Jump to content
WhiskeyJar

Mohamed Salah

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, an tha said:

Although all that said how much is this 'story' a case of a paper making shite up to have a headline/paper not having a clue what he actually earns already and what his actual demands are.

Again,it's hard to disagree. Slow news weekend= Lies and half truth headlines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Elite said:

I think Salah is more of the Ronaldo, Messi Ilk in that he'll still be a top player into his mid-thirties.

There’s no guarantees of that and those 2 were far more of a sure thing than Mo.

 

I posted a while back about how clubs are going the opposite way now when it comes to giving ageing players long term contracts on ridiculous wages. It’s far easier to keep hold of them on the wages they’ve signed upto for another couple of years and see where the land lies when there contracts are up and they’re in their 30’s than get stuck with a disinterested player you can’t get shut of. 
 

Be interesting to see how this pans out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, an tha said:

Although all that said how much is this 'story' a case of a paper making shite up to have a headline/paper not having a clue what he actually earns already and what his actual demands are.

I haven't read the mirror story - but is it possible it has fuck all to do with Salah or his agent and has come from the club so the "greedy cunt" stuff starts? It's exactly what they did with sterling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Players can demand big wages on contract renewals because there's no transfer fee. It really is as simple as that.

 

£500,000 a week is £26 mlllion a year, or £104m over four years.

 

It's the rough equivalent of signing a player for £70m and giving him a contract worth £150,000 a week.

 

Does anyone think there wouldn't be a horde of clubs willing to pay £70m for Salah and give him £150,000 a week? Because budget-wise, that's what they'd be doing.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Does anyone think there wouldn't be a horde of clubs willing to pay £70m for Salah and give him £150,000 a week? Because budget-wise, that's what they'd be doing.

In two years when he is available on a free, yes they would be.

 

Or they will be paying a transfer fee and the wages.

 

If you want to know why football is fucked:

 

Signing Brazil star Neymar, 29, from Barcelona in 2017 has cost PSG £489m in his transfer fee and wages.

 

 

That is 100 mil a year. One hundred million a season, on one player.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barrington Womble said:

I haven't read the mirror story - but is it possible it has fuck all to do with Salah or his agent and has come from the club so the "greedy cunt" stuff starts? It's exactly what they did with sterling. 

I'd hope we are better than that shite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're one of the biggest clubs in the world in terms of turnover so we should start paying the going rate for players, especially when those players have delivered the biggest prizes, instead of acting like a small club.

 

The mancs have several players on huge salaries, yet we constantly get told we've got one of the biggest wage bills in the league- how?!

 

Think Mane is on something like 100k if that - Titus bramble must've been making that much in his prime!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ManéMan said:

We're one of the biggest clubs in the world in terms of turnover so we should start paying the going rate for players, especially when those players have delivered the biggest prizes, instead of acting like a small club.

 

The mancs have several players on huge salaries, yet we constantly get told we've got one of the biggest wage bills in the league- how?!

 

Think Mane is on something like 100k if that - Titus bramble must've been making that much in his prime!

You are pretty sure we are not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rick Sanchez C-137 said:

I'd love to see ala list of our wages. No idea how were always at the top of wage bills. Just heaps of crocks on £100k?

We'll have paid out tens of millions in bonuses following the CL/Prem wins. And I doubt we try and cheat the wage figures like I suspect other sides do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, aws said:

We'll have paid out tens of millions in bonuses following the CL/Prem wins. And I doubt we try and cheat the wage figures like I suspect other sides do. 

I don't think it's all trophy bonus driven. In the accounts before last our wage bill was about 300m iirc. It was for the financial year ending may 2019 and we didn't win the CL till June 19, so those bonuses had to fall outside that and in the latest accounts at ~325m it was outside the PL win. I'm pretty sure we.dont try and fiddle our wages like city where they try and keep things out. It wouldn't shock me though if we chuck in thing most clubs don't - maybe agent fees or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

In two years when he is available on a free, yes they would be.

 

Or they will be paying a transfer fee and the wages.

 

If you want to know why football is fucked:

 

Signing Brazil star Neymar, 29, from Barcelona in 2017 has cost PSG £489m in his transfer fee and wages.

 

 

That is 100 mil a year. One hundred million a season, on one player.

