Poll: S24SU opinion on Wilder's budget

[Akinbiyi]

Can't believe how many want to force Wilder to work another miracle with only £10-20m....

They’re not in the real world

 

[Pinchy]

Apologies. I'd not seen your post & basically repeated it.

I’m deeply offended and do not feel able to accept your apology. I demand a full page notice in the London Gazette...

 

[nopigfansintown]

This may be more down to the ambition of future owners than the current incumbents. It's all hypothetical. Wilder's comments indicate a bottom three budget; McCabe's comments indicate something larger. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[Benny and the Blades]

I know let us just tell them we're not bothered, so just give us the money and we'll stop where we are......

 

[Jonboy60]

I think if McCabe wins the court case, there’s new investors/owners waiting in the wings.
Could say the same about the Prince, but he does seem to keep his cards closer to his chest.
But then again if I’m talking bollox, 20/30m.

 

[georgebernardshaw]

This season’s cashfest - might clear one or two things up - figures “include £79.4 million share of total pot”

Daily Telegraph this morning

 

[I should coco]

This season’s cashfest - might clear one or two things up

This clearly shows that the bottom club got £94m but it won't stop some saying we should spend £150m.

All these people wanting to spend £50+m on transfers are doing the usual 'money tree pays for wages' trick.

A player on £30k/week over 4 years, will cost about £7.5m including Nat Ins and pension. That is without any regard as to effect on relative wages and the existing pecking order.

 

[blade too long]

Think on fees around 20 to 25m as another 30m will go on wages minimum

 

[blademark]

This clearly shows that the bottom club got £94m but it won't stop some saying we should spend £150m.

All these people wanting to spend £50+m on transfers are doing the usual 'money tree pays for wages' trick.

A player on £30k/week over 4 years, will cost about £7.5m including Nat Ins and pension. That is without any regard as to effect on relative wages and the existing pecking order.

My understanding is that if we did spend, say, £50m on transfer fees, for accountancy purposes the amount is spread over the contract duration, say, 3 years. Therefore only £17m per annum, which doesn't seem unreasonable to be fair, against a minimum income of £94m in year one. Not even considering other considerable income such as sponsorship, ticket sales, merchandise etc.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

He should get 70m+, however I think he'll get closer to 66m.

 

[itsinyerblood]

Not that it matters (let's be right, at what point does a supporter's opinion have any influence?), and if I've already posted just ignore my previous comments, I think Wilder will receive between £20-35 mil.

Far from spectacular, but in the hands of a master wheeler-dealer let's see what CW manages to achieve. I'd prefer CW to have an additional £15 mil, but wanting ain't getting.

 

[Barney]

Not that it matters (let's be right, at what point does a supporter's opinion have any influence?), and if I've already posted just ignore my previous comments, I think Wilder will receive between £20-35 mil.

Far from spectacular, but in the hands of a master wheeler-dealer let's see what CW manages to achieve. I'd prefer CW to have an additional £15 mil, but wanting ain't getting.

I think it's irresponsible to rely on Wilder's managerial ability once again.

We've done it for three seasons in a row now and yes, it's worked so far.

However, he will want a buffer amount to cushion his inexperiences in recruiting Premier League quality.

 

[Pinchy]

View attachment 53614
This season’s cashfest - might clear one or two things up - figures “include £79.4 million share of total pot”

Daily Telegraph this morning

Well done. Very similar to last season, which I’ve linked about three times now, but it goes un-noticed whilst guesswork and pure fabrication prevail. Watch it keep coming.

 

[Pinchy]

My understanding is that if we did spend, say, £50m on transfer fees, for accountancy purposes the amount is spread over the contract duration, say, 3 years. Therefore only £17m per annum, which doesn't seem unreasonable to be fair, against a minimum income of £94m in year one. Not even considering other considerable income such as sponsorship, ticket sales, merchandise etc.

No hugely increased wages and other costs? How uniquely lucky we are.

What of next season’s £50m and the season after? Soon adds up.

 

[Topplayersleave]

This is where it becomes daft and silly season.

A £10 million player will want paying at least £30k pw.

To protect its investment, the club will need to secure a 3-4 year contract (say 4).

That’s £16 million on one player.

Someone mentioned we need at least 8 new players.

The point of stating this is, don’t expect to run before we can walk .

UTB

But a three or four year contract is paid over three or four years, and even transfer fees are paid over three or four years as well nowadays, Bournemouth bought Brooks on the never never. It's the reason why parachute payments were introduced.
We should be expecting £40 - £50 million on fees and a £40 million wage bill first season to give us any chance at all of surviving.

Our last season in the Prem was worth £30 million to us apparently and we spent £11 million on fees (again apparently), and our first season back in the Championship it was often reported that we had a £16 million wage bill

 

[Lawrence]

It’s difficult to work out what premier teams spend on players, Looking at established lower teams like Burnley 30mil, Newcastle 50mil, Palace 11mil, Bournemouth 62mil, Watford 27mil etc. these clubs did buy and sell during the season, So I think for our first season 30-40mil would probably be acceptable, could keep us up and not bankrupt the club! But it’s depending on how well CW spends the money.

Wolves 80mil finished 8th

Relegated
Huddersfield 34mil
Fulham 100mil
Cardiff 46mil

 

[Pinchy]

But a three or four year contract is paid over three or four years, and even transfer fees are paid over three or four years as well nowadays, Bournemouth bought Brooks on the never never. It's the reason why parachute payments were introduced.
We should be expecting £40 - £50 million on fees and a £40 million wage bill first season to give us any chance at all of surviving.

Well that’s not going to happen, nor should it. We need to be bold, not crazy. As I’ve said elsewhere, this instalment thing is cumulative. You can’t discount the previous years’ spending or the following seasons.

