Who didn't want to hurl themselves in the river when he starts drumming in Gone in 60 seconds, or worse when they were going to make him Superman. Nicholas Cage that is, not Dev.
Dr Congo, note that I made it very clear above (on more than one occasion) that I saw no reason why the switch of ownership should directly lead to the substantial drop in attendance that took place when the trust took over. I am not sure I understand your point.
its not massively relevant now, but to be honest there were some mistakes made at the time with messaging that I think put off the more casual supporter. On that instance bad management rather than bad ownership structure.
Dr Congo, note that I made it very clear above (on more than one occasion) that I saw no reason why the switch of ownership should directly lead to the substantial drop in attendance that took place when the trust took over. I am not sure I understand your point.
its not massively relevant now, but to be honest there were some mistakes made at the time with messaging that I think put off the more casual supporter. On that instance bad management rather than bad ownership structure.
Interested to see the figures. Somebody mentioned earlier about higher than expected bonuses last season. As I mentioned previously in a former employment I had access to a number of players salary details and the striking thing across all of them was that the balance of basic pay to total pay was basic made up roughly one third and bonuses the remaining two thirds.
At the start of last season, a reasonable expectation may have been that we would likely be in or around the play off positions and the bonuses would have been negotiated on that basis I.e. the club would have ‘broken even’ if around 70 points had been gained. As it happens we finished with something like 85 points. That equates to 5 extra win bonuses.
Now going back to my original point re the split of basic pay to bonuses let’s assume the basic wage bill for a group of 22/23 players is approximately £50,000 a week if the team wins that wage bill with bonuses would swell to approximately £150,000 a week a difference obviously of £100,000 multiply that by 5 unbudgeted for win bonuses and suddenly a black hole of £500,000 appears.
Of course, I have no evidence that football contracts still work on a heavily incentivised basis but given Steve Craig’s grumble a few years back concerning unpaid bonuses I assume that they still do.
Then throw in some less than functioning at full efficiency areas of the club such as hospitality and food and beverage and a loss of this magnitude becomes understandable.
@Twizz said: @Dickie, can the win bonus really be anything like as big as you are speculating at >£4000 per man per win? That would seem astonishing if true.
Well look that is just my experience of footballers contracts from years gone by. It may well all have changed and of course I am just speculating on what the collective group salary may be but yes if a player was on £2000 a week basic then win bonuses would push that figure up to around £6000 a week based on my experience.
@twizz The Cost of Sales probably includes the team costs which have risen by £400,000 in the year. Admin costs are down this probably due to less spend on the Stadium. Without fuller detail we can only assume.
I would expect cost of sales to be all things bought and resold - so food, drink, event catering supplies, match day programs etc. Either way my point was with a wages bill of £2.45M we can't be paying out £6K per player per win, as suggested by Dickie.
24 wins x 17 in match day squad x £6K = £2.448M. And that's without paying manager and back room staff, front office staff or basic player salary for the drawn games, lost games or cup matches.
I agree with the idea of win bonus, clean sheet bonus etc and I'm sure it's part of the package at WWFC. It's the suggestion that £6k per win per player is being paid that is the problem. It just doesn't add up.
As we are all aware anything posted, even once on the internet, has the ability to be later quoted as known fact.
£2k a week basic, for the top boys, I can believe as Hayes and Thompson were rumoured to be on not far less a few years back. But trebling it? And weekly? That'd be barmy!
I could only imagine any trebling occurs for particularly low earners.
From the Adams days, Andy Bell, years later quoted his wages. Something like £250 basic, and could get up to about £650-700 if he was playing, he scored and we won.
I also remember hearing Steven Craig was on a shockingly low wage, something like £250-300, so in his case, you perhaps could see the same situation as above, perhaps trebling it if he was scoring, and the team was winning.
The numbers here are very wrong. Our average wage bill per player is approx £900 per week rising to £1200 maximum in a full bonus season . Yes these numbers are variable but those are the basic ballpark numbers .