 

 

Like Dave says on the podcast, the oil clubs have skewed football, from the transfer market to player wages and messing with everyone's perception.

 

The idea that we might not even be paying Sadio 100k a week is a clear example of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Elite said:

I think Salah is more of the Ronaldo, Messi Ilk in that he'll still be a top player into his mid-thirties.


No chance. How many forwards maintain their peak level? And how many of the ones that do have their game based around pace?

 

Even Ronaldo has had to completely reinvent his game to become more of a goal hanger and as much as we’d love to think otherwise, Salah is no Ronaldo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, ManéMan said:

Going by the figures that get bandied about for players at other clubs, then yeah I'm sure.

Why would the top players in the world be signing extensions then?

 

For the love of the club?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wage debate started up again the other day after that Swiss ramble put up clubs wage bills. 
 

The newspapers were saying the team bonuses for winning the champions league was about £5 mill between them and the Prem was pretty similar. 
 

So who the fuck is taking nearly £200 mill of our wage bill when the talent only takes up a 3rd of the total wage. Our admin staff must be earning about £10 grand a week. 

 

 

6BAFD3B3-44C8-49FE-8485-1052DD8DEFE0.jpeg

336872B8-D5AF-4B53-8D47-381BD47A28B3.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

Why would the top players in the world be signing extensions then?

 

For the love of the club?

Well Wijnaldum for one didn't. We also pulled out of signing Werner due to his wage demands, which was £240k if I remember. On the other hand we have the mancs shelling out £70m plus on a relatively unproven youngster while paying him close to £400k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barrington Womble said:

I don't think it's all trophy bonus driven. In the accounts before last our wage bill was about 300m iirc. It was for the financial year ending may 2019 and we didn't win the CL till June 19, so those bonuses had to fall outside that and in the latest accounts at ~325m it was outside the PL win. I'm pretty sure we.dont try and fiddle our wages like city where they try and keep things out. It wouldn't shock me though if we chuck in thing most clubs don't - maybe agent fees or something.

Fair enough. I don't think money is disappearing or being secretly sucked out by FSG so my gut feeling is that different accountancy practices may be the reason why we never seem  to have money to spend which is commensurate with our income compared with our peer clubs. Maybe we budget in a very safe, conservative manner ( perhaps to comply with stricter US financial requirements for financial institutions) and other clubs take a more liberal, risky approach. You'd probably need some forensic accountants with full access to the information to get to the bottom of what does seem a bit of a mystery. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ManéMan said:

Well Wijnaldum for one didn't. We also pulled out of signing Werner due to his wage demands, which was £240k if I remember. On the other hand we have the mancs shelling out £70m plus on a relatively unproven youngster while paying him close to £400k.

Werner is not one of the best players in the world.

Van Dijk and Alisson clearly are - they probably have agents as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Red74 said:

So who the fuck is taking nearly £200 mill of our wage bill 

 

Mr A. Yacht 

 

really good motor on him and takes up a wide berth in the squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Werner is not one of the best players in the world.

Van Dijk and Alisson clearly are - they probably have agents as well.

Yet he's probably earning a lot more than both, and there'll be many more relatively mediocre players in the league earning more than our top earners, some of whom you have rightly said are the best in he world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, aws said:

Fair enough. I don't think money is disappearing or being secretly sucked out by FSG so my gut feeling is that different accountancy practices may be the reason why we never seem  to have money to spend which is commensurate with our income compared with our peer clubs. Maybe we budget in a very safe, conservative manner ( perhaps to comply with stricter US financial requirements for financial institutions) and other clubs take a more liberal, risky approach. You'd probably need some forensic accountants with full access to the information to get to the bottom of what does seem a bit of a mystery. 

It would seem unlikely it would be American accountancy practices because you could compare us to Manchester United who are listed on NYSE, carry some significant acquisitional debt and still out spend us despite turning over very little more. I just think they're tight. Perhaps some FSG people are paid via some type of "services" that falls in this "other" category in the accounts so our highest director remains somewhat insignificant. But our 326m seems a pretty unlikely number if it's only wages. About 30m will be NI, the rest is hard to fathom if you compare it to this. https://www.spotrac.com/epl/liverpool-fc/payroll/ . And that makes us still within the UEFA target of 70% of turnover even in a covid impacted season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×