Thirsty Lizard 3,155 Posted January 4, 2019 Analysis of Wages and Income in the Championship Last Season. Birmingham City - OMFG! Clearly nothing at Birmingham City is in any way due to the lovely bloke Harry Redknapp who charmed the nation on that jungle thingy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thirsty Lizard 3,155 Posted January 4, 2019 (edited) Sorry - that hasn't come out as planned. Hopefully this will show it better. Put another way - Birmingham lost £746,000 per week in 2017/18. Edited January 4, 2019 by Thirsty Lizard Adding more info Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
splendidrush 700 Posted January 4, 2019 Binners aren't exactly getting value for money. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capt. Pants 4,195 Posted January 4, 2019 Who's to blame for the Huddersfield numbers? Not Webber surely. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted January 5, 2019 13 hours ago, Capt. Pants said: Who's to blame for the Huddersfield numbers? Not Webber surely. He was in charge of transfers and player contracts at Huddersfield so you could say he is to ‘blame’. But ultimately, like at Norwich, he doesn’t decide the budget and works with what he is given - Huddersfield allowed him to make that spending so he spent it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,554 Posted January 5, 2019 Are these really the figures for 2017-18? Huddersfield and Newcastle were not in the Championship last season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KeiranShikari 1,409 Posted January 5, 2019 15 hours ago, Capt. Pants said: Who's to blame for the Huddersfield numbers? Not Webber surely. I'm not going to pretend to understand all of that but you would imagine that Huddersfield's overall income would be much smaller than a majority, and Dean Hoyle's investment allowed them to extend further. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capt. Pants 4,195 Posted January 5, 2019 So to sink a ratio of almost 1:4 of wages to revenue was one hell of a gamble, that paid off. Especially as they finished 19th the previous season. Advantage of stinking rich owner I guess. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted January 5, 2019 13 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said: So to sink a ratio of almost 1:4 of wages to revenue was one hell of a gamble, that paid off. Especially as they finished 19th the previous season. Advantage of stinking rich owner I guess. 140% is a wage to revenue ration of 1.4:1 - although that is still high. I believe they added some big wages on loan only, so weren’t stuck with long term commitments but it was still a gamble financed by their owner. The lure of mega Premier League money will always lead to some teams gambling. The real worry is for those clubs who aren’t pushing for promotion but still having unsustainable wage bills. Purple: I believe this isn’t meant to be just the 2017/18 season but a collection of teams over the previous few season. Would be interesting to know the original source though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
