Wolves in for Tarkowski

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
# 1
ClaretTony
Posts: 29086
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 13358 times
Has Liked: 2564 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby ClaretTony » Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:37 pm

Wile E Coyote wrote:surely poor business to let a key player go to a rival club and then struggle to find the money to acquire a decent enough replacement.
If we need to sell at this stage, then the business side is in need of an overhaul, and quickly.


Where have you got the notion that we are letting a key player go to a rival club and struggle to acquire a decent enough replacement?
This user liked this post: randomclaret2

# 2
Royboyclaret
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 721 times
Has Liked: 265 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Royboyclaret » Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:40 pm

Wile E Coyote wrote:surely poor business to let a key player go to a rival club and then struggle to find the money to acquire a decent enough replacement.
If we need to sell at this stage, then the business side is in need of an overhaul, and quickly.


If Garlick is giving that impression then he is, as always, erring on the side of caution.

Cash in bank in the last set of accounts was £34.4m with no reason to suspect any significant drop in the meantime. So, money is available to acquire a decent enough replacement for Tarks without causing any cash-flow problem.

# 3
MDWat
Posts: 1350
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 12:42 pm
Been Liked: 429 times
Has Liked: 156 times
Location: Bradford
Contact:

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby MDWat » Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:44 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:If Garlick is giving that impression then he is, as always, erring on the side of caution.

Cash in bank in the last set of accounts was £34.4m with no reason to suspect any significant drop in the meantime. So, money is available to acquire a decent enough replacement for Tarks without causing any cash-flow problem.


And that would be the case if we paid it all up front, which we know we don’t do as we tend to pay transfer fees over 3 years.

There’s money available for transfers and we don’t need to sell to bring them in. I agree with Royboy in that I expect Tarkowski to be sold (and probably someone like Dawson to be brought in) relatively soon. In his statement, Garlick alludes to the need to invest in talent that is coming up to, or are at their peak. We need to get two or three of those this summer, to allow the model to continue a la Keane, Gray, Tarkowski (and Vokes, who clearly wasn’t bought with an expectation to make such great profit).

Should be an interesting summer, though the market has gone potty.

# 4
brexit
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:20 am
Been Liked: 94 times
Has Liked: 27 times
Location: on the gravy train in strasbourg

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby brexit » Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:55 pm

he can go
We are going three at the back next season gibo, mee and dawson
Trips is on his way back so with taylor we have 2 wing backs.
gunnarson will be joining cork and westwood in a workman like midfield
jay rod and ash will lead the line

impeccable sources barry the gawthorpe hall national trust volunteer and gary of 3 legged jack russell fame from river drive

# 5
rob63
Posts: 375
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:15 pm
Been Liked: 77 times
Has Liked: 266 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby rob63 » Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:57 pm

dsr wrote:On "Molineux Mix" they seem to think Burnley will want over £20m (I think they could be right!!! :roll: ) and that that might be more than he's worth :shock: .


There's one Wolves deluded muppet on Twitter thinks they should get him for £15! :lol:

# 6
rob63
Posts: 375
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:15 pm
Been Liked: 77 times
Has Liked: 266 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby rob63 » Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:58 pm

Sorry, s/be £15m.......not even the Wolves muppet is that deluded tbf
This user liked this post: dsr

# 7
TVC15
Posts: 5356
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2082 times
Has Liked: 334 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby TVC15 » Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:01 pm

ClaretTony wrote:If costs are amortised over the period of the contract then the accounts will surely also include part of the cost of signings from previous seasons.


Yes they do - but yet we still make great profits every year which means trading losses in anyone year are not that relevant...it’s what you do over a 4 or 5 year period that counts.
Those profits we make on Keane, Gray, Vokes, Ings, Trippier, Austin and even making a couple of million on the likes of David Jones etc help fund your future transfer fees for years.
On top of our excellent record in the transfer market you also have the consecutive years of good profits we make excluding the transfer profits.
If we spent £40m on transfer fees this summer and that cost was amortised at £10m a year over the next 4 years that would be no issue whatsoever for us based on the profits we have already generated and “banked” so to speak.
This user liked this post: Reecey1987

# 8
rob63
Posts: 375
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:15 pm
Been Liked: 77 times
Has Liked: 266 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby rob63 » Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:08 pm

MACCA wrote:I heard when he signed his new long term deal, there was a release fee included. The release fee was said to be 50m.

