50% wages deferred for 3 months

prenzlauerbear said:
Find it strange a guy with 80 million quid in the bank, Gerrard, couldn't take a small pay cut for a few months. Same goes for guys we've made millionaires like Tav and Morelos.

Different principles for different folk, I guess.
Click to expand...

You have to realise that there’s next to no loyalty in football.

The players you mention are not rangers fans like you or I. They are at our club purely to earn a living and earn as much as they can (in Gerrard’s case - he’s here to get himself established as a coach as a higher priority of earning a living I assume)

The well-being of the club is secondary to all these guys income. The same can be said for almost every player at every club in the world.

Only a small % is who you could say otherwise about.

Footballers have circa 15yrs to make as much as they can from the game. No club that they have little deep lying affection for will change that.
 
JohnBrownsboot said:
The players are doing absolutely nothing to help the lower paid staff. They are taking their full wages for doing nothing. They are not getting paid the full actual money for some months but still taking every penny they are entitled to.

Lower paid staff are being helped by the tax payer. Government are paying their wages.

In such difficult times highly paid footballers could have given up 3 months pay. Then the club would not have needed tax payer support. Issue for me is theseplayers have a very privileged position and could have done something positive like players at Juventus did.

Let’s be honest they wouldn’t have missed it. Many other players are helping the communities the club are part of. Alfredo seems to be the only one of ours doing much.

says a bit about the players to me.
Click to expand...

Said it already in this thread but think needs repeating here.

What costs the government more money, paying 80% of 600quid a week or losing the tax and NI on 20% of a footballers wage cut?

Cause their both coming from the same pot!! You cant moan about the club using the furlough scheme without recognising that a wage cut for the players would cost the government in less tax and NI as their gross pay would be less.

Only way that wouldnt be the case would be if the club themselves funded the non-playing staff wages through investment or the players took a NET pay wage cut which would be unprecedented.
 
Barrymoped said:
It’s clear by this thread (and many others) that we really do have a lot of whining, moaning faces buggers in our support!
Click to expand...
Far,far higher on FF than the general support. Too many on FF look forward to our next defeat so they can criticise Directors, staff and players. I can be hard being on FF sometimes.
We are using a legal Government subsidy to save money. If we were cash rich, I'd be against it, but we rely on Directors keeping us solvent.
 
If im honest any type of small cut in wages from the players wouldve have been a better option for me to show they are doing there bit to help club and other employes through this ,to defer wages for 3 months doesnt cut it for me,i speak as a season ticket holder who is about to take a massive pay cut.I just feel they could do a bit more.
 
g87 said:
Said it already in this thread but think needs repeating here.

What costs the government more money, paying 80% of 600quid a week or losing the tax and NI on 20% of a footballers wage cut?

Cause their both coming from the same pot!! You cant moan about the club using the furlough scheme without recognising that a wage cut for the players would cost the government in less tax and NI as their gross pay would be less.

Only way that wouldnt be the case would be if the club themselves funded the non-playing staff wages through investment or the players took a NET pay wage cut which would be unprecedented.
Click to expand...

this.
 
g87 said:
Said it already in this thread but think needs repeating here.

What costs the government more money, paying 80% of 600quid a week or losing the tax and NI on 20% of a footballers wage cut?

Cause their both coming from the same pot!! You cant moan about the club using the furlough scheme without recognising that a wage cut for the players would cost the government in less tax and NI as their gross pay would be less.

Only way that wouldnt be the case would be if the club themselves funded the non-playing staff wages through investment or the players took a NET pay wage cut which would be unprecedented.
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought of it that way tbh.

Setting aside the 'morals' or the 'right thing to do' I guess the question is whether, if the entire first team squad at a club - any club - take a 20% cut in salary, is the resulting loss of tax to the Exchequer (at 40%) more than the cost of the 80% salary for the non-playing staff at the same club for those 3 months? In other words, is it actually 'better' (for the Government) that the players do NOT take pay cuts? Assuming the clubs would furlough the non-playing staff anyway, of course.

I get that players could take a salary cut and the club use that to fund the entire salary of the non-playing staff rather than just topping-up the Govt 80% to ensure staff received their full pay.
 
prenzlauerbear said:
Find it strange a guy with 80 million quid in the bank, Gerrard, couldn't take a small pay cut for a few months. Same goes for guys we've made millionaires like Tav and Morelos.

Different principles for different folk, I guess.
Click to expand...

