Konate

[bluebell]

I'm using this:

2024-2025 Liverpool Salaries and Contracts

Capology | Football Salaries & Finances

www.capology.com

Puts us at 128M.


--

AC Milan 82M.
Dortmund 94M.
Juve 96M.
Inter Milan 121M.
....

Bankrupt Barca 162M.
Chelsea 171M.
PSG 172M.
Arsenal 172M.
United 190M.
City 201M.
Bayern 224M.
Madrid 230M.

Al Ahli 146M.
Al Ittihad 172M.
Al Hilal 272M.
Al Nassr 289M.

Those are estimates based on press reports. The actual money shown to the tax man includes, pensions, bonuses, promotion work etc,,, I am sure if @Beamrider wants, he can tell you why in more detail why there is such a discrepancy

 

[Beamrider]

Can I repeat again, ignore all these sites on the internet that think they know what all the players are on. They haven't got a clue.
And even if they did, they only quote basic. They ignore on costs, they ignore agent fees, they ignore bonuses (which can almost double the very top players' wages). They probably ignore image rights too.
The only figure you can rely on is what's in the published accounts. That's what it really costs. The only distortion in the accounts (other than for City and their dodgy dealings) is that they will also include club staff's wages too (probably about 15% of the total, on average).

 

[ibromurph]

A bigger concern is we have 12 players whose contracts will end either in 26 or 27, we are creating a rod for our back. So as it stands how many of those you renew this year and how many do you sell at the most opportunist time?
12 players have their contracts ending between 26-27

Liverpool FC - Agent & contracts (Detailed view)

This is a detailed overview over the club Liverpool with current players, contract durations and their player agents.

www.transfermarkt.co.uk

Exactly. Huge fall off is coming, because we are trying to keep the wage bill down.

I guess that's the problem with giving Salah and VVD the same money. Younger players in our squad who will be expected to take on leading roles in years to come are going to expect something close to parity.

TAA being prime example. He's probably asking to close the gap in his wage between him and Moh. He will say he could get double elsewhere (as they won't have to pay a transfer fee for him), and he'd be right.

Same is going to happen to Konate, Diaz etc.

 

[ibromurph]

Can I repeat again, ignore all these sites on the internet that think they know what all the players are on. They haven't got a clue.
And even if they did, they only quote basic. They ignore on costs, they ignore agent fees, they ignore bonuses (which can almost double the very top players' wages). They probably ignore image rights too.
The only figure you can rely on is what's in the published accounts. That's what it really costs. The only distortion in the accounts (other than for City and their dodgy dealings) is that they will also include club staff's wages too (probably about 15% of the total, on average).

The graph posted above. Is that from official accounts or just another website on the internet?

 

[Beamrider]

Latest accounts figures where known:

The graph posted above. Is that from official accounts or just another website on the internet?

Kieran takes his information directly from the accounts.
EDIT - that's why his chart is only up to 2023 because those are the last figures where everyone has published.

 

[bluebell]

Exactly. Huge fall off is coming, because we are trying to keep the wage bill down.

I guess that's the problem with giving Salah and VVD the same money. Younger players in our squad who will be expected to take on leading roles in years to come are going to expect something close to parity.

TAA being prime example. He's probably asking to close the gap in his wage between him and Moh. He will say he could get double elsewhere (as they won't have to pay a transfer fee for him), and he'd be right.

Same is going to happen to Konate, Diaz etc.

Our wage bill is huge though, I think its worth asking can we go any higher if we don't sell players?
Hughes so far has not done anything to prove he can renegotiate contracts, and he has to do upto 12 for 26/27 contract ends

 

[Beamrider]

Barcelona and Madrid have both published their 2023 accounts. Their wage bills:
Barca (sports staff only, but will include some costs for basketball etc) - €556m
Madrid (includes non-sports staff) - £452.7m

Capology = CRAPology

 

[MomoWASright]

Konate isn’t signing a contract because he wants to know what he’d be earning compared to Virgil and Trent. Those aren’t signing a new contract as they want to compare their salary to Mo. Mo isn’t signing one because he wants to see what Trent and Virgil are being paid.

 

[binomial]

If only we had a sporting director whose job it is to sort this fucking shit out.

 

[MomoWASright]

They’re all being greedy cunts and won’t just sign based on their individual worth.

 

[bluebell]

They’re all being greedy cunts and won’t just sign based on their individual worth.