Not saying we'll get that, not even saying he's worth that, but if he did go I'd expect it to be for far more than 20m.

Personally I think he might go this summer, and I'd like to think for somewhere in the region of 30m


Yes, that £50m release fee has been touted, it's something the Spanish & Portuguese clubs favour & it seems to work for them, they usually get within £10m of their release fee

# 9
Grumps
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 138 times
Has Liked: 59 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Grumps » Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:08 pm

Good job we have all this betting sponsorship

# 10
rob63
Posts: 375
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:15 pm
Been Liked: 77 times
Has Liked: 266 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby rob63 » Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:13 pm

bobinho wrote:Not sure I get this `right sided - left sided` mullarkey at centre half. Well, I understand it but I don't for one minute believe it's an absolute `must have` for a decent defence. So many good teams have had two right footed centre halves but no-one bats an eyelid. Now, ones gotta be left footed, and the other right footed. Not buying it i'm afraid. Two decent left footed centre halves will do fine, and we have two.


Agree Bobinho, this argument has been posted elsewhere recently, Gibson is more than decent with his right foot, there's a difference between being left-footed & favouring your left foot

# 11
Wile E Coyote
Posts: 5791
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:22 pm
Been Liked: 1839 times
Has Liked: 1020 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Wile E Coyote » Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:42 pm

ClaretTony wrote:Where have you got the notion that we are letting a key player go to a rival club and struggle to acquire a decent enough replacement?


from trying to make sense of a potential loss of a key player, and looking at the monetary stats that other posters supplied.
I am no economist, but wolves are a rival, and maybe losing a tried and tested successful player who has proved his worth, and then having to hit and hope we can secure an equally reliable replacement based on a sale which strikes me as pointless.

# 12
COBBLE
Posts: 707
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:04 am
Been Liked: 194 times
Has Liked: 179 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby COBBLE » Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:09 am

Whether this happens or not it is what will have to happen if we want to stay in the Premier League. We do not have enough income after paying the wages to recruit and retain players. Therefore we have to keep the production line going buying at a low price and selling for a lot more, This also attracts the next younger player into the club knowing they can come in, improve and move on. Its a business.

# 13
bfcmik
Posts: 1739
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 2:03 pm
Been Liked: 478 times
Has Liked: 537 times
Location: Solihull Geriatric Centre

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby bfcmik » Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:30 am

Wile E Coyote wrote:from trying to make sense of a potential loss of a key player, and looking at the monetary stats that other posters supplied.
I am no economist, but wolves are a rival, and maybe losing a tried and tested successful player who has proved his worth, and then having to hit and hope we can secure an equally reliable replacement based on a sale which strikes me as pointless.

We have done this time and time again over the years. However galling it is to hear successive Chairmen and managers tell us we are punching way above our true weight it is, unfortunately, a fact. Unless we go down the route of finding a multi-billionaire owner we are doomed to recruit and sell again and again just to keep our noses above the water financially in this division and, to a substantial extent, in the division below.

However, I find it hard to get to anxious about players being sold. I cannot remember just how many 'vital' or 'key' players and fan favourites I have seen sold, often at the most inopportune moment (Charlie Austin anyone?), with the direst consequences being forecast by both supporters and media only to watch the team survive or even thrive once in a while.
This user liked this post: randomclaret2

# 14
fatboy47
Posts: 1598
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:58 am
Been Liked: 877 times
Has Liked: 735 times
Location: Isles of Scilly

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby fatboy47 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:17 am

I read the last 3 posts and honestly wonder if the posters hav3 been fast asleep for the last 3 years.

Have you actually seen our balance sheets recently?..and our league status.?

We're a premier league club for the last 4 years. We have made significant profits over this period, on both player sales and tv income...and have had some decent league finishes

.worry about iran...or boris..or corbyn..or single use plastics...this club is doing fine.
This user liked this post: Carnsmerry12

# 15
TVC15
Posts: 5356
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2082 times
Has Liked: 334 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby TVC15 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:45 am

Grumps wrote:Good job we have all this betting sponsorship


Why ?
Have you ever read or understood our accounts ?
If you had then you would see how little difference these make to our overall revenue or to our profit numbers.
What percentage of our revenue has it been in recent years? Less than 1% ? And the difference between a betting sponsor and a non betting sponsor would be even less relevant.

