19 Dec 2017 02:12:26
Ed002 Genuine question so hope you have some info
From the outside looking in it appears to the layman that Spanish clubs in the top echelon seem to have a lot of funding for transfers, mostly it seems when it comes to trying to purchase high level players, im sure Couthino, De Gea, Hazard etc have all been looked at in recent times as it seems common knowledge that these lads are much sought after,
Id like to know what their wage structure is in general compared to The Premier league? We sought of know that Man city can pay top wages but what comparison is there on that score with the Spanish league?
And as im an LFC fan is it such a huge difference when it comes to what LFC can pay or say Spurs compared to such as Man City/ Utd?
Im not bothered to be complaining Im just interested in the difference in what clubs can offer a player and what clubs have pulling power when compared to others.
Also my sons a massive Chelsea fan, as it seems you probably are, what's your assessment so far? My lads none too happy with the old loan system and isn't the biggest Courtois fan this season!
A very merry xmas to all the eds and to all the regular posters too, its a minefield of opinions some days but in all fairness in between ups and downs its such a good website and i personally check in everyday, top lads and lasses everywhere YNWA.

{Ed002's Note - Real Madrid and Barcelona have the highest wage bill of football clubs world-wide. After that come PSG and then Manchester United. They can do this because they are two of the three highest revenue earning clubs - with Manchester United. Additionally they, particularly Real Madrid, manage their spending on players well - bringing in significant income from sales. Both have manageable debt - compared say to Manchester United who still have significant debt that needs servicing. Additionally, both sides top the sponsorship leagues ahead of Manchester United and Chelsea and they are second and fifth placed in terms of CL income over the past five years (behind Juventus). LFC are toward the bottom end of the top 10 overall because they have not had sustained Champions League income - Chelsea are fourth in the lis of CL income and Liverpool are way, way down. In terms of annual sponsorship Chelsea are again fourth and Liverpool seventh at a little over half what Chelsea has and a third of what Barcelona has. Liverpool has a 7% debt right now (that is 7% of the total value of the club) whist Chelsea are debt free. This is not an insignificant amount of debt that Liverpool has but when compared to Inter's 37%, Roma's 31% and Milan's 73% it is not a major concern. Spurs carry 17% of debt right now and Manchester United 24% - so when all of that is taken in to account Liverpool are in reasonable financial shape - but they cannot run wild with the spending. Liverpool's income has been boosted by the sale of players such as Suarez and Sterling and will be going forward will be again with the sale of Coutinho and, at some point, Salah. Putting aside the two major Spanish sides, the rest of the Spanish clubs have suffered with the economy and only Atletico are in the top 20 income wise. In Italy the game is debt ridden and needs to address that - Juventus is by far and away in best shape - in fact very similar to Liverpool. In terms of wages paid in the Premier League the top five are Mancheser Unted, Manchster City, Chesea, Arsenal and then Livepool.

As for the loan system, Chelsea has a business model where players are loaned out for experience - some come through to the first team (Courtois, Christensen) and some have demands that are to rich for the club (Solanke), some move on to get frrst team football on a regular basis (Chalobah, Ake) and some fall by the way side as they don't cut at the level Chelsea want. It works.

Thanks for the question and have a good holiday period.}


1.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 11:37:50
Great question OP and an equally great, insightful answer. Thank you ED02.


2.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 11:56:05
Nice reply Ed 2 interesting read.


3.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 12:09:28
That’s what makes this site so good.

Great question and thanks to ed002 for the detailed reply.

{Ed002's Note - You are welcome.}


4.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 13:11:58
ED if you don't mind, how does man city fare on this list?

I see they are second in the wage bill, which is surprising as I thought they will be topping that list.

{Ed002's Note - Manchester City are assessed to be the fifth most valuable overall, in terms of sponsorship they are 8th - just behind Liverpool, and in terms of the 5 year Champions League income they are 7th beind Juve, RM, Bayern Munich, Chelsea, Barcelona and PSG (in order 1 - 6). They carry debt of 5% and pay the second highest wages in England (fourth worldwide). Their commercial income is skewed somewhat and eventually that will have to be resolved - attempts have been made to deal with it under FFP.}


5.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 13:16:51
Just to build on the Chelsea loan system point, did anyone see Terry discussing Salah (and by extension De Bruyne) last night? It was quite an interesting perspective on how it works for Chelsea from a player on the ground level.


6.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 13:33:19
Thank you Ed2. Great information. Hope you and yours have a great Christmas!

{Ed002's Note - You are welcome - thanks.}


7.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 13:57:47
Salah? Have I missed something.


8.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 13:48:30
Thank you ed! very informative. I was wondering about their income and ffp compliance. I figured they are set up in a similar way to PSG!