Win bonuses are not paid on every win , we structure bonuses based on them triggering when the team reached an agreed number of league points.
@DevC Since WWFC became Trust owned the attendance declared is the actual attendance. Prior to this attendance declared was actually the number of tickets sold (including STs and freebies). Hope that helps.
I am not prepared to reveal confidential salary details-I’ll leave that to others-but what I can say is that the suggestion that any player at Wycombe could earn £6k a week is massively wide of the mark.
@Midlander said: @DevC Since WWFC became Trust owned the attendance declared is the actual attendance. Prior to this attendance declared was actually the number of tickets sold (including STs and freebies). Hope that helps.
That policy changed back to the “include all tickets sold to make it appear better “ system of old, not sure exactly when but at least 1.5 years ago.
@glasshalffull said:
I am not prepared to reveal confidential salary details-I’ll leave that to others-but what I can say is that the suggestion that any player at Wycombe could earn £6k a week is massively wide of the mark.
@NorsQuarters said:
Well done @Dickie, you managed to get some real discussion of ballpark wage figures by going out on a limb with your estimates.
Either way, we have to beat Lu'on in the cup!
I am glad someone recognised them as ball park figures which I thought I had clearly explained at the time. Unfortunately other more vocal figures on this forum decided to interpret my musings as ‘facts’ and chose the route of deriding these figures rather than the more salient point I was hoping I was making that unbudgeted for bonuses due to overachieving on the pitch were a contributory factor to the loss figure posted.
The more important issue I have in the subsequent conversations is that an individual, who as far as I am aware is purely a supporter like me, has access to presumably confidential salary information and bonus details.
Now, it may well be that, like me previously, they are in an employment which gives them access to such information, but if instead someone at the club is providing them with such information then this is somewhat concerning.
We haven’t got adequate resources to carry on operational existence for the forseeable future- maybe only until....tomorrow-for all we know-if we did-why do we seek investment-who plugs the newly announced loss-so many questions?
@blucket said:
We haven’t got adequate resources to carry on operational existence for the forseeable future- maybe only until....tomorrow-for all we know-if we did-why do we seek investment-who plugs the newly announced loss-so many questions?
So many questions , some are even sensible ones and many of those have been discussed at length or put to people who might knowno in order that they might answer them.
Comments
Who didn't want to hurl themselves in the river when he starts drumming in Gone in 60 seconds, or worse when they were going to make him Superman. Nicholas Cage that is, not Dev.
Dr Congo, note that I made it very clear above (on more than one occasion) that I saw no reason why the switch of ownership should directly lead to the substantial drop in attendance that took place when the trust took over. I am not sure I understand your point.
its not massively relevant now, but to be honest there were some mistakes made at the time with messaging that I think put off the more casual supporter. On that instance bad management rather than bad ownership structure.
this is utter nonsense
Wherever did I get the idea that you claimed they were related? It’s a mystery that may never be solved.
Interested to see the figures. Somebody mentioned earlier about higher than expected bonuses last season. As I mentioned previously in a former employment I had access to a number of players salary details and the striking thing across all of them was that the balance of basic pay to total pay was basic made up roughly one third and bonuses the remaining two thirds.
At the start of last season, a reasonable expectation may have been that we would likely be in or around the play off positions and the bonuses would have been negotiated on that basis I.e. the club would have ‘broken even’ if around 70 points had been gained. As it happens we finished with something like 85 points. That equates to 5 extra win bonuses.
Now going back to my original point re the split of basic pay to bonuses let’s assume the basic wage bill for a group of 22/23 players is approximately £50,000 a week if the team wins that wage bill with bonuses would swell to approximately £150,000 a week a difference obviously of £100,000 multiply that by 5 unbudgeted for win bonuses and suddenly a black hole of £500,000 appears.
Of course, I have no evidence that football contracts still work on a heavily incentivised basis but given Steve Craig’s grumble a few years back concerning unpaid bonuses I assume that they still do.
Then throw in some less than functioning at full efficiency areas of the club such as hospitality and food and beverage and a loss of this magnitude becomes understandable.