# 16
AndyClaret
Posts: 720
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:08 pm
Been Liked: 119 times
Has Liked: 467 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby AndyClaret » Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:47 am

The idea that we have to sell players is for the birds. The manager has said we don't have to.

# 17
Grumps
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 138 times
Has Liked: 59 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Grumps » Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:51 am

TVC15 wrote:Why ?
Have you ever read or understood our accounts ?
If you had then you would see how little difference these make to our overall revenue or to our profit numbers.
What percentage of our revenue has it been in recent years? Less than 1% ? And the difference between a betting sponsor and a non betting sponsor would be even less relevant.

I can assure you its not 1% plus are you aware that sky own a betting company, and advertise at grounds as part of the huge percentage of income they give us.

# 18
GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 3069
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 585 times
Has Liked: 1332 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby GodIsADeeJay81 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:03 am

ClaretTony wrote:Keane was outstanding. We got a really good fee for him at the time but prices have soared since.


I know he was outstanding, but Krbfc is adamant that Keane was and still is toss.

# 19
TVC15
Posts: 5356
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2082 times
Has Liked: 334 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby TVC15 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:20 am

Grumps wrote:I can assure you its not 1% plus are you aware that sky own a betting company, and advertise at grounds as part of the huge percentage of income they give us.


How can you assure me it’s not 1% ?
Show me the numbers in our accounts that proves it.

# 20
claretspice
Posts: 4178
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
Been Liked: 1819 times
Has Liked: 84 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby claretspice » Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:30 am

Seems to me that the technicalities of profit, cash at bank now and cashflow now and over the next couple of years are all being blurred on this thread.

I'd be flabbergasted if Dyche doesn't have a (by our standards) substantial pot of money at his disposal this summer even without any sales, given our trading history over the last 2-3 years. But it goes without saying that if Tarks leaves for the sort of fee you'd expect, that pot could become enormous by our standards, and facilitate significant upgrades to the squad in other departments even after we've replaced him.

The decision whether to sell Tarks this summer has to be taken on whether it allows us, overall, a better chance of competing at this level over the next 2-3 years. And the truth is that Tarks will leave at some point, and it will be equally hard to replace him as it is now - but his value probably won't equal the value we can get for him now.

# 21
TVC15
Posts: 5356
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2082 times
Has Liked: 334 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby TVC15 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:49 am

It’s sometimes easy to forget in all this talk of “little old Burnley”.....having one of the smallest budgets in the league, our ground etc etc that in the last 4 years we have generated total revenue of the best part of half a billion pounds.
That will be more revenue than the rest of our history put together ! And we will have also made more profit in the last few years than we have in the rest of our total history.
The money in football is crazy - I have never seen a league table of clubs by total revenue in their history but I would guess that if there was one produced every year that we will have overtaken some very big clubs during the last 4 years....in this country and in Europe.

# 22
Jakubs Tash
Posts: 815
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 177 times
Has Liked: 83 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Jakubs Tash » Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:57 am

claretspice wrote:Seems to me that the technicalities of profit, cash at bank now and cashflow now and over the next couple of years are all being blurred on this thread.

I'd be flabbergasted if Dyche doesn't have a (by our standards) substantial pot of money at his disposal this summer even without any sales, given our trading history over the last 2-3 years. But it goes without saying that if Tarks leaves for the sort of fee you'd expect, that pot could become enormous by our standards, and facilitate significant upgrades to the squad in other departments even after we've replaced him.

The decision whether to sell Tarks this summer has to be taken on whether it allows us, overall, a better chance of competing at this level over the next 2-3 years. And the truth is that Tarks will leave at some point, and it will be equally hard to replace him as it is now - but his value probably won't equal the value we can get for him now.

Agreed. It's vitally important that we maximise how much we bring in for Tarkowski so, if he goes, the timing of the sale has to be right....and that could be this summer. He might not have the same value in 12 months time, for example, due to various reasons.

I suspect that if he does go, we get at least £30m for him as things stand right now.

