The Hootsman compares the market values of Scotland's teams

#1
Using the website Transfermarkt we break down the individual market value of the 22 teams in the top two divisions - (all values are GBP) - ranking them in order by lowest to highest. Click and scroll through the pages to discover where each clubs lie. FYI - Market value is determined by the estimated market worth of each player in every club’s squad:

Rangers - 2nd
Market Value - 40.68m

Celtic - 1st
Market Value - 82.31m

No laughing now:D:D:D:D:D:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
 

jf1960

Well-Known Member
#23
Using the website Transfermarkt we break down the individual market value of the 22 teams in the top two divisions - (all values are GBP) - ranking them in order by lowest to highest. Click and scroll through the pages to discover where each clubs lie. FYI - Market value is determined by the estimated market worth of each player in every club’s squad:

Rangers - 2nd
Market Value - 40.68m

Celtic - 1st
Market Value - 82.31m

No laughing now:D:D:D:D:D:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
That's about right I think considering Bhoy wonder is wanted by Juventus, Barcelona etc for £70m
 

Hobjo

Well-Known Member
#30
What a club pays a player is their valuation. It doesn't mean that another interested club will value them at the same.

If it had anything to do with it, we'd have gotten reasonable transfer fees for Pena and Herrera.
Yeah but by the same token you could say a market valuation also includes factors like how many years left on their contract and other add-ons and clauses.

We’re splitting hairs here really, I don’t think you can say there’s no relationship between the two, in fact finding a way to combine the two