Then sell them, don't let them see out their contracts

 

[Beamrider]

Just a very quick overview on this.
Let's say a player signs a five-year contract on £100k a week. Papers report (assuming someone leaks the salary) £5.2m a year.
Over the life of the contract it'll probably cost double that.
Pay structure is more like £85k a week salary, £15k image rights.
The salary is subject to NIC and apprenticeship levy, so it costs £5.1m a year.
The image rights don't attract NIC (that's why clubs like them) so they cost £0.8m.
Agent fee will be something like £3m, of which £1.8m (50% +VAT) is for the player's account. In practice, the club pays this, and the tax on it so it'll cost £3.9m p.a. over the first 3 years, with £1.5m for the club's account which is subject to amortisation (not a salary cost).
Player probably has performance bonuses worth £1.5m-£2m (costing the club, an average of £2m p.a. including NIC).
So the actual annual cost is probably more like:
Years 1-3 (with agent cost) £5.1m + £0.8m + £1.3m+ £2m = £9.2m (more than twice what's reported).
Years 4-5 (no agent cost) £5.1m + £0.8m + £2m = £7.9m.
Over 5 years that's £43.4m (against £26m implied by the press reporting).
And that's assuming the player doesn't negotiate a new, improved deal.
EDIT - amended for agent fee - I put the full amount in for years 1-3, rather than 1/3 each year.

 

[ibromurph]

Just a very quick overview on this.
Let's say a player signs a five-year contract on £100k a week. Papers report (assuming someone leaks the salary) £5.2m a year.
Over the life of the contract it'll probably cost double that.
Pay structure is more like £85k a week salary, £15k image rights.
The salary is subject to NIC and apprenticeship levy, so it costs £5.1m a year.
The image rights don't attract NIC (that's why clubs like them) so they cost £0.8m.
Agent fee will be something like £3m, of which £1.8m (50% +VAT) is for the player's account. In practice, the club pays this, and the tax on it so it'll cost £3.9m p.a. over the first 3 years, with £1.5m for the club's account which is subject to amortisation (not a salary cost).
Player probably has performance bonuses worth £1.5m-£2m (costing the club, an average of £2m p.a. including NIC).
So the actual annual cost is probably more like:
Years 1-3 (with agent cost) £5.1m + £0.8m + £1.3m+ £2m = £9.2m (more than twice what's reported).
Years 4-5 (no agent cost) £5.1m + £0.8m + £2m = £7.9m.
Over 5 years that's £43.4m (against £26m implied by the press reporting).
And that's assuming the player doesn't negotiate a new, improved deal.
EDIT - amended for agent fee - I put the full amount in for years 1-3, rather than 1/3 each year.

Fair enough. Thanks for explaining this.

I do think Capology has it's uses (rough player vs player wage comparisons), but clearly it's not as detailed as official accounts which include every member of staff and other considerations.

 

[Modo]

To be fair, I looked at our Annual salary and compared it with the other top sides in Europe.

We are far behind City, United, Bayern, Real in wages.

And also a fair way behind Chelsea, Arsenal and Barca.

For a team that's done so well in recent years, we are actually underpaying our players (in comparison to rivals).

I can see why our players all want pay rises!

 

[darkstarexodus]

I was going to point out we're one of the only top clubs not running up against PSR or similar issues.

But it's much nicer to add another trophy to the cabinet.

 

[Beamrider]

Just a few other things to add re comparing salary bills to other clubs.
One factor that can make a big difference is squad size (and composition) and how loan fees are accounted for. So if you take Chelsea, for example, it's possible, given the size of their squad, that their underlying salary bill is higher than the accounts suggest if they structure their many loan deals so that they can deduct part of the loan fee from the salary costs, rather than showing it as "player trading" income (which is more normal). I don't remember the detailed rules around this, but there are ways you can get either treatment - it doesn't affect the economics, just how it's presented.
City's wage bill isn't like for like with ours because they have shifted some of their support functions out of the football club itself (as I've commented on previously in the Football Finance thread).
Performance bonuses will also give rise to increases in some years which aren't always sustained.
I always had the impression that we pay well, but some of it is incentive-based, and we don't necessarily have a full squad of first-teamers, so whilst our top players are earning top money, they are balance out with youth / reserves on lower wages, so the overall squad cost may be lower than our competitors in any given year, even thought our best players are earning similar / better wages compared to their peers elsewhere.