Wages

[Redcliffe1990]

Our wage bill is in the lower half of the division, comparatively low compared to Villa, Stoke and those subject to the Premier League machine.

However, how do you feel when our top earners take home reportedly up to 20k a week, even after tax more in a week than many earn in a year.

Do you feel player earnings are justified as the market dictates?

Do you feel the players are representative of you and our community, despite the vast disparity in income between supporter and player, on average?

In anticipation of the description of footballers’ careers as short, yes you could argue so but today temporary, insecure work pervades and we’ve largely moved away from traditional lifelong careers across the board, rightly or wrongly.

Great to see our local academy players coming through of course, Max and Lloyd, lads we truly want to see develop and mature, while representing us. However, do you feel represented through our high earners, temporarily wearing our badge? Or does a players’ earnings create a disconnect between you and the club or player? 

While many scrape by on minimum wage and live in insecure private accommodation, high earning players, not just ours of course, earn a comfortable annual income in a matter of weeks. It is of course necessary within the context of modern football, but it does also create distance between supporter and player, in my opinion. Is there something to be done, I don’t know. How does it make you feel?

[BS4 on Tour...]

When I was growing up following the City, the players earned about double what the average Bristolian was on, that was acceptable, they all lived in semi detached houses and drove Ford Capris, they lived next door to normal, happy, proper Bristolians....they were very much still in the real world, and they gave everything they bloody well had for our club.....it’s all gone now, it will never come back, the players today will never relate to the fans they ‘claim’ to represent....we had a proper team back then, totally embedded in the community....oh well, the game has moved on....as I’m constantly told by the 1992 premier league, Sky generation, the ones who will never know the joy of supporting your local club when the players did it for you because they loved it.....

[miser]

It's obscene as most of modern life. I know of bankers living in million pound properties who contribute less to society than dustmen. Not sure how we put the genie back in the bottle. Remember when we had club houses in Whitchurch. Not sure that would be a selling point to new signings.

[Davefevs]

It’s not just footballers, I think the whole country is becoming / has become divided, and the gap between the haves and have-nots growing bigger.

I was listening to Twentyman the other week interviewing ex-City keeper Con Sullivan, and it was heart-warming.  Made me think how society has changed...for the worse imho.

[BS4 on Tour...]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

It’s not just footballers, I think the whole country is becoming / has become divided, and the gap between the haves and have-nots growing bigger.

I was listening to Twentyman the other week interviewing ex-City keeper Con Sullivan, and it was heart-warming.  Made me think how society has changed...for the worse imho.

Con was a cool name, even back then, although I’m sure he shortened it from Cornelius! And he went on to join the Gunners? Oh well...

[BRISTOL86]

It’s all relative. Their salary is dictated by their worth to the industry and we ultimately are the ones bankrolling it through Sky subscriptions and what have you. It’s not self financing. If everyone tomorrow stopped paying £40/m for sky sports it would change very quickly. 

[pongo88]

In response to the question “Is there something to be done?”, the answer is what do you want?  If the solution is a totalitarian state where wages for everything are controlled, then the answer is yes. This might seem to be a good idea, but countries that have tried to micro manage wages have tended to have caused more problems than they have solved. An alternative is for people to stop watching football on TV. It’s TV money that generates the money that pays the high wages. 

Looking at it another way, most people who go to the cinema don’t stop to complain that the Hollywood star has earned $20m for a few months work making the film. Then there’s Chris Evans who gets approx £2m for chatting on the radio and playing a few records. It may not be fair, but few things in life are. 

[Gibbs]

If our top earners are on up to 20k I'd be impressed. A complete guess but I imagine the likes of David James, Stephen Pearson, Damion Stewart, Kalifa Cisse etc were on 20-35k. 

[Eddie Hitler]

5 minutes ago, Gibbs said:

If our top earners are on up to 20k I'd be impressed. A complete guess but I imagine the likes of David James, Stephen Pearson, Damion Stewart, Kalifa Cisse etc were on 20-35k. 

From a couple of years back; Kodjia and Tomlin were on £15k per week.

[BS4 on Tour...]

5 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

From a couple of years back; Kodjia and Tomlin were on £15k per week.

......and you know that spreadsheet to be 100% accurate? How?

[Tinmans Love Child]

24 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

In response to the question “Is there something to be done?”, the answer is what do you want?  If the solution is a totalitarian state where wages for everything are controlled, then the answer is yes. This might seem to be a good idea, but countries that have tried to micro manage wages have tended to have caused more problems than they have solved. An alternative is for people to stop watching football on TV. It’s TV money that generates the money that pays the high wages. 

Looking at it another way, most people who go to the cinema don’t stop to complain that the Hollywood star has earned $20m for a few months work making the film. Then there’s Chris Evans who gets approx £2m for chatting on the radio and playing a few records. It may not be fair, but few things in life are. 

