Jump to content
IGNORED

2.3 Million To £300K


Antman

Recommended Posts

Absolutely, I think I heard yesterday we have to reduce our wage bill to a maximum of £7m, from £18m currently!

Presumably that doesn't just include the playing staff but management and coaches, too.

I'm not expecting anyone who is out of contract to stay and at least two of those we'd like to keep to move on this summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely, I think I heard yesterday we have to reduce our wage bill to a maximum of £7m, from £18m currently!

Presumably that doesn't just include the playing staff but management and coaches, too.

I'm not expecting anyone who is out of contract to stay and at least two of those we'd like to keep to move on this summer.

Our wage bill isn't currently £18m - that was the figure for the 2011/12 season. It was widely reported that McIness had halved the wage bill, so there is still work to do to get the wage bill down from £9m to £7m but thankfully most of the hard work has been done already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our wage bill isn't currently £18m - that was the figure for the 2011/12 season. It was widely reported that McIness had halved the wage bill, so there is still work to do to get the wage bill down from £9m to £7m but thankfully most of the hard work has been done already.

Thanks for the explanation.

You are right, the wage bill was £18.7 two seasons ago, however despite McInnes claiming he had halved it, I do have my doubts, we won't be paying Baldock, Davies or Cunningham low amounts, will we?

I doubt strongly that our current wage bill is less than £10m, the accounts will prove whether I'm right or wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the explanation.

You are right, the wage bill was £18.7 two seasons ago, however despite McInnes claiming he had halved it, I do have my doubts, we won't be paying Baldock, Davies or Cunningham low amounts, will we?

I doubt strongly that our current wage bill is less than £10m, the accounts will prove whether I'm right or wrong.

I can only assume the three players' mentioned contracts were bolstered by promotional or positional based bonuses to enable the club and McInnes to make that statement.

We are going in the right direction with wages but you can't help but assume that this is why we have gone in the wrong direction on the field. Hopefully it's short term pain for long term gain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the explanation.

You are right, the wage bill was £18.7 two seasons ago, however despite McInnes claiming he had halved it, I do have my doubts, we won't be paying Baldock, Davies or Cunningham low amounts, will we?

I doubt strongly that our current wage bill is less than £10m, the accounts will prove whether I'm right or wrong.

I agree. As far as I remember mcinnes said he was told he had to half it. He didn't say how long he had to do this either.

He will have reduced it a lot but the three you mention there will all be on a good whack so a lot of work still needed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. As far as I remember mcinnes said he was told he had to half it. He didn't say how long he had to do this either.

He will have reduced it a lot but the three you mention there will all be on a good whack so a lot of work still needed

Cunningham, Davies & Baldock are some of out newer signings, so all will have relegation clauses in their contracts, so will automatically be on reduced wages next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...