Premier League Salary Cap

[Anubis]

Most clubs have just voted for it. PFA say they’re against any hard limits on wages, unsurprisingly.

 

In principle, a good idea. Let’s see the proposals for implementation.

[TheHowieLama]

The league can write whatever rules they want.

Until they are enforced effectively they don't matter.

[Scott_M]

[Fugitive]

Expect to see loads of sponsorship and endorsement deals from Middle Eastern companies to City players in the coming years.

[TD_LFC]

So 'spending' on wages, amortisation and agents fees will be limited to x times the lowest earning club in the league. Coupled with the recent vote on banning amortisation for longer than 5 years.

 

Cobbling together very rough figures for us our costs are currently about £511m although it depends what wages are included (do non playing/coaching staff count) and doesn't include upcoming savings on some high earners.

[joe_fishfish]

25 minutes ago, Fugitive said:

Expect to see loads of sponsorship and endorsement deals from Middle Eastern companies to City players in the coming years.

City? Paying players off the books? I'm shocked. SHOCKED

[Anubis]

Bumped to fuck Code’s late arse thread off.

[Trumo]

2 hours ago, Fugitive said:

Expect to see loads of sponsorship and endorsement deals from Middle Eastern companies to City players in the coming years.

 

'In the coming years' he says!

[Sut]

Important ambassadorial roles, I think you'll find.

[Barrington Womble]

Both Manchester clubs and villa voted against this didn't they? 

[Mudface]

4 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

Both Manchester clubs and villa voted against this didn't they? 

 

Yes, and Chelsea abstained.

[dave u]

35 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

Both Manchester clubs and villa voted against this didn't they? 

 

What's Villa's angle here?

[JohnnyH]

Hope

[manwiththestick]

City proved with the Haaland deal that you can sign one of the most wanted players in world football for less than a Darwin and give wages that are thereabouts to what the elite level players are getting.

 

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, dave u said:

 

What's Villa's angle here?

Dunno, but they've been overspending massively since these owners took over. My guess is the owners have seen how much we & arsenal are worth and think if they get regular CL etc they can start hitting those types of valuations - I think the paid around 400m for them. But they're in Europe and likely to continue that way, so they're bound by UEFA PSR anyway. 

[Red74]

Can’t wait to see the little Ev breach this too and then cry corruption. 

[Wezza]

Isn’t it they’ve agreed to look into it as opposed to it’s definitely going to happen?

[chrisbonnie]

2 hours ago, dave u said:

 

What's Villa's angle here?

They're fucking minted as well, the equity company that owns them is worth over 100 billion. 

 

My mate supports them and has been giving it the large one all year, the smug cunt. Can't blame him either, they've been shite forever, and he's genuinely supported them since we where kids, when everyone else supported Liverpool or utd 

[dave u]

51 minutes ago, manwiththestick said:

City proved with the Haaland deal that you can sign one of the most wanted players in world football for less than a Darwin and give wages that are thereabouts to what the elite level players are getting.

 

 

They paid a dead agent £30m so the cost of that was well more than we paid for Darwin, and that's before we even start on the 900k a week wages (a third of which goes through City's books).

 

The summer before, Chelsea went for him and were put off by the 700k a week wage demands. A year later he's signing for City and we're meant to believe they're paying half that?

[TheHowieLama]

3 minutes ago, dave u said:

 

They paid a dead agent £30m so the cost of that was well more than we paid for Darwin, and that's before we even start on the 900k a week wages (a third of which goes through City's books).

 

The summer before, Chelsea went for him and were put off by the 700k a week wage demands. A year later he's signing for City and we're meant to believe they're paying half that?

 

I am pretty sure that post was tongue in cheek.

[Red74]

Just now, dave u said:

 

They paid a dead agent £30m so the cost of that was well more than we paid for Darwin, and that's before we even start on the 900k a week wages (a third of which goes through City's books).

 

The summer before, Chelsea went for him and were put off by the 700k a week wage demands. A year later he's signing for City and we're meant to believe they're paying half that?

Exactly, the barca & Madrid chairmen came out after they’d took him on a tour of Europe to who’re him out saying they wanted a million a week. Madrid chairman said after the financial disasters with Bale & Hazard, no one was getting wages like that anymore from them unless it was a once in a lifetime signing.  
 

Even Klopp said we had a look but put the phone back down. 
 

Then City announce they get him on a bargain deal of £350k a week 

[dave u]

Errrr, yeah, I knew that. So was mine.

 

Honest!

[Lee909]

6 minutes ago, dave u said:

 

They paid a dead agent £30m so the cost of that was well more than we paid for Darwin, and that's before we even start on the 900k a week wages (a third of which goes through City's books).

 

The summer before, Chelsea went for him and were put off by the 700k a week wage demands. A year later he's signing for City and we're meant to believe they're paying half that?

 

His deal as a ambassador to Abu Dhabi tourism is a complete coincidence and nothing to do the the other 600k a week

[TheHowieLama]

It is quite a honker if it's not.

[Code]

5 hours ago, Anubis said:

Bumped to fuck Code’s late arse thread off.

I had a look and honestly did not see this one.