# 23
Lancasterclaret
Posts: 14318
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 4715 times
Has Liked: 2644 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Lancasterclaret » Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:58 am

TVC15 wrote:It’s sometimes easy to forget in all this talk of “little old Burnley”.....having one of the smallest budgets in the league, our ground etc etc that in the last 4 years we have generated total revenue of the best part of half a billion pounds.
That will be more revenue than the rest of our history put together ! And we will have also made more profit in the last few years than we have in the rest of our total history.
The money in football is crazy - I have never seen a league table of clubs by total revenue in their history but I would guess that if there was one produced every year that we will have overtaken some very big clubs during the last 4 years....in this country and in Europe.


Think it was last year when we appeared in 10th place with the biggest profits in European football (was it profit? Or was it something else?), just behind some ridiculously huge clubs

# 24
buzzclarets79
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 2:05 am
Been Liked: 44 times
Has Liked: 87 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby buzzclarets79 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:02 am

Every player will have his price, for a number of seasons now we have sold players that most of us think we can't afford/ don't want to lose, yet as a club we still grow and continue in the prem, that's no fluke.
Personally if we sold Tarks and got in Cahill on a free I think that would be a good bit of business, yes Cahill is much older and nearing the end of his career, but given that we tend to sit deep, pace isn't a worry, he could still have 2/3 good years in him, much like Duff did, Duff was immense towards the end of his time with us
The money from Tarks then spent on a good CM and a young CD job done.

Also be happy with Tarks staying, if he could just stop thinking he's Zidane with them 50 yrd long balls :D :D
This user liked this post: rob63

# 25
claretblue
Posts: 3863
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:36 pm
Been Liked: 1052 times
Has Liked: 783 times
Location: cloud 9 since Dyche appointed

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby claretblue » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:05 am

brexit wrote:impeccable sources : gary of 3 legged jack russell fame from river drive


Gary's only got 2 legs...bumped into him this morning! :?

# 26
aggi
Posts: 4118
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1021 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby aggi » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:16 am

Bear in mind that the £35m or whatever in the bank probably isn't for spending in the Premier League, it will be reserves for when we go down.

Realistically though the way we're operating we'll still make a decent profit in 18/19 even if we don't sell anyone else. (I think it will be a little lower than Royboy's estimate as I don't reckon wages will drop as much as he believes but maybe only £5-8m in it.)

# 27
randomclaret2
Posts: 3131
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
Been Liked: 1504 times
Has Liked: 2038 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby randomclaret2 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:19 am

However you slice it the club must surely currently be in its strongest financial position ever ?

# 28
Spijed
Posts: 9292
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 1676 times
Has Liked: 733 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Spijed » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:21 am

Surely we are in a position that 100% of the Tarkowski fee can go on player purchases (after any sell-on figure Brentford may receive), and not like previous seasons, where a portion would be put by for other costs.

It would be criminal if we still had to do that.

# 29
TVC15
Posts: 5356
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2082 times
Has Liked: 334 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby TVC15 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:29 am

aggi wrote:Bear in mind that the £35m or whatever in the bank probably isn't for spending in the Premier League, it will be reserves for when we go down.

Realistically though the way we're operating we'll still make a decent profit in 18/19 even if we don't sell anyone else. (I think it will be a little lower than Royboy's estimate as I don't reckon wages will drop as much as he believes but maybe only £5-8m in it.)


I thought I read something where Dyche was recently saying our true wage bill before bonuses was nearer to £60m which implied that virtually all of the extra money we got for finishing 7th is directly linked to the staff / players bonuses.

# 30
Royboyclaret
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 721 times
Has Liked: 265 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Royboyclaret » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:34 am

randomclaret2 wrote:However you slice it the club must surely currently be in its strongest financial position ever ?


Of that there is absolutely no doubt......

The £12.4m drop in broadcast income for last season will result in a Turnover for the year to Jun'19 of some £128m. That will give a total over the last 7 seasons of £535m and a cumulative profit over the same period in excess of £100m.

Heady financial times indeed for our Club but, as always, we'll continue to operate in a prudent manner. As aggi points out cash reserves will always be required for our one day inevitable return to the Championship.
This user liked this post: randomclaret2

# 31
Royboyclaret
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 721 times
Has Liked: 265 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Royboyclaret » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:35 am

TVC15 wrote:I thought I read something where Dyche was recently saying our true wage bill before bonuses was nearer to £60m which implied that virtually all of the extra money we got for finishing 7th is directly linked to the staff / players bonuses.


