0,,10278~1004245,00.html

 

 

Macbeth:

 

"A year ago for the first time ever the club announced they had a bank overdraft. Up til then the club had always had moneyin the bank to get by with tday to day things. Suddenly last January they told us they had an overdraft of £17.8m, by last July it was down to £5.5m as the season ticket money came in. This time the overdraft is £20.8m, so up £3m on last year.

 

The reason this is particulalrly bad is that last sumer season ticket sales were okay, there have been a lot more rumblings this year and it could well be that they will go into next season starting with an overdraft.

 

In all the short term amount that is owed totals £76.3m. this time last year it was £69.6m"

[macbeth]

you could have corrected my typos

[Parky]

In all reality it is going to come down to choices like whether on his wages Owen is good value.

[Parky]

Bumpaluna.

 

 

Probably good to tag on the expert opinion of Richard Slack a football finance expert pt2 Chronicle interview.

 

 

How much are the players' wages?

 

The interim report states that wages and salaries increased by 1% from £26.8m to £27m.

 

Mr Slack said: "A general rule is that clubs don't like to spend more than 50% of their revenue on wages.

 

"The current amount is just under 60% and if you were to take out of the equation the amount of compensation they are receiving for Michael Owen's injury, it would be more like 66%.

 

"So, can the club afford new signings without getting rid of existing players? You would have to look at where the extra money was going to come from. The club are probably relatively close to their buffer in terms of the amount they want to spend on wages."

[Rich]

What about the extra TV revenue that is incoming at the start of next season? Surely that will knock down the percentage a fair whack from the current 66%, even without European football next season? Still doesn't look like a crisis to me, whatever way you try to spin it.

 

The worry that I have is while the rest of the Premiership clubs will quite probably each spend some/most of the new money, we'll have to use it to balance the wage-bill while getting money from somewhere else for transfers, if at all. Not exactly brilliant and not even ideal, but hardly a crisis in my eyes.

 

A "crisis" would be if we had to go into administration or were on the brink of being relegated, surely?

 

If we hadn't have spent that money on wages last season and this season, with these managers, would be still be in the Premiership now? People seem to conveniently ignore the fact that we still came 7th last season and got to the last 16 of the UEFA Cup this campaign, with Glenn's "never seen before" injury list to contend with as well. The more I sit and think with my head over my heart, the more I realise how it isn't really that bad at all when you consider where we could be. It does have to improve though, I realise that, because there are plenty of people who don't see it that way.

[Dragon55544]

Get rid of Luque,Babayaro,Carr and Bramble then the wage bill should go down. I know we have to replace them but we shouldnt offer such high wages

[Howaythelads]

Get rid of Luque,Babayaro,Carr and Bramble then the wage bill should go down. I know we have to replace them but we shouldnt offer such high wages

 

As you say, Babayaro, Carr and Bramble would need replacements. However, Luque wouldn't need replacing and neither would Parker, if he was shipped out too.

[Mowen]

Get rid of Luque,Babayaro,Carr and Bramble then the wage bill should go down. I know we have to replace them but we shouldnt offer such high wages

 

As you say, Babayaro, Carr and Bramble would need replacements. However, Luque wouldn't need replacing and neither would Parker, if he was shipped out too.

 

Who would you play in the holding role when Butt was injured?

[ChezGiven]

Get rid of Luque,Babayaro,Carr and Bramble then the wage bill should go down. I know we have to replace them but we shouldnt offer such high wages

 

As you say, Babayaro, Carr and Bramble would need replacements. However, Luque wouldn't need replacing and neither would Parker, if he was shipped out too.

 

Who would you play in the holding role when Butt was injured?

 

Sidwell.

[Howaythelads]

Get rid of Luque,Babayaro,Carr and Bramble then the wage bill should go down. I know we have to replace them but we shouldnt offer such high wages

 

As you say, Babayaro, Carr and Bramble would need replacements. However, Luque wouldn't need replacing and neither would Parker, if he was shipped out too.

 

Who would you play in the holding role when Butt was injured?

 

Nobody springs to mind who is on the clubs books at present.

 

[macbeth]

Get rid of Luque,Babayaro,Carr and Bramble then the wage bill should go down. I know we have to replace them but we shouldnt offer such high wages

 

As you say, Babayaro, Carr and Bramble would need replacements. However, Luque wouldn't need replacing and neither would Parker, if he was shipped out too.

 

we lost Faye, Boumsong, Chopra, Elliot, Bowyer and Shearer from last year, replaced them with Duff, Martins, Bernard and Sibs and the wages bill went up. But that was also probably Souness's fault ?

[Martin Lol]

What about the extra TV revenue that is incoming at the start of next season? Surely that will knock down the percentage a fair whack from the current 66%, even without European football next season? Still doesn't look like a crisis to me, whatever way you try to spin it.

 

The worry that I have is while the rest of the Premiership clubs will quite probably each spend some/most of the new money, we'll have to use it to balance the wage-bill while getting money from somewhere else for transfers, if at all. Not exactly brilliant and not even ideal, but hardly a crisis in my eyes.