Agreed why is it only footballers who get grief for earning amazing money?  Nobody has a go at golfers, or film stars etc etc football generates huge sums of money, if the players don’t get it who should?  Granted they could def offset some of the cash to reduce ticket prices etc but whilst people still pay their cash to get in then they won’t 

 

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

......and you know that spreadsheet to be 100% accurate? How?

I will take some serious convincing that this came from inside City.  To me it’s the kind of spreadsheet I would create if I was playing footie manager and trying to work out my budget.  Was it rumoured to be a bit of shit-stirring from Wes’s old man?

[Alessandro]

34 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

It’s all relative. Their salary is dictated by their worth to the industry and we ultimately are the ones bankrolling it through Sky subscriptions and what have you. It’s not self financing. If everyone tomorrow stopped paying £40/m for sky sports it would change very quickly. 

Bingo mate - In exactly the same way - hot topic of converastion this summer on OTIB - why do we think well over 50/60% of teams in the top 2 divisions are sponsored by betting companies?

Because they are making shit tons of money out of you, you, you and you. And you.......even if you “only do the odd accumulator” 

[CyderInACan]

It’s a curious one isn’t it. I used to pay about £3 subs every week to play (or run the line!) upthe Downs for Old Cots. I obviously wasn’t much good but **** me I loved every single minute of it. That money kept the club running and in turn, I guess, kept the league going. 

As a pro footballer what are you supposed to do? The game is awash with money. It’s just a job. Take the money, wear the top, kiss the badge, say the boys done fantastic today or we go again and enjoy it while you can. 

[Prinny]

Are you in favour of the people playing the game making the money or the super rich owner making the money? Or the TV companies (also owned by the mega rich) saving money? Or advertisers?

This isn't a choice between the players getting the money or the community, it's not us or them. Want to restructure all of society so things are more fair? Then we'll talk, but in the current system out of all the people who can get the money, the players are the MOST deserving.

[wendyredredrobin]

The law of supply and demand dictates wages nowadays and the money in football has allowed wages to become inflated just like some other sports and like areas of banking, law and medicine, etc.

Maybe a teacher, nurse or a dustman have an importance to society more than a footballer, but they are paid from the public purse, i.e. taxation and taxation could be used to help to equalize things a bit, but that could drive many high earners abroad and alienate some tax payers too.

Where it goes wrong is that too many tax concessions are available to high earners and it is still perhaps too easy for high earners to arrange payments outside the UK to avoid tax altogether.

So long as the public are willing and able to pay extortionate amounts to go to concerts, football matches, cinemas, etc, then nothing will change until perhaps we have another recession (which is on our doorstep btw).

It's not only the more famous though.  Tradesmen still seem to expect between £1000 and £2000 per week and i'm not sure that can be justified either, especially as they seem to demand payment in cash most of the time so it doesn't all get to be declared to the Taxman. And has anyone looked at the cost of accountancy legal advice and private medicine lately? 

A final point is that some, having made a pile of money then disappear off to live in tax Havens.  Perhaps taxation could be levied upon them when they leave the UK.

Infortunately we have to be careful because high taxation can make living and earning in the UK and competitive and drive people abroad anyway.

 

[JamesBCFC]

1 hour ago, CyderInACan said:

It’s a curious one isn’t it. I used to pay about £3 subs every week to play (or run the line!) upthe Downs for Old Cots. I obviously wasn’t much good but **** me I loved every single minute of it. That money kept the club running and in turn, I guess, kept the league going. 

As a pro footballer what are you supposed to do? The game is awash with money. It’s just a job. Take the money, wear the top, kiss the badge, say the boys done fantastic today or we go again and enjoy it while you can. 

I remember seeing a couple of stories about top players.

One was Christian Vieri, who by his own description "wasn't even that good at football".

He wanted to play cricket, but had to settle with playing for 6 of Italy's most sucessful clubs, 1 Serie A title, 1 Intercontinaental Cup, 1 UEFA Cup Winners Cup, 1 European Super Cup, 1 Italian Super Cup and 2 Copa Italias..

 

My Dad told me of another player who had 2 contract offers as a tennager, one to play football, one to race in F1. Can't remember the name now, but a very good footballer.

[Lrrr]

29 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

I remember seeing a couple of stories about top players.

One was Christian Vieri, who by his own description "wasn't even that good at football".

He wanted to play cricket, but had to settle with playing for 6 of Italy's most sucessful clubs, 1 Serie A title, 1 Intercontinaental Cup, 1 UEFA Cup Winners Cup, 1 European Super Cup, 1 Italian Super Cup and 2 Copa Italias..

 

My Dad told me of another player who had 2 contract offers as a tennager, one to play football, one to race in F1. Can't remember the name now, but a very good footballer.

You do read quite a few stories these days that football is a job like any other to some players and just do it because they're good at it. More are seeming to lose the love of the game by the time they reach the upper end of the academy but by that point for a lot it's their primary skill set.

[Lrrr]

3 hours ago, Gibbs said:

If our top earners are on up to 20k I'd be impressed. A complete guess but I imagine the likes of David James, Stephen Pearson, Damion Stewart, Kalifa Cisse etc were on 20-35k. 

