He he he.
Transfer Fees as ratio to Turnover
- Thread starter Scholesy
- Start date
He he he.
Youve had a mare here, you cannot talk about "Maybe's" in finance, therefore Di Maria had (IIRC) a five year deal so 12.5m per year AND PP would have a 5 year deal @ 20m per year.
You cannot presume that they will sign a new deal.
I don't know if transfer fee/turnover is the best way to look at the relative cost of a transfer. You would want to look at total amount of the transfer cost/money available for transfers
First of all the transfer fee is only a part of the transfer cost, you also have to account for the wages the player will earn.
Turnover isn't equal to the money availble for transfers. You have to account for operational and financial costs before you can spend money on transfers.
For example our turnover when we bought Rooney was £250m but our financial costs at the time were also much bigger then they are now because we have refinanced and paid off alot of our debts. So not only do we have a higher turnover but our financing costs right now are also much lower so the total amount of money available will be actually bigger than the difference in turnover which allows us to spend more on Pogba.
And that is just one aspect of it. You also need to account for the fact the Pogba transfer will have a much bigger impact on our future revenue because he is alot more marketable than Rooney was at the time of his transfer and his predicted immediate impact on the pitch is also bigger than Rooney was 10 years ago and the impact is also more needed in our current situation compared to our situation 10 years ago.
-We have much more money available to spend on Pogba now than we had to spend on Rooney 10 years ago
-Pogba is more marketable now than Rooney was 10 years ago
-The football impact of Pogba will be bigger and more needed than the impact Rooney had 10 years ago
First of all the transfer fee is only a part of the transfer cost, you also have to account for the wages the player will earn.
Turnover isn't equal to the money availble for transfers. You have to account for operational and financial costs before you can spend money on transfers.
For example our turnover when we bought Rooney was £250m but our financial costs at the time were also much bigger then they are now because we have refinanced and paid off alot of our debts. So not only do we have a higher turnover but our financing costs right now are also much lower so the total amount of money available will be actually bigger than the difference in turnover which allows us to spend more on Pogba.
And that is just one aspect of it. You also need to account for the fact the Pogba transfer will have a much bigger impact on our future revenue because he is alot more marketable than Rooney was at the time of his transfer and his predicted immediate impact on the pitch is also bigger than Rooney was 10 years ago and the impact is also more needed in our current situation compared to our situation 10 years ago.
-We have much more money available to spend on Pogba now than we had to spend on Rooney 10 years ago
-Pogba is more marketable now than Rooney was 10 years ago
-The football impact of Pogba will be bigger and more needed than the impact Rooney had 10 years ago
Last edited:
Ofcourse you can but it just makes the calculations alot more difficult because you have to account for possible scenarios and make a predication on the likelihood of each scenario. There are for example very complex calculation models to account for uncertainty in valuing options that are frequently used in important financial decisions.
Paying more for a younger player makes alot more sense because:
- He can be contracted to the club for a longer period if you get him to sign a new deal
- He will have a higher resale value if you end up selling him
- But there is indeed always a scenario where the player would leave the club for free after his contract, but it is not the only scenario and it is also not the most likley scenario so you should not account for it like that in your investment calculation.
To be fair he was right about Modric.
These are the actual figures. So, basically there is a 3.6% difference between Rooney and Pogba. I don't see how that's a problem. Also, there are two signings with even higher figures.
How could there only be a marginal increase of 22 million between 2008 and 2009 when Ronaldo was sold for 80m?
United's wages as a percentage of turnover.
Season - revenue - wage bill - %
89/90 - £11.59m - £3.9m - 33.6%
90/91 - £17.82m - £5.21m - 29.2%
91/92 - £20.15m - £6.15m - 30.5%
92/93 - £25.18m - £7.59m - 30.1%
93/94 - £43.8m - £11.1m - 25.3%
94/95 - £60.6m - £13m - 21.4%
95/96 - £53.3m - £13.3m - 25%
96/97 - £87.9m - £22.5m - 25.6%
97/98 - £87.9m - £26.9m - 30.6%
98/99 - £111m - £37m - 33.3%
99/00 - £116m - £44.8m - 38.6%
00/01 - £129.6m - £50m - 38.5%
01/02 - £146.1 - £70.8m - 48.5%
02/03 - £173m - £79.5m - 46%
03/04 - £169.1m - £76.9m - 45.5%
04/05 - £157.1m - £77m - 49%
05/06 - £165.4m - £85.4m - 51.5%
06/07 - £210m - £91.6m - 44%
07/08 - £256m - £120.6m - 47%
08/09 - £278.5m - £123m - 44%
09/10 - £286.4m - £131.7m - 46%
10/11 - £331.5m - £153m - 46%
11/12 - £320.3m - £161.7m - 50.5%
12/13 - £363.1m - £180.5m - 50%
13/14 - £433.2m - £214.8m - 50%
14/15 - £395.2m - £203m - 51%
Season - revenue - wage bill - %
89/90 - £11.59m - £3.9m - 33.6%
90/91 - £17.82m - £5.21m - 29.2%
91/92 - £20.15m - £6.15m - 30.5%
92/93 - £25.18m - £7.59m - 30.1%
93/94 - £43.8m - £11.1m - 25.3%
94/95 - £60.6m - £13m - 21.4%
95/96 - £53.3m - £13.3m - 25%
96/97 - £87.9m - £22.5m - 25.6%
97/98 - £87.9m - £26.9m - 30.6%
98/99 - £111m - £37m - 33.3%
99/00 - £116m - £44.8m - 38.6%
00/01 - £129.6m - £50m - 38.5%
01/02 - £146.1 - £70.8m - 48.5%
02/03 - £173m - £79.5m - 46%
03/04 - £169.1m - £76.9m - 45.5%
04/05 - £157.1m - £77m - 49%
05/06 - £165.4m - £85.4m - 51.5%
06/07 - £210m - £91.6m - 44%
07/08 - £256m - £120.6m - 47%
08/09 - £278.5m - £123m - 44%
09/10 - £286.4m - £131.7m - 46%
10/11 - £331.5m - £153m - 46%
11/12 - £320.3m - £161.7m - 50.5%
12/13 - £363.1m - £180.5m - 50%
13/14 - £433.2m - £214.8m - 50%
14/15 - £395.2m - £203m - 51%
Last edited:
I showed this table to a friend last week and the first thing he asked was whether the numbers had been ajusted for inflation because of how money loses value of time. I'd like to hear from a caf economy expert if possible.
