Jump to content

Fonte Transfer Rumours

Master Bates

By Master Bates,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Redslo

Redslo

Posted
Posted
Huh, so it sounds like we could boost wages by the £6/7m allowed in the rules by default, plus the extra £5m a year Virgin are paying above Veho (assuming the £1m/£6m figure is correct) plus anything up to an extra £8m from Under Armor (depending on how our self-produced shirt income was accounted for and whether the £8m per year figure reported is accurate), plus whatever proportion of our player sales income needed to be allocated to inbound salaries. On that basis, unless we agreed to pay JWP £200k a week in his new deal, it doesn't sound like wages should be a huge constraint this year.

 

You are probably correct, but we did give lots of new contracts so they will eat into what is available. However, I an confident the club has this well under control. Even the posters who think the club is crazy to sell good players every year will probably agree that the club understands the salary cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redslo

Redslo

Posted
Posted
P

 

Surely if last years wage bill of 70% of turnover included exceptional payments to get rid of Osvaldo ...then we can now pay 7m on top of that? so we have the money we paid to get rid of Osvaldo plus an extra 7m to play with? (Plus those leaving etc) so with regard to FFP it can't be much of a restriction especially as we already had the 9th highest wage bill.

 

This illustrates one of the problems we have in analyzing this. We simply do not have the information we need. Even the published financials are only of a little help because the wage limit applies only to players whereas the published information includes all staff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sandwichsaint

sandwichsaint

Posted
Posted
This illustrates one of the problems we have in analyzing this. We simply do not have the information we need. Even the published financials are only of a little help because the wage limit applies only to players whereas the published information includes all staff.

 

And therein lies the rub, what is the split between 'players' wages and those of all 'all staff'? Top players earn stupid money, pretty mediocre players earn fairly silly money. Do SFC pay their cooks, launderers, receptionists and car park attendants 20k/40k/60k a week? Unlikely, they probably earn much the same as those professions in the real world. How many 'staff' do SFC actually, directly employ? Presumably catering/stewarding etc is contracted out. How many non-players at the club take a decent/big wedge, probably under 10, probably fewer than five.

 

I would hazard as an educated guess that player wages equal over 90% of the SFC wage bill.

 

I would suggest that over 90% of our wage bill goes on players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Redslo

Redslo

Posted
Posted
And therein lies the rub, what is the split between 'players' wages and those of all 'all staff'? Top players earn stupid money, pretty mediocre players earn fairly silly money. Do SFC pay their cooks, launderers, receptionists and car park attendants 20k/40k/60k a week? Unlikely, they probably earn much the same as those professions in the real world. How many 'staff' do SFC actually, directly employ? Presumably catering/stewarding etc is contracted out. How many non-players at the club take a decent/big wedge, probably under 10, probably fewer than five.

 

I would hazard as an educated guess that player wages equal over 90% of the SFC wage bill.

 

I would suggest that over 90% of our wage bill goes on players.

 

I think you would be wrong. Coaching, training, medical, and scouting staff wages are staff, not player, wages for FFP purposes. Also, the various quoted figures for what players are getting are not reliable not just because they are not reliable, but because they are under inclusive. Money paid to for social security and other pension costs counts, but may not be included with the weekly figures we see quoted. The same applies to bonuses, appearance fees, loyalty fees, and whatever. Someone who has been on the inside of a Premier League club and was familiar with all this stuff probably knows what is what here and I would be thrilled to hear from such a person, but baring that we just can't calculate the effective salary cap limits on Southampton this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sandwichsaint

sandwichsaint

Posted
Posted
I think you would be wrong. Coaching, training, medical, and scouting staff wages are staff, not player, wages for FFP purposes. Also, the various quoted figures for what players are getting are not reliable not just because they are not reliable, but because they are under inclusive. Money paid to for social security and other pension costs counts, but may not be included with the weekly figures we see quoted. The same applies to bonuses, appearance fees, loyalty fees, and whatever. Someone who has been on the inside of a Premier League club and was familiar with all this stuff probably knows what is what here and I would be thrilled to hear from such a person, but baring that we just can't calculate the effective salary cap limits on Southampton this season.

 

Agree that we have to consider coaching/training/medical costs but they are still not excessive if you consider the ratio of number of players to number of 'staff' and the fact that 'players' earn disproportionally (far) more than 'staff'. Your argument that the 'headline' figure we see for players' wages doesn't include NI/pensions/bonuses etc distorts the wages more in the favour of the players, more against the club. I've given you a speculative (and completely made up) figure for players' wages (90% of wage costs); you're happy to pontificate on this sort of thing, what do you think they are? (I 'know' you don't 'know', just give me your best-guess).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_clark

Saint_clark

Posted
Posted
Agree that we have to consider coaching/training/medical costs but they are still not excessive if you consider the ratio of number of players to number of 'staff' and the fact that 'players' earn disproportionally (far) more than 'staff'. Your argument that the 'headline' figure we see for players' wages doesn't include NI/pensions/bonuses etc distorts the wages more in the favour of the players, more against the club. I've given you a speculative (and completely made up) figure for players' wages (90% of wage costs); you're happy to pontificate on this sort of thing, what do you think they are? (I 'know' you don't 'know', just give me your best-guess).

 

Way, too (much) 'punctuation'; try to (maybe) use, #less?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted (edited)
Why is FFP dominating a Fonte thread? Seems random what is being discussed on any given thread nowadays.

Anyone see Mrs Brown's Boys was voted best sitcom of the century?

 

Which century was that, the 13th?

 

There's a summary of all the clubs and their financial situations here:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/may/25/premier-league-finances-club-by-club-breakdown-david-conn

(These figures are to May/June 2015)

 

Saints paid 70% of their turnover as wages. TV money is the most significant income.