The basic Wage bill to Jun'18 was £58m, so slightly over £23m in merit based bonuses.

# 32
aggi
Posts: 4118
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1021 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby aggi » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:39 am

TVC15 wrote:I thought I read something where Dyche was recently saying our true wage bill before bonuses was nearer to £60m which implied that virtually all of the extra money we got for finishing 7th is directly linked to the staff / players bonuses.


It was something like that but I take that kind of thing with a pinch of salt.

# 33
arise_sir_charge
Posts: 618
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:36 am
Been Liked: 315 times
Has Liked: 4 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby arise_sir_charge » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:46 am

I think we all need to prepare ourselves for the happy clapper, summer transfer window, cake and eat it posts!

As an example, if someone says Burnley have £20m to spend, a section of our fans say "well that includes transfer fee, 4 years of wages at £x etc etc".....at the same time, it is said Brighton have £20m to spend and when they buy a player for £15m our fans say "well they had £20m to spend" and forget all the restrictions that they apply to our transfer pot!

The same will undoubtedly happen with Tarks. We will accept say £30m and I guarantee some of our fans will say "well it's not all paid upfront you know, we will likely only get £10m of it upfront"........but conveniently forget this when we bid for a player and behave like we have to BACS the full amount on day one!

People seem to find multiple excuses as to why we can't spend money but fail to apply the same rules to any of our opponents!

# 34
claretspice
Posts: 4178
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
Been Liked: 1819 times
Has Liked: 84 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby claretspice » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:56 am

TVC15 wrote:I thought I read something where Dyche was recently saying our true wage bill before bonuses was nearer to £60m which implied that virtually all of the extra money we got for finishing 7th is directly linked to the staff / players bonuses.


But even if that is true, we will have paid bonuses again this season for surviving, winning games, getting to 40 points, and ultimately finishing in the third quarter of the league. How much of the bonus point that unlocks none of us can know, but you'd imagine we worry more about incentivising things which are realistic (i.e. surviving) than those that are serious stretch targets (finishing 7th).

# 35
TVC15
Posts: 5356
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2082 times
Has Liked: 334 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby TVC15 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:13 am

claretspice wrote:But even if that is true, we will have paid bonuses again this season for surviving, winning games, getting to 40 points, and ultimately finishing in the third quarter of the league. How much of the bonus point that unlocks none of us can know, but you'd imagine we worry more about incentivising things which are realistic (i.e. surviving) than those that are serious stretch targets (finishing 7th).


You would think that would be possible but it’s no coincidence that the total wage bill was that high because we finished 7th which does suggest that a large proportion of the bonus structure is directly linked to the finishing position rather than just purely surviving. I’d be amazed if it was linked to any kind of points total - that would be a very silly thing to do !
It seems like we have a sensible bonus structure that pays out bonuses based on a 100% knowledge that we will receive the extra revenue to pay those bonuses. My guess is that we avoid like the plague individual player bonus arrangements which do not benefit the whole of the team or that could be paid out in a scenario where a player meets his targets but the overall club does not meet their targets - i’m sure many clubs are hampered by these kind of deals which they agree just to secure a player they want.

# 36
aggi
Posts: 4118
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1021 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby aggi » Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:26 am

TVC15 wrote:You would think that would be possible but it’s no coincidence that the total wage bill was that high because we finished 7th which does suggest that a large proportion of the bonus structure is directly linked to the finishing position rather than just purely surviving. I’d be amazed if it was linked to any kind of points total - that would be a very silly thing to do !
It seems like we have a sensible bonus structure that pays out bonuses based on a 100% knowledge that we will receive the extra revenue to pay those bonuses. My guess is that we avoid like the plague individual player bonus arrangements which do not benefit the whole of the team or that could be paid out in a scenario where a player meets his targets but the overall club does not meet their targets - i’m sure many clubs are hampered by these kind of deals which they agree just to secure a player they want.