Rawknomics!
To be fair, Scholesy was right about Modric.
I agree. Modric.
Delfounso
No they haven't. It's a comparison of ratio's so there's no point in adjusting for inflation.
So, Pogba and Scholsey are making their return
Who else? Brad?
Who else? Brad?
Barry Bannan
Thanks
These are the actual figures. So, basically there is a 3.6% difference between Rooney and Pogba. I don't see how that's a problem. Also, there are two signings with even higher figures.
Game. Set. Match.
Now to set-up a Kickstarter for OP to buy a calculator.
Since we won't pay 100mil all at once comparing it to one years turnover is a bit pointless.
To be fair he was right about Modric.
That is great and all, but what is Sergio Canales Nathan Delfouneso up to these days?
These are the actual figures. So, basically there is a 3.6% difference between Rooney and Pogba. I don't see how that's a problem. Also, there are two signings with even higher figures.
Dont let Carmine see this!
It's a poor comparison to make purely because you should be looking at World record transfers and comparing the ratios to the turnover of clubs ie Real Madrid in 2001 signed Zidane for a world record fee of £50million.
In that year their turnover was 138million EUROS.
We all know what happened to Real, financially after the galactico era. That was a dream team.
So perhaps people running the club feel we should be buying the best to not only win major trophies but obviously also for marketing the club ie attracting sponsors.
In that year their turnover was 138million EUROS.
We all know what happened to Real, financially after the galactico era. That was a dream team.
So perhaps people running the club feel we should be buying the best to not only win major trophies but obviously also for marketing the club ie attracting sponsors.
You should give Essien his calculator back you tight bastard.
So the problem is only spending 20-25% on one player ?
If its spent on multiple average players,we are fine ? Just like pool has been doing ?
If its spent on multiple average players,we are fine ? Just like pool has been doing ?
These are the actual figures. So, basically there is a 3.6% difference between Rooney and Pogba. I don't see how that's a problem. Also, there are two signings with even higher figures.
Great list, that.
I had thought that we were long overdue a 'marquee'/big money signing being successful. However, looking at the top 10 names on that list; I would probably only class Veron and Di Maria as being flops (that's me not wanting to re-open the Berbatov debate!)
Our turnover was £169M. We bought Rooney before the buyout - the only "finance costs" were the dividends we paid to shareholders.
Manchester United is a huge commercial success as a football club. If anyone can afford to overpay to get exactly the player we want, it's us. It evenmakes good business sense -- with the commercial engine revving up, a league win could give us another jump, as our success would finally sync up with our exposure.
What? That's literally the dumbest post I've ever read . How if he wins us the league crazy amount of times over could it be the wrong transfer ?
It's a joke, referencing a post from Scholesy years ago.
It's a reference to one of Scholesy's (thread starter) more memorable posts a few years back in which he was complaining about the starting line-up. When we won he kept on insisting that Fergie had gotten it wrong, and claimed that even if we had won 100-0 it would still have been the wrong line-up
It's a reference to one of Scholesy's (thread starter) more memorable posts a few years back in which he was complaining about the starting line-up. When we won he kept on insisting that Fergie had gotten it wrong, and claimed that even if we had won 100-0 it would still have been the wrong line-up
Damn I'm on a roll with foot in mouth posts
No worries!Damn I'm on a roll with foot in mouth posts
Two thumbs up for patience
No worries!
It was O'shea vs Rafael in a match against City (probably the same match when Rooney scored that beauty). Was still a lurker back then but can't ever forget it.It's a reference to one of Scholesy's (thread starter) more memorable posts a few years back in which he was complaining about the starting line-up. When we won he kept on insisting that Fergie had gotten it wrong, and claimed that even if we had won 100-0 it would still have been the wrong line-up
Do you have any link related to Pobga marketing power? To be honest I don't think he has that much marketing power he just signed a deal with Adidas worth 44 million for 10 years and his salary at Juventus is 4.5 m euros, if he was a marketing power then Real Madrid would get him.
You are right..No, he is hot. Really?!?!
He is just the topic everybody has been talking about for the whole summer, all the media are talking about him and are following him, and is in every newspaper. We are ready to pay 100mln. quid for him but he has no marketing power...Come on....