cibaman said:In the longer term City's wage bill will depend on how much the owners can increase the sustainable turnover of the club.
Our turnover in 2007/08 was about £80m. If the club can win titles, achieve regular CL status, market the club outside the UK, increase the home support, generate improved genuine sponsorship etc it will still be an achievement if the owners can double our turnover. Chelse managed to increase their turnover to around £200m but they probably have a more affluent fan base than City and started from a higher base.
If we can achieve a sustainable turnover of say £175m we could probably afford a wage bill of around £90-£100m once Mansoor decides that he has invested enough in the club.
danburge82 said:I think there should be a structure in place at City that states that players can only earn, let's say, a maximum of £75-100k/wk on an initial contract. Maybe £50-75k/wk if you're U21. Then as time progresses you may be awarded improved contracts based on games played, performances, targets met, trophies won, influence in the team etc.
Rather than us spend a fortune of £17.5million on somebody worth £5m who spent 80% of the whole season injured. Or if a certain player doesn't fit in, doesn't like the club, the city, the country, and we want to sell him a year later - we're not going to be stuck with them because no other team can meet their wages, therefore nobody will buy him.
nashark said:Manchester United
nashark said:Manchester United