Search the Community

The only way Liverpool will ever win the League is by paying higher wages than their rivals - it's not rocket science By David Maddock For the hard of thinking amongst our generally enlightened readership, I'd like to revisit a topic first touched upon a fortnight ago, when I suggested a correlation between wage spending and league position. For all Rafa's moaning about money, only a new stadium will allow Liverpool to win the title Quite interestingly, some of the regular contributors to the comments section at the bottom of my columns couldn't get their heads around the concept. But it is simple really. Let me explain. Over a period of time, the wealthiest clubs who can pay the highest wages tend to do better than the rest. Not exactly rocket science is it? Yet some took it to be a defence of Liverpool or their manager, or a prediction of their impending rise to supreme dominance or even some scientific mumbo-jumbo designed to confuse and distort. So let me explain further, and this time, I'll do it particularly slowly. In modern football, there is only one way to rise to the top of the pile over a long period, and that is to find the revenue so you can pay higher wages than your rivals, thus attracting the very best players. That is not some fanciful notion, but a scientific fact, provable over the past decade not just in the Premier League, but across every league in European, with a 93 per cent correlation. There are two three ways of increasing spending. One is to find a particularly generous benefactor, as Chelsea and Manchester City have done, with lots of patience and very deep pockets to keep funding the inevitable losses accumulated by attracting the very best. But history tells us that is a short-term position, because in the end the benefactor tends to tire of losing so much money, and either cuts back or withdraws. Roman Abramovich has been particularly generous at Chelsea, but even he is now asking the club to become self-sufficient, which will have an undoubted impact on future spending. How long before the same happens at Manchester City? Most people within football assume it is a passing trend, and within a couple of years the pipeline from the Middle East will dry up. We will see. Which brings us to the second form of revenue - borrowing. Lots of clubs have tried it, Leeds spring to mind and Portsmouth currently, along with many, many, many other clubs. They borrow money from the banks, or other sources, and hope increased success will increase revenues to allow that debt to be paid off. That policy, of course, is increasingly exposed as untenable, as Leeds proved, as Portsmouth are proving. Currently, it is estimated that more than two thirds of Premier League clubs are borrowing well beyond their means, and could pay a heavy price. The third way of increasing spending is to increase income. Which brings us back to the original article. I suggested, rather uncontroversially I thought, that if Liverpool are to challenge in the long run, then they can't go down the borrowing road, but must ultimately find ways of increasing their revenue to match the top spenders. Chelsea currently have the highest wage bill and City will soon have the second highest, both underwritten by their owners. Manchester United are third, because of their massive turnover, allowing them - comfortably - to meet interest payments and still have profit left over to pay wages. Arsenal will be fourth highest, because they too have big turnovers thanks to increased revenue streams from a state of the art new stadium. Liverpool, by next season will be fifth in the wage spending league, and thus can expect to generally, over a long period, end up fifth in the league. Obviously, this is a dangerous position, because it means they would miss out on Champions' League money, so they must act, and realistically, the only way they can do that is to build a new stadium, and increase their income dramatically. It is possible. The banks have already committed funds to help the build of a new stadium, if the current owners reduce debts on the borrowing they took out to pay for the purchase of the club. They will do that by bringing in new investors. If - and it is still a big IF given the current climate - Liverpool can find a new investor or investors to reduce debt by £100million, then they will be able to build a new stadium, and then match and possibly even exceed the revenue streams of Manchester United and Chelsea. They can become self-sufficient, in terms of being able to meet interest payments on the money borrowed to pay for the club, and still have enough profits to pay the highest wages, which - despite the understandable protests from fans opposed to the Glazer regime - is the position United are in. Not rocket science again, just a reasonable assessment of how the club can plan for the future and get themselves out of the current slump in fortunes they have endured. It is entirely plausible, and doesn't even require the overthrow of the hated American owners, just a dilution of their holding. Here endeth the lesson. I hope you get it this time.