@Dickie, can the win bonus really be anything like as big as you are speculating at >£4000 per man per win? That would seem astonishing if true.
Well look that is just my experience of footballers contracts from years gone by. It may well all have changed and of course I am just speculating on what the collective group salary may be but yes if a player was on £2000 a week basic then win bonuses would push that figure up to around £6000 a week based on my experience.
I can't imagine it's made much economic sense to sign Sam Saunders and then not play him
Maybe we get a cut of the swimwear sales.
@Dickie, Except the Football Club Admin Expenses are only £2.45M, which I presume includes player wages and bonuses(?). The maths just doesn't add up.
@twizz The Cost of Sales probably includes the team costs which have risen by £400,000 in the year. Admin costs are down this probably due to less spend on the Stadium. Without fuller detail we can only assume.
My maths never added up...that's why I am a five day week drone and go to football to forget about it.
I would expect cost of sales to be all things bought and resold - so food, drink, event catering supplies, match day programs etc. Either way my point was with a wages bill of £2.45M we can't be paying out £6K per player per win, as suggested by Dickie.
24 wins x 17 in match day squad x £6K = £2.448M. And that's without paying manager and back room staff, front office staff or basic player salary for the drawn games, lost games or cup matches.
I agree with the idea of win bonus, clean sheet bonus etc and I'm sure it's part of the package at WWFC. It's the suggestion that £6k per win per player is being paid that is the problem. It just doesn't add up.
As we are all aware anything posted, even once on the internet, has the ability to be later quoted as known fact.
£6k a week is seriously mad talk.
£2k a week basic, for the top boys, I can believe as Hayes and Thompson were rumoured to be on not far less a few years back. But trebling it? And weekly? That'd be barmy!
I could only imagine any trebling occurs for particularly low earners.
From the Adams days, Andy Bell, years later quoted his wages. Something like £250 basic, and could get up to about £650-700 if he was playing, he scored and we won.
I also remember hearing Steven Craig was on a shockingly low wage, something like £250-300, so in his case, you perhaps could see the same situation as above, perhaps trebling it if he was scoring, and the team was winning.
The numbers here are very wrong. Our average wage bill per player is approx £900 per week rising to £1200 maximum in a full bonus season . Yes these numbers are variable but those are the basic ballpark numbers .
Win bonuses are not paid on every win , we structure bonuses based on them triggering when the team reached an agreed number of league points.
@DevC Since WWFC became Trust owned the attendance declared is the actual attendance. Prior to this attendance declared was actually the number of tickets sold (including STs and freebies). Hope that helps.
I am not prepared to reveal confidential salary details-I’ll leave that to others-but what I can say is that the suggestion that any player at Wycombe could earn £6k a week is massively wide of the mark.
That policy changed back to the “include all tickets sold to make it appear better “ system of old, not sure exactly when but at least 1.5 years ago.
We agree on something then.
Well done @Dickie, you managed to get some real discussion of ballpark wage figures by going out on a limb with your estimates.
Either way, we have to beat Lu'on in the cup!
I am glad someone recognised them as ball park figures which I thought I had clearly explained at the time. Unfortunately other more vocal figures on this forum decided to interpret my musings as ‘facts’ and chose the route of deriding these figures rather than the more salient point I was hoping I was making that unbudgeted for bonuses due to overachieving on the pitch were a contributory factor to the loss figure posted.
The more important issue I have in the subsequent conversations is that an individual, who as far as I am aware is purely a supporter like me, has access to presumably confidential salary information and bonus details.
Now, it may well be that, like me previously, they are in an employment which gives them access to such information, but if instead someone at the club is providing them with such information then this is somewhat concerning.
We haven’t got adequate resources to carry on operational existence for the forseeable future- maybe only until....tomorrow-for all we know-if we did-why do we seek investment-who plugs the newly announced loss-so many questions?
So many questions , some are even sensible ones and many of those have been discussed at length or put to people who might knowno in order that they might answer them.
Wise words mate?