{Ed002's Note - Manchester City (a) have a larger income than most, and (b) whilst working within the rules are making use of some pretty extreme sponsorship that comes via their owner's business interests. So the figures are skewed.

This is seen as an issue by UEFA and the reason there have been efforts over the past four years or so to agree a sponsorship cap. UEFA are happy for those "elite" European clubs that meet (now twice or three times a year) to come up with a proposal, but so far they have failed to agree a figure. UEFA are aware that taking the matter to the European Club Association will not help them. Eventually they will come up with a cap themselves and that will be it. A similar issue is being discussed about capping TV and media income for FFP. With a UEFA senior official moved on it might be easier to push something through as the resistance was related to the three clubs that would be most impacted by a change include Manchester City and two clubs that play in the French league.

Effectively the cap would say something like, "regardless of the amount of sponsorship a club obtains, only the first €115M will be allowable for the purposes of the FFP calculation". The same could be done with the media income - obviously that would hit the English sides and a few others only. It is contraversial but there is a swell of effort from other sides to make it happen. One side who were leading the push pulled out of the group of "elite" sides earlier this year so it will take others to pick up the ball on that one. But it is fair to say that mainland European sides do not see it as fair that the English sides can benefit from media income and would like a more level playing field.}


9.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 14:40:33
What I fail to understand in your answer ed is the fact that you talk about Chelsea’s loan system and say it works yet when Liverpool do the same thing with the likes of Luis Alberto, Markovic and the like we are ruining people’s careers. It would seem to me that you are showing a massive biase towards Chelsea who in my view pick players up and drop them like they are nothing.

{Ed002's Note - where is Markovic playing right now? How much did Liverpool pay for him? How much have Liverpool continued to pay a third party for him until recently? There is no bias, Chelsea have a well documented and understood system that sees the progress of loan players monitored and if they make the cut then they are integrated in to the squad. Liverpool don’t - it is a shambles that often sees no contact with the players whilst on loan. Grujic will get a loan to avoid him walking away for nothing. Markovic will leave or will walk away for nothing two weeks after the end of the season. And this is in addition to players who are already unsettled at the club. Klopp interfered with Ward’s loan leaving him in limbo now. You have no idea about what happens at Chelsea and spend too much of your time trying to pick holes in what I say. Clearly your knowledge of the game is about zip.}


10.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 15:27:55
Thank you ed!

{Ed002's Note - You are welcome.}


11.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 15:29:25
In fairness our loan set up is a shambles unfortunately.


12.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 15:47:07
I can see why teams in Europe would want to level the playing field in terms of tv money, if it was an even keel there's no way I'd be plying my trade in the north of England when I could be cutting around in Spain, Italy or France.


13.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 16:12:39
Ed you can’t come onto a Liverpool page spouting your usual tripe about how great Chelsea are at everything and how Liverpool are lower than a snakes belly then get annoyed when Liverpool fans pull you up on it. I don’t pretend to know more than you, I don’t. I just think your views are massively skewed because you are a Chelsea fan and hate Liverpool and everything about Liverpool.
It’s ok though I haven’t got many nice things to say about Chelsea either. To me they are everything that’s wrong with football today. Each to their own though.

{Ed002's Note - I was asked by a poster whose sons are Chelsea supporters. I am not in any way biased. Chelsea's policy and execution of a loan system to gain experience for players works extremely well - there is no one denyiong that except you. Liverpool do not have such a policy. You raised Markovic not me - it is a prime example of how bad Liverpool are at dealing with loans. You raised Luis Alberton - he was sent on loan after the embarrassment of a court case and not to gain experience. And do you think Klopp did Danny Ward a favour by cancelling his loan and then not giving hjim a chance? Now he is third choice and has no future at Liverpool. I certainly don't "hate" Liverpool and have only ever written anything that is truthful. I have no idea what you know about Chelsea but it seems very little - the same is true of your knowledge of Liverpool. You are trolling posts again and making an embarrassment of yourself - it makes a lot more sense for the other posters if you don't visit the site any more. You are not interested in what is going on. You just want to wreck the posts of others.}


14.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 16:13:16
Thanks for that Ed02, a very insightful answer and much appreciated, have a great xmas, cheers!

{Ed002's Note - You are welcome.}


15.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 16:20:47
our loan system and Chelsea can't even be compared. If we had De bryne in our youth academy and with the loan system we have we would have screwd his career completly.


16.) 19 Dec 2017
19 Dec 2017 18:53:00
Spot on about Ward Ed. Imagine if Chelsea had recalled Courtois 6 months into his loan deal to watch Cech between the sticks where would he be now. I believe he was at Athletico 2 seasons before he was deemed ready and now he's in the top 3 in the league IMO.

{Ed002's Note - Right.}


17.) 21 Dec 2017
21 Dec 2017 09:08:30
Thank you Ed002.