Edited by Whitey Grandad
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tajjuk

tajjuk

Posted
Posted
From Sam Wallace's piece on Arsenal's hunt for a centre-back:

 

 

 

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/08/23/man-utd-tell-phil-jones-his-future-is-at-old-trafford-as-arsenal/

 

 

No contact bit is interesting, doesn't just say from Arsenal.

 

More and more this just sounds a bit like agent games. Wonder what an 'exceptional bid' would be for Fonte, probably a lot of if West Brom want £25 million for Jonny Evans.

 

Seems to be a distinct lack of centre-back talent out there, which highlights what a good job the club did in finding VVD, plus Alderveld and Lovren before him.

 

Hope the scouts are working hard on a Fonte replacement anyway for long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted

I read in various places (I guess because they all copy each other) that Mourinho is happy to wait until the last day of the window before buying him!!!

 

That makes absolutely no sense what so ever. Presumably the people who wrote that are presuming he will be able to pick him up on the cheap, which just won't be the case as we don't want to sell. In fact it would be the opposite and his price would go up. Then the other point it raises is that Mourinho can just buy whoever he wants and the club who holds the player's registration just has to bend over and take it.

 

FWIW, I would have thought that Koné would have been a better option, although ACN cover that Fonte would offer would be an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tajjuk

tajjuk

Posted
Posted
Then the other point it raises is that Mourinho can just buy whoever he wants and the club who holds the player's registration just has to bend over and take it.

 

 

 

Both Mourinho and Man Utd are arrogant enough to think that would be the case.

 

All the big clubs think like that, they just expect clubs like us, Everton, WBA etc. to just be happy they throw some money our way.

 

Arsenal clearly weren't expecting WBA to say £25 million for Evans, and both City and Chelsea clearly thought they could get Stones for way less.

 

it's also a great example why the window should shut before we play any games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hughieslastminutegoal

hughieslastminutegoal

Posted
Posted
Both Mourinho and Man Utd are arrogant enough to think that would be the case.

 

All the big clubs think like that, they just expect clubs like us, Everton, WBA etc. to just be happy they throw some money our way.

 

Arsenal clearly weren't expecting WBA to say £25 million for Evans, and both City and Chelsea clearly thought they could get Stones for way less.

 

it's also a great example why the window should shut before we play any games.

 

it's also a great example why the window should be done away with altogether. It is driving up wages and fees unnecessarily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ErwinK1961

ErwinK1961

Posted
Posted

On the BBC website - 'Jones still in Mourinho's plans'

 

Phil Jones has been told he still has a future at Manchester United. Jones has not even made the bench in Jose Mourinho’s first two Premier League games as United boss.

 

Stoke assistant manager Mark Bowen has said the Potters are interested in signing the defender, who has 20 England caps. But the defender has been assured by Mourinho he is part of his Old Trafford plans and Jones has no wish to leave.

 

The 24-year-old, who joined United from Blackburn for £17m in 2011, signed a new contract last year that runs to 2019, with the option of a further season.

 

 

If that's the case, surely they don't need Fonte.... Blind, Bailly, Smalling, Jones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marino

Marino

Posted
Posted

The Times ran a piece this morning headlined 'Top ten transfer targets remaining in this window'.

 

First up : Fonte - the Times commenting '....Soton have grown used to losing their best players but may have contributed

to their captain wanting to leave by offering him only a small increase in wages, allowing other clubs to sense his dissatisfaction

at the proposal.'

Likelihood of move : 9/10.

 

 

Then comes JayRod, the Times commenting '...the forward is keen to move on loan to a mid-table team where he can play regularly.

WBA are seen as a more attractive option than Hull who are also interested.'

Likelihood of move : 10/10

 

Others include the usual suspects...Bony/Berahino/Sissoko/Remy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alpine_saint

alpine_saint

Posted
Posted (edited)
For the record Fonte is going trust me ☺

 

F**k off back to the Liverpool sites.

 

Its obvious hes going; hes done absolutely no PR since returning from vacation, and the club have issued their " We're optimistic ...." crap.

 

We dont need you telling us

Edited by alpine_saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites
angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted
Can't be bothered to read back, but why the vitriol towards THEVMAN and who is he?

 

He was someone who thought he was important in life because he hung on to the coat tails of a football player.

 

As an aside, I am quite pleased that Nivea Boy has found favour with Klopp, and seems to be doing well. Just wish he would shave as the celeb bum fluff really doesn't suit him. Bit like Bale and his stupid little bun he has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_Ash

Saint_Ash

Posted
Posted
He was someone who thought he was important in life because he hung on to the coat tails of a football player.

 

As an aside, I am quite pleased that Nivea Boy has found favour with Klopp, and seems to be doing well. Just wish he would shave as the celeb bum fluff really doesn't suit him. Bit like Bale and his stupid little bun he has.

 

With Bale it's to cover a big bald spot. Strange but true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Donatello

Donatello

Posted
Posted (edited)
To be fair i really thought some of you boys had a sense of humour but it's obviously seriously lost on some��

 

To be fair, you did come back and gloat at a sour time, so *if* it was a joke/humour, it's easy to understand why so many missed it. Tarnished your own rep a bit (which would've been perfectly intact if you didn't).

 

Edit: Oh, on second reading, I think you meant the Fonte comment was a joke, and in your defence that is pretty obvious. Ultimately, people are reacting to how you conducted yourself previously.

Edited by Donatello
Link to comment
Share on other sites
farawaysaint

farawaysaint

Posted
Posted
To be fair i really thought some of you boys had a sense of humour but it's obviously seriously lost on some��

 

You came back and gloated when we lost to Pool and promptly shut up when we beat them. Shocker you are not popular really.

 

Besides you only ever knew about team news I don't think you ever broke a transfer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...