 

A "crisis" would be if we had to go into administration or were on the brink of being relegated, surely?

 

If we hadn't have spent that money on wages last season and this season, with these managers, would be still be in the Premiership now? People seem to conveniently ignore the fact that we still came 7th last season and got to the last 16 of the UEFA Cup this campaign, with Glenn's "never seen before" injury list to contend with as well. The more I sit and think with my head over my heart, the more I realise how it isn't really that bad at all when you consider where we could be. It does have to improve though, I realise that, because there are plenty of people who don't see it that way.

 

My thought, and it just an opinion,  is that whilst the new TV money will reduce the overall percentage ratio, when the new players come in who are going to improve the squad, the percentage will start pushing back up again.  Also, will Newcastle attract the right quality of players if there is no European competition?  If the 'right' players won't sign, then will FFS start offering silly wages to get those players in with the hope that the improved squad will have European competition the following season. 

 

I tend to agree that the current situation looks a cause for concern rather than looking disastrous, but I also think that there is an significant element of risk if Newcastle's next season finishes without European competition as a prize.  What I'm saying in a roundabout way is I think Newcastle's salary levels are sustainable without Uefa competition in the short term, but maybe for only one or two years.

[Baggio]

Also, will Newcastle attract the right quality of players if there is no European competition? 

 

I don't think players care too much about the uefa cup, waste of a thursday night tbh.

[Parky]

What about the extra TV revenue that is incoming at the start of next season? Surely that will knock down the percentage a fair whack from the current 66%, even without European football next season? Still doesn't look like a crisis to me, whatever way you try to spin it.

 

The worry that I have is while the rest of the Premiership clubs will quite probably each spend some/most of the new money, we'll have to use it to balance the wage-bill while getting money from somewhere else for transfers, if at all. Not exactly brilliant and not even ideal, but hardly a crisis in my eyes.

 

A "crisis" would be if we had to go into administration or were on the brink of being relegated, surely?

 

If we hadn't have spent that money on wages last season and this season, with these managers, would be still be in the Premiership now? People seem to conveniently ignore the fact that we still came 7th last season and got to the last 16 of the UEFA Cup this campaign, with Glenn's "never seen before" injury list to contend with as well. The more I sit and think with my head over my heart, the more I realise how it isn't really that bad at all when you consider where we could be. It does have to improve though, I realise that, because there are plenty of people who don't see it that way.

 

My thought, and it just an opinion,  is that whilst the new TV money will reduce the overall percentage ratio, when the new players come in who are going to improve the squad, the percentage will start pushing back up again.  Also, will Newcastle attract the right quality of players if there is no European competition?  If the 'right' players won't sign, then will FFS start offering silly wages to get those players in with the hope that the improved squad will have European competition the following season. 

 

I tend to agree that the current situation looks a cause for concern rather than looking disastrous, but I also think that there is an significant element of risk if Newcastle's next season finishes without European competition as a prize.  What I'm saying in a roundabout way is I think Newcastle's salary levels are sustainable without Uefa competition in the short term, but maybe for only one or two years.

 

I agree. It is well know right at this moment Arsenal would have problems without CL. I think we are ok to miss out one year, but need to get back in asap.

[Howaythelads]

Get rid of Luque,Babayaro,Carr and Bramble then the wage bill should go down. I know we have to replace them but we shouldnt offer such high wages

 

As you say, Babayaro, Carr and Bramble would need replacements. However, Luque wouldn't need replacing and neither would Parker, if he was shipped out too.

 

we lost Faye, Boumsong, Chopra, Elliot, Bowyer and Shearer from last year, replaced them with Duff, Martins, Bernard and Sibs and the wages bill went up. But that was also probably Souness's fault ?

 

Eh?

 

wtf are you on about now? Why are you asking me this at all?

 

But since you have once again shown your obsession with money ahead of maintaining our status as a PL club, are you saying you think the club should have kept Faye, Boumsong, Chopra, Elliot, Bowyer and an over-the-hill Shearer to help keep the wages as they were?

[macbeth]

Get rid of Luque,Babayaro,Carr and Bramble then the wage bill should go down. I know we have to replace them but we shouldnt offer such high wages

 

As you say, Babayaro, Carr and Bramble would need replacements. However, Luque wouldn't need replacing and neither would Parker, if he was shipped out too.

 

we lost Faye, Boumsong, Chopra, Elliot, Bowyer and Shearer from last year, replaced them with Duff, Martins, Bernard and Sibs and the wages bill went up. But that was also probably Souness's fault ?

 

Eh?

 

wtf are you on about now? Why are you asking me this at all?

 

But since you have once again shown your obsession with money ahead of maintaining our status as a PL club, are you saying you think the club should have kept Faye, Boumsong, Chopra, Elliot, Bowyer and an over-the-hill Shearer to help keep the wages as they were?

 

sorry it wasn't aimed at you, it was aaimed at the perso who suggested getting rid of players would reduce the wage bill. Apolgies