We did the reset button pretty hard when we went down. Pretty sure our L1 title season everyone brought in under Cotts won't have been on much. Then we only really brought in Kodjia when we came up so wages won't have risen too much. If we kept that sort of cap not hard to think our highest earners would be just over 20.

 

[054123]

7 hours ago, BRISTOL86 said:

It’s all relative. Their salary is dictated by their worth to the industry and we ultimately are the ones bankrolling it through Sky subscriptions and what have you. It’s not self financing. If everyone tomorrow stopped paying £40/m for sky sports it would change very quickly. 

My only challenge to this is that it is not driven by tv money.

The vast majority of professional football clubs run at a loss when trying to operate to these levels (ourselves included) there for it is not a reflection of the market or the industry.

Sadly a reflection of greed.

[054123]

7 hours ago, CyderInACan said:

It’s a curious one isn’t it. I used to pay about £3 subs every week to play (or run the line!) upthe Downs for Old Cots. I obviously wasn’t much good but **** me I loved every single minute of it. That money kept the club running and in turn, I guess, kept the league going. 

As a pro footballer what are you supposed to do? The game is awash with money. It’s just a job. Take the money, wear the top, kiss the badge, say the boys done fantastic today or we go again and enjoy it while you can. 

I don’t think the game is awash with money, hence why so many clubs run at a loss.

[Mad Cyril]

8 hours ago, Redcliffe1990 said:

Do you feel the players are representative of you and our community, despite the vast disparity in income between supporter and player, on average?

I dont go to football to see players who are representative of me.

Why would I want to pay £30 to watch a fat bald unfit pillock with two left feet and dodgy knees completely embarrass himself trying to kick a ball?

[ChippenhamRed]

8 hours ago, Eddie Hitler said:

From a couple of years back; Kodjia and Tomlin were on £15k per week.

There is absolutely no way that’s real.

And if you genuinely believe it is, then you’ll have to explain why it’s credible.

[swanker]

8 hours ago, miser said:

It's obscene as most of modern life. I know of bankers living in million pound properties who contribute less to society than dustmen. Not sure how we put the genie back in the bottle. Remember when we had club houses in Whitchurch. Not sure that would be a selling point to new signings.

And the worldwide austerity and cutbacks that effect us is the result of the banks mismanagement of loans! Bankers  are paid massive amounts of money. Work that one out?

[CyderInACan]

48 minutes ago, 054123 said:

I don’t think the game is awash with money, hence why so many clubs run at a loss.

Of course it is. It’s obscene, but it is what it is. They may run at a loss but the players are very well remunerated. 

[ChippenhamRed]

11 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Why do people have a problem with how much a footballer earns? They have worked their whole lives becoming as good as they are. And they work incredibly hard all year to stay in shape, with huge pressure to perform and win games. All those millions that go into the game, of course they're going to be on good money.

Plenty of people work very hard in many different walks of life, many of them doing something far less rewarding and enjoyable than playing football. And plenty of jobs come with “huge pressure” far more meaningful than winning or losing a football match.

If you think footballers deserve to earn more in a week than the many earn in a year, I suspect you might find yourself in a tiny minority.

To put it another way; an average Championship full back could conceivably earn twice as much in a year as a surgeon. You think that’s right?

[Eddie Hitler]

8 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

......and you know that spreadsheet to be 100% accurate? How?

 

36 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

There is absolutely no way that’s real.

And if you genuinely believe it is, then you’ll have to explain why it’s credible.

I know a lot of people have challenged that as an authentic document however it doesn't need to be an authentic document.

It ties in with what is known about the players' wages and expected appearances / loans and was not even at the time rubbished for its content but rather for its provenance.

If it was put together by somebody who follows the club closely as well as picking information from transfer market and Championship Manager then it was put together well and represents an accurate picture of the squad and their wages for 2016/17.

Which is rather the point of it.

[Super]

33 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Why do people have a problem with how much a footballer earns? They have worked their whole lives becoming as good as they are. And they work incredibly hard all year to stay in shape, with huge pressure to perform and win games. All those millions that go into the game, of course they're going to be on good money.

Maybe because of the disgraceful amount it is to watch footy these days and help pay these wages.

[ChippenhamRed]

13 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Yes I do. It's what teams are willing to pay so fair play to them.

It might be economically justifiable but it’s morally detestable.

[ChippenhamRed]

27 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

I know a lot of people have challenged that as an authentic document however it doesn't need to be an authentic document.

It ties in with what is known about the players' wages and expected appearances / loans and was not even at the time rubbished for its content but rather for its provenance.

If it was put together by somebody who follows the club closely as well as picking information from transfer market and Championship Manager then it was put together well and represents an accurate picture of the squad and their wages for 2016/17.

Which is rather the point of it.

There is no way you can say with any certainty that it represents an accurate picture of the squad and their wages. We don’t know their wages.