How are the German clubs handling this mate? I know they are always at the forefront of social issues etc. For example St Pauli despite being what they are I can't see their fans accepting the club being held to ransom by players etc.
 
scott-nisbet said:
Judging by this thread it's clear the club or players can't win no matter what they do.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's because it's not really helping the club financially?

Where's the money coming from in 3 months time to pay them their backdated salaries, season ticket money for next season that's where. It should have came from gate money, merchandise, matchday revenue, corporate etc from the remainder of this season.

We are losing out in millions of revenue now due to no fixtures. The least the players could do to ease the financial burden on the club is take a pay cut, not deferred.
 
LewisRob2009 said:
Maybe it's because it's not really helping the club financially?

Where's the money coming from in 3 months time to pay them their backdated salaries, season ticket money for next season that's where. It should have came from gate money, merchandise, matchday revenue, corporate etc from the remainder of this season.

We are losing out in millions of revenue now due to no fixtures. The least the players could do to ease the financial burden on the club is take a pay cut, not deferred.
Click to expand...
Its amazing how many can't (or simply refuse) to see that.

Do people honestly think the option of taking a pay cut wasn't put to them?
 
Greenisland Bear said:
As people have said, it's not the money that matters but our cash flow which at the moment is 0.

Makes absolute sense to defer the money until hopefully we have some source of income.

Every little helps.
Click to expand...
It does if that was the only option the players and management were willing to take , taking a pay cut would have been a better solution for the club . A wage deferral is a short time solution to a medium to long time problem .
 
Johnny Boyd 2 said:
It does if that was the only option the players and management were willing to take , taking a pay cut would have been a better solution for the club . A wage deferral is a short time solution to a medium to long time problem .
Click to expand...
A pay cut would be the best option to protect the club in the short-medium term
 
What happens if the Fans wanted to Defer their season tickets for 3 months due to being unable too work etc would the club be so understanding?
I can see both sides of the debate i thought at least the Manager and Assistant Manager ( both millionaires) and some of higher salary players could have taken a pay cut but they didn't that's life.
 
Agree with most that the high paid players and management team should take a pay cut. Maybe some have without it being made public.
 
Blue Willie said:
What happens if the Fans wanted to Defer their season tickets for 3 months due to being unable too work etc would the club be so understanding?
I can see both sides of the debate i thought at least the Manager and Assistant Manager ( both millionaires) and some of higher salary players could have taken a pay cut but they didn't that's life.
Click to expand...

Some of our fans pay their ST over several months, is that not the same thing?
 
Just on the tax thing, as a few people have mentioned it anyway.

Any salary over £150k is actually taxed at 46% in Scotland. Anything over about £43k is taxed at 41%.

So to use an example of someone on say £10k per week, as people seem to like that figure, that's an annual salary of £520k.

Someone on that salary would pay tax and NI of about £240k. With a take home of about £280k

To look at the top earners, if they are on £30k per week, that's an annual salary of £1.56m

Someone on that salary would pay tax and NI of about £740k. With a take home of about £820k

I am not making any comment on the morality of how much footballers are paid. The contract is put in front of them and they sign it. If clubs don't want to pay that money, and supporters don't want to finance it then they don't have to.

I just wanted to put the numbers out there as people were discussing the tax / NI anyway.
 
Teddyjohn said:
You're deluded if you think it wasn't put to them. The EPL and Serie A players have (rightfully) been hounded for refusing pay cuts. That is always going to be the first offer from clubs, the only difference with those situations is how publicly it's been played out.
Click to expand...
Maybe I am but I don't delude myself that I know
 
BlueKop said:
Pay cuts would result in less tax paid too, having had time to think about the direction the players/club are taking it is the right one.

Greegs in particular mentions the tax issue and donations to NHS

https://twitter.com/x/status/1247480939762122753
Click to expand...
One of the measures the chancellor has offered up to support business is a whole host of schemes to reduce the tax burden in the short term.

You think the money men inside Ibrox wont be considering this avenue?
 
Johnny Boyd 2 said:
Any businessman worth his salt would clearly try to get them to take a pay cut rather than a deferral , but you are correct in no one on here would be privy to that boardroom decision
Click to expand...
It would be a dereliction of duty for the people assigned to look after our clubs interests not to have proposed that.

The post with the tweet above from Jordan Campbell clearly proves that option was on the table.

It's common sense. Some folk have none of it.
 
Now and forever said:
Its amazing how many can't (or simply refuse) to see that.
Click to expand...

Maybe because it isn't true.

To suggest that taking a salary deferral is not helping the club financially is simply not the case.

