Reduction In Wage Bill

[ganistuk]

There was a fella on toffeeweb who was a specialist in that area and he valued the club at between 0-50m based on whether the buyer would view the players as assets or liabilities.

That narrows it down then

 

[Moomin]

Completely false. The club can make commission from kit sales and as a result of the Nike deal have to sell far less kits before they start making said commission.

I don't know the details, but im fairly confident that the deal with Kitbag will be heavily on the cash up front to us.

Yes, no doubt some type of rebate included on volume sales but minimal value, biased towards kitbag.

I base this on how inept we are with managing our finances, and cash up front each year is what we want.

 

[Brennan]

I don't know the details, but im fairly confident that the deal with Kitbag will be heavily on the cash up front to us.

Yes, no doubt some type of rebate included on volume sales but minimal value, biased towards kitbag.

I base this on how inept we are with managing our finances, and cash up front each year is what we want.

It is Nike/LCS who receive the majority of the merchandise revenue and as a result are the ones who give us commission. That explains why even though the Kitbag deal is the same as it was before we joined Nike, the sales we now have to reach before we begin to see commission is much lower.

The Kitbag deal (as far as i can tell), involves them paying us £3m P.A for the chance to sell our stuff, they then take a cut of every sale at the point of purchase and the rest is handed back to Nike.

But even if the workings of the Kitbag deal are not as written above the fact remains, we receive commission from Nike and to say that we cannot generate extra income through increases merchandise sales is not true.

 

[steken1]

Completely false. The club can make commission from kit sales and as a result of the Nike deal have to sell far less kits before they start making said commission.

Note the word 'generate' as in go out and drum up additional income. We cannot open stores without Kitbag. We cannot introduce new products into the market without thier approval and they play a significant part in all future kit negotiations with manufacturers and suppliers.

Can you imagine a sheik or Oligarch asking an adviser "If I spend £100m on players what will come back in shirts sales" etc? and the reply being "for the next seven years, £3m P.A and some commission".

Also, the £3m figure I'm using isn't strictly true either. The deal was widely reported as worth up to £30m. I would imagine we need to be selling a good bit of merch to get our £3m before we recieve any further commission.

 

[steken1]

That narrows it down then

MickNick has posted the guys article in the Board thread. Good read.

 

[Moomin]

It is Nike/LCS who receive the majority of the merchandise revenue and as a result are the ones who give us commission. That explains why even though the Kitbag deal is the same as it was before we joined Nike, the sales we now have to reach before we begin to see commission is much lower.

The Kitbag deal (as far as i can tell), involves them paying us £3m P.A for the chance to sell our stuff, they then take a cut of every sale at the point of purchase and the rest is handed back to Nike.

But even if the workings of the Kitbag deal are not as written above theact remains, we receive commission from Nike and to say that we cannot generate extra income through increases merchandise sales is not true.

I have no idea of the deal we have in place with Kitbag, what are you basing the above on? Just for my own knowledge.

I thought Nike would not pay us a penny directly, but it would be via Kitbag.

 

[davek]

steken's takin' names and kickin' ass.

Neiler and this mike character have scarpered.

 

[dixie7]

Based on the "out before in" logic...

On an average salary of 50k a week - 50x52x9=23.4M

Out
--
Cahill
Yobo
Saha
Bilyaletdinov
Piennaar
Arteta
Yakubu
Beckford
Vaughan

Haven't included Baxter, Mustafi, Hahnemann etc.. Or any players in on loan, Donovan, Drenthe, Stracqualursi etc..

Based on an average salary of 35k a week - 35x52x3=5.5M

In
--
Naismith
Jelavic
Gibson

Factoring in contract extensions, agent fees and pay rises (Fellaini etc) the club should still be 15M a year better off. So why are so skint???

ye but we havent been getting as much money in.
no european football for 3 years l
lower league finishes cost us a couple of million from constantly getting 5/6th
contract renewals

but the main factor is pi$$ poor player sales we have been completely shafted in selling players during the past few years, we used to be the team that could sell a player for way more then he is worth

bily 5m
yak-1.5m
baxter-free
yobo likley 1-2m
cahill-1m
pienaar 2.5m and now expcted to pay 4-5m to get him back at the age of 30
even arteta at 10m when 1 season previous he was being touted at double the price

what happened to the days of getting 10m for a injured AJ, or 24m for lescott

pienaar yak cahill and yobo wont even get us 10m

selling 1 big player kept us going for 2-3 years until moyes trained someone else up those days have long gone, even the fee mooted for baines was way too low