I'd be very, very surprised if this is the case. I'm sure that players will have appearance bonuses and the rest, there's no way you'd be able to convince players to sign up to bonuses that are 100% dependent on the team as a whole and not an individual's performance.

# 37
TVC15
Posts: 5356
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2082 times
Has Liked: 334 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby TVC15 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:30 am

aggi wrote:It was something like that but I take that kind of thing with a pinch of salt.


Why ?
Our accounts seem to suggest that is the kind of structure we operate.
We know that we don’t pay the biggest wages and we won’t go above a certain amount for individual players.
Of course we have increased that upper limit but based on reports that we have seen it’s unlikely that any of our players are on much more than £50k a week.
So even if say that we have 20 players averaging £50k a week that’s £52m with the managers and other staffs wages to go on top.....pretty sure I have over estimated that £52m as we know we have first team players who are not on this....but a £58m total wage bill does not seem unrealistic at all to me.

# 38
TVC15
Posts: 5356
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2082 times
Has Liked: 334 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby TVC15 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:39 am

aggi wrote:I'd be very, very surprised if this is the case. I'm sure that players will have appearance bonuses and the rest, there's no way you'd be able to convince players to sign up to bonuses that are 100% dependent on the team as a whole and not an individual's performance.


Never said 100% - I said that a bulk of our bonus paid out will be linked to where we finish in the league and this is what our accounts suggest.
I’m not suggesting we don’t have the standard type bonuses like appearance money which have always existed in football - I just don’t think these are that material compared to the ones we pay out based on position finished.
The type of individual arrangements I was referring to are some of the crazy deals and incentives you see being given to “star” players at other teams which can end up crippling a team - we don’t seem to have gone down that route under Dyche though i’m guessing that a few agents and players have requested special incentives from us.

# 39
aggi
Posts: 4118
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1021 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby aggi » Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:11 pm

TVC15 wrote:Why ?
Our accounts seem to suggest that is the kind of structure we operate.
We know that we don’t pay the biggest wages and we won’t go above a certain amount for individual players.
Of course we have increased that upper limit but based on reports that we have seen it’s unlikely that any of our players are on much more than £50k a week.
So even if say that we have 20 players averaging £50k a week that’s £52m with the managers and other staffs wages to go on top.....pretty sure I have over estimated that £52m as we know we have first team players who are not on this....but a £58m total wage bill does not seem unrealistic at all to me.


Partly because I'm professionally cynical and don't believe that many football pronouncements aren't favourably spun.

For instance that £58m could well be (I'd assume it would be) before social security costs which would bump it up. Then there are going to be bonuses that we can't avoid paying, for instance it's guaranteed that at least 11 players will get an appearance bonus 38 times. That £58m could well have gone up by £10m at this point and still be the basic wages figure but we don't really know. That's why I don't put much reliance on such things, there's not enough accuracy to make real sense out of it.

# 40
TVC15
Posts: 5356
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2082 times
Has Liked: 334 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby TVC15 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:34 pm

aggi wrote:Partly because I'm professionally cynical and don't believe that many football pronouncements aren't favourably spun.

For instance that £58m could well be (I'd assume it would be) before social security costs which would bump it up. Then there are going to be bonuses that we can't avoid paying, for instance it's guaranteed that at least 11 players will get an appearance bonus 38 times. That £58m could well have gone up by £10m at this point and still be the basic wages figure but we don't really know. That's why I don't put much reliance on such things, there's not enough accuracy to make real sense out of it.


Ok you might be right - but all of what you are saying would happen whether we finish 17th or 7th. I’m pretty cynical too but everything I have seen or heard points to a big part of our bonus payments and increased wage bill relating to where we finished in the league and whilst we can argue about a few million here or there then surely this is a good thing and a good way to run the club.

# 41
Grumps
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 138 times
Has Liked: 59 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Grumps » Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:09 pm

TVC15 wrote:How can you assure me it’s not 1% ?
Show me the numbers in our accounts that proves it.

Any sensible person can see that Ladbrokes, skybet and funbet account for more than 1% of our income

# 42
TVC15
Posts: 5356
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2082 times
Has Liked: 334 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby TVC15 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:20 pm

Grumps wrote:Any sensible person can see that Ladbrokes, skybet and funbet account for more than 1% of our income


Well just show me the numbers then if that’s easy. It’s a simple question.
To be honest I was just referring to the shirt sponsorship deal - I forgot about Ladbrokes. I wasn’t aware we got anything from skybet.
Irrespective it’s still a small percentage of our total revenue which i’m sure when you post the numbers we will all be able to see.