The club has to pay bills as they fall due. What has happened is that

a, Those bills will now not fall due, therefore don't have to be paid at this time.

b, That will make it easier to pay the other bills which do fall due and do have to be paid just now.

They may not have done what you and others wanted but to say they have not helped the club financially is misrepresenting the picture.
 
Robert Marshall said:
Any businessmen would make sure their assets are happy
Click to expand...
Possibly but hard cash should come first , a pay cut is a relatively simple thing to implement . A wage deferral is more complicated as if the deferred wages are not paid at the specified time the club will be in breach of contract I would presume .
 
Greebo said:
Maybe because it isn't true.

To suggest that taking a salary deferral is not helping the club financially is simply not the case.

The club has to pay bills as they fall due. What has happened is that

a, Those bills will now not fall due, therefore don't have to be paid at this time.

b, That will make it easier to pay the other bills which do fall due and do have to be paid just now.

They may not have done what you and others wanted but to say they have not helped the club financially is misrepresenting the picture.
Click to expand...
You are wasting your time
 
Greebo said:
Maybe because it isn't true.

To suggest that taking a salary deferral is not helping the club financially is simply not the case.

The club has to pay bills as they fall due. What has happened is that

a, Those bills will now not fall due, therefore don't have to be paid at this time.

b, That will make it easier to pay the other bills which do fall due and do have to be paid just now.

They may not have done what you and others wanted but to say they have not helped the club financially is misrepresenting the picture.
Click to expand...
It is true.

And i've never once suggested the deferral doesn't help the club. I've stated a cut is far better for the club and that could be done in many different ways.
 
Greebo said:
Maybe because it isn't true.

To suggest that taking a salary deferral is not helping the club financially is simply not the case.

The club has to pay bills as they fall due. What has happened is that

a, Those bills will now not fall due, therefore don't have to be paid at this time.

b, That will make it easier to pay the other bills which do fall due and do have to be paid just now.

They may not have done what you and others wanted but to say they have not helped the club financially is misrepresenting the picture.
Click to expand...
You make valid points however the deferred salaries will need to be paid from future revenues from next seasons income which will have a big knock on effect in budgets, transfer budgets, capex etc.

The best solution would have been for the playing staff to take a temp pay cut, allowing the points you made above to carry on, with no future liability of deferred salary payments
 
Mview83 said:
There’s an actual hatred for a lot of our players (the ones repeatedly named) on here and on social media.

The last few years has caused a lot our support to jump the shark. Some of the comments are terrible it’s saddening.
Click to expand...

there is a massive disconnect between some of the players and the fans. For some, there’s players who simply can’t do no right.

Some of the abuse they get is appalling. Would I f*ck go to war for some of our fans.

social media doesn’t help, imo.
 
I wonder how many on here run their own business or are involved in some way like accountants or Finance Directors etc ?
I am sure these individuals will understand the problems and pressures that Companies are under.
While quite a lot seem to think it is ok to slash someone's else wages because they are well paid.
 
LewisRob2009 said:
You make valid points however the deferred salaries will need to be paid from future revenues from next seasons income which will have a big knock on effect in budgets, transfer budgets, capex etc.

The best solution would have been for the playing staff to take a temp pay cut, allowing the points you made above to carry on, with no future liability of deferred salary payments
Click to expand...
Maybe the Club is going to pay them out of the Europa League money and just need time for it to be issued. I have no idea
 
LewisRob2009 said:
You make valid points however the deferred salaries will need to be paid from future revenues from next seasons income which will have a big knock on effect in budgets, transfer budgets, capex etc.

The best solution would have been for the playing staff to take a temp pay cut, allowing the points you made above to carry on, with no future liability of deferred salary payments
Click to expand...

Where is this logic coming from

These salaries were going to have to be paid. They are still going to have to be paid. The wage bill hasn't somehow gotten bigger, it has stayed the same size.
 
Johnny Boyd 2 said:
Not at all , I merely mentioned that a pay cut is a better option for the club than deferral, if I was a player with no great connection to the club I played for I would have took a deferral over a pay cut as well
Click to expand...
Players giving up all their wages for 6 months would be great as well, never going to happen
 
Robert Marshall said:
I wonder how many on here run their own business or are involved in some way like accountants or Finance Directors etc ?
I am sure these individuals will understand the problems and pressures that Companies are under.
While quite a lot seem to think it is ok to slash someone's else wages because they are well paid.
Click to expand...
Me , I fall under one of those categories, a company needs to do what’s best to survive not what’s ok , ethical or even morally correct .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top