• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state with some features missing, normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Value For Money table


hoolio said:
One of the most pointless tables I’ve witnessed
Click to expand...
I found it quite useful to understand how much financial headroom all the teams have. Looks like we have a lot….Everton, Palace, Leeds and Brentford are surviving…everyone else is sinking.

West Ham are double fucked for years to come
 
Surely it’s all guesswork? No one has published their 2025/26 financial accounts yet, so how can they workout wages or amortisation?
 
Chelsea 74 points and champions? So no team was expected to get more than 74 points or have I misread it?

How many points has each champion got over the last 5 years. Surely more than 74 points

Statistics really are no reflection of the truth
 
Boris Bear said:
You must be logged on to see external links
Click to expand...
It says analysis based on 24/25 AR&A, but our total staff costs (including promotion bonuses) was £53m, so our wages must be made up guesswork?

I’m not denying how well we’ve done and how £ for £ we’ve exceeded expectations. It’s just I see these tables on wages and can’t understand how they get there. There was one doing the rounds in 23/24 which had our wage bill at £3m. It was used to show the KLD was tight and didn’t want promotion. When the accounts came out our bill was £30m.
 
Last edited:
CollingwoodFTM said:
It says analysis based on 24/25 AR&A, but our total staff costs (including promotion bonuses) was £53m, so our wages must be made up guesswork?

I’m not denying how well we’ve done and how £ for £ we’ve exceeded expectations. It’s just I see these tables on wages and can’t understand how they get there. There was one doing the rounds in 23/24 which had our wage bill at £3m. It was used to show the KLD was tight and didn’t want promotion. When the accounts came out our bill was £30m.
Click to expand...
They’ve uplifted it based on available data (agents fees) and assumptions
fyl2u said:
Isn't there a column or two missing to explain the order of the teams?
Click to expand...
It’s in the order of who outperformed/underperformed expectations the most
 
Last edited:
Boris Bear said:
I found it quite useful to understand how much financial headroom all the teams have. Looks like we have a lot….Everton, Palace, Leeds and Brentford are surviving…everyone else is sinking.

West Ham are double fucked for years to come
Click to expand...
Yes but Bournemouth and Brentford made money on players so it’s decieving
 
CollingwoodFTM said:
It says analysis based on 24/25 AR&A, but our total staff costs (including promotion bonuses) was £53m, so our wages must be made up guesswork?

I’m not denying how well we’ve done and how £ for £ we’ve exceeded expectations. It’s just I see these tables on wages and can’t understand how they get there. There was one doing the rounds in 23/24 which had our wage bill at £3m. It was used to show the KLD was tight and didn’t want promotion. When the accounts came out our bill was £30m.
Click to expand...
The same article on wages all the twisty arses would point towards and say our wage bill isn't up to scratch so the owners weren't investing enough in the side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top