Your final paragraph is melodramatic to say the least. There is no cut-off point at which we have ‘any chance at all’. That’s not capable of quantification.

It’s simply unreasonable and unrealistic to expect our club to spend virtually the whole of our first season Premier windfall at the first time of asking. In fact it’s highly reckless and potentially seriously damaging. Are you starting a contest for the daftest expectations? There will be competition, I must warn you...

Thank Pele our club isn’t run by daft fans. They’d last half a day before begging for mercy as the money runs out.

 

[itsinyerblood]

I think it's irresponsible to rely on Wilder's managerial ability once again.

We've done it for three seasons in a row now and yes, it's worked so far.

However, he will want a buffer amount to cushion his inexperiences in recruiting Premier League quality.

Serious question Barney, if we're not to rely on Wilder and what you refer to as "his inexperiences in recruiting Premier Legue quality", what is your answer to this supposed problem? Wilder has, on more than one occasion, made it clear that he will not accept interference in his role as manager, hence his refusal to work alongside the Prince's nominee for Director of Football. I'm curious to know what your solution is to this apparently intractable problem. and why, exactly, you think it's 'irresponsible' to rely on a man whose judgement has been more or less spot on where recruitment's concerned.

 

[Pinchy]

Serious question Barney, if we're not to rely on Wilder and what you refer to as "his inexperiences in recruiting Premier Legue quality", what is your answer to this supposed problem? Wilder has, on more than one occasion, made it clear that he will not accept interference in his role as manager, hence his refusal to work alongside the Prince's nominee for Director of Football. I'm curious to know what your solution is to this apparently intractable problem. and why, exactly, you think it's 'irresponsible' to rely on a man whose judgement has been more or less spot on where recruitment's concerned.

I imagine Tufty would be rather upset to hear we were not relying on his managerial ability given that’s his function within the club. What next, abandon One-Knill’s coaching and give somebody else a go at Mitchell’s recruitment role?

Dem Bladesfans, the things they say...

 

[Charlieblade]

On a positive note, money is already being spent on essential improvements. You would assume that Wilder’s sensible improvements to facilities are also going ahead. Bonus payments and wage inflation are unavoidable.

Anything else is a bonus.

See that? Easy innit.

 

[itsinyerblood]

I imagine Tufty would be rather upset to hear we were not relying on his managerial ability given that’s his function within the club. What next, abandon One-Knill’s coaching and give somebody else a go at Mitchell’s recruitment role?

Dem Bladesfans, the things they say...

Couldn't agree more.

The very thought is preposterous. If you employ a specialist allow them to get on with the job without interference. wilder has earnt the right to manage as he see's fit, unless, of course, there are dissenting voices who consider Wilder to be incapable of managing this club with the highest levels of competency.

Strewth, it fair takes your breath away!

 

[Houston_Blade]

Should be £40m. In reality we’ll spend around £20m on permanent signings and loan the rest. Wage bill will increase by 2.5 times over current.

 

[bromtom]

This doesn't have anything to do with our budget but serves to illustrate how stupid transfer fees are nowadays.

I've just been watching some football videos on YouTube, one popped up on Michael Owen, in 2004 when Owen was 25, Real Madrid bought him from Liverpool for £8m, 8 million quid for a 25 year old Michael Owen.

Southampton would charge us more than that for Shane Long and he's awful.

Crazy.

 

[tonytonycurrie]

https://www.s24su.com/forum/index.php?threads/wages.72380/

 

[Darthblade]

Read everything and nothing into Kev's words. None of which is to suggest he's misleading us, but get a grip if you find you're being swayed by what he says.

The owners will have done the sums, they'll know what's at stake and whether it's worth supporting the manager. Dependent on their intentions it may well be like a weather vane, so don't hold your breath, it'll all become clear soon enough.

That is the worry ……. "the owners will have done their sums"

What those two know about football you could put on the back of a postage stamp in marker pen!!

I trust Tufty …… I don't trust those two

UTB & FTP

 

[Pinchy]

That is the worry ……. "the owners will have done their sums"

What those two know about football you could put on the back of a postage stamp in marker pen!!

UTB & FTP

...and still have room for the collective wisdom of our daft fans.

 

[I should coco]

I've just been watching some football videos on YouTube, one popped up on Michael Owen, in 2004 when Owen was 25, Real Madrid bought him from Liverpool for £8m, 8 million quid for a 25 year old Michael Owen.

By 2005 the price for Newcastle had gone up to £17m and he came with the special 'added injuries' bonus package. You can plot the increase in transfer fees against the increase in the tv money. What you get in one hand, is taken away in the other.

People seem to think that the £100m will set us up for years to come but it will only buy two or three half decent players, pay their wages for 4 years and the increases necessary to keep the rest of the squad happy.

 

[Barney]

Serious question Barney, if we're not to rely on Wilder and what you refer to as "his inexperiences in recruiting Premier Legue quality", what is your answer to this supposed problem? Wilder has, on more than one occasion, made it clear that he will not accept interference in his role as manager, hence his refusal to work alongside the Prince's nominee for Director of Football. I'm curious to know what your solution is to this apparently intractable problem. and why, exactly, you think it's 'irresponsible' to rely on a man whose judgement has been more or less spot on where recruitment's concerned.

As stated I think he will want a buffer amount to be on the safe side.

In other words, he will want a top 17 budget rather than a relegation one with the task of over achieving and staying up.

He's a wonderful manager. He more than deserves the budget to match the position we're going for and not be burdened with constantly having to overachieve.

 

[Ricky]

I'd love to see an example list of the minimum of 8 signings we need from the £10-20m bunch....

 

[Charlieblade]

I’m assuming there is a brake on any spending pending the outcome of two events.
A. The play offs
B. The court case

That explain why substantive rumour has been so quiet up to now.