# 43
aggi
Posts: 4118
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1021 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby aggi » Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:27 pm

TVC15 wrote:Ok you might be right - but all of what you are saying would happen whether we finish 17th or 7th. I’m pretty cynical too but everything I have seen or heard points to a big part of our bonus payments and increased wage bill relating to where we finished in the league and whilst we can argue about a few million here or there then surely this is a good thing and a good way to run the club.


Yes, I'm not disagreeing that we have a large bonus structure and it's a sensible way to run the club. It's just my suspicion that there'll be a very hefty staying up bonus and so the added bonus payments between 7th and 15th, although significant, won't be as big as some such as Royboy suspect. Ultimately though, as you say, it's a good way to run the club.

# 44
Royboyclaret
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 721 times
Has Liked: 265 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Royboyclaret » Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:49 pm

aggi wrote:Yes, I'm not disagreeing that we have a large bonus structure and it's a sensible way to run the club. It's just my suspicion that there'll be a very hefty staying up bonus and so the added bonus payments between 7th and 15th, although significant, won't be as big as some such as Royboy suspect. Ultimately though, as you say, it's a good way to run the club.


And yet the Total Wage bill to Jun'17 was £61.2m compared to £81.6m to Jun'18 when we came 7th.
This user liked this post: AndyClaret

# 45
burnley007
Posts: 768
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 8:49 am
Been Liked: 154 times
Has Liked: 257 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby burnley007 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:55 pm

So, have we actually received an offer??

# 46
Royboyclaret
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
Been Liked: 721 times
Has Liked: 265 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Royboyclaret » Fri Jun 14, 2019 2:04 pm

burnley007 wrote:So, have we actually received an offer??


I'd say the answer to that is most likely 'yes', but that initial offer from Wolves was dismissed out of hand.

# 47
claretspice
Posts: 4178
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
Been Liked: 1819 times
Has Liked: 84 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby claretspice » Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:18 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:And yet the Total Wage bill to Jun'17 was £61.2m compared to £81.6m to Jun'18 when we came 7th.


Given inevitable basic wage bill increases since June 17, doesn't that confirm the suspicion that the wage bill (including bonuses) this finished season will be somewhere between 60-80 million, and likely north of 65 million?

# 48
Grumps
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 138 times
Has Liked: 59 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Grumps » Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:20 pm

TVC15 wrote:Well just show me the numbers then if that’s easy. It’s a simple question.
To be honest I was just referring to the shirt sponsorship deal - I forgot about Ladbrokes. I wasn’t aware we got anything from skybet.
Irrespective it’s still a small percentage of our total revenue which i’m sure when you post the numbers we will all be able to see.

I never mentioned just shirt sponsorship...skybet is sky, so about 120 million? Taking away the skybet for argument, what is the percentage of income generated by replical shirt sales, or matchday catering, if you think that our second largest income stream is 1% or less. You dont need to provide accounts to show it, just have a little common sense,unless you want to be really childish

# 49
aggi
Posts: 4118
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1021 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby aggi » Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:43 pm

Royboyclaret wrote:And yet the Total Wage bill to Jun'17 was £61.2m compared to £81.6m to Jun'18 when we came 7th.


I'd guess part of the difference was that we signed more first team players than we released and some of our existing players had a boost in wages. I'm sure that the squad players we brought in like Bardsley and Walters were on a fair chunk more than ones we released like Boyd and Kightly and we probably had a few players on contracts with escalating basic salaries (e.g play 30 games+ in the prior season and your basic is bumped up).

Ultimately it's not going to make a huge difference either way. I guess we'll find out in 9.5 months.

# 50
Wokingclaret
Posts: 741
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 106 times
Has Liked: 241 times

Re: Wolves in for Tarkowski

Postby Wokingclaret » Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:49 pm

Surprised Wolves are in for him, as at the last Wolves home game, Nuno had words with Tarky for a few rough tackles on his players.
Last edited by Wokingclaret on Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.


Return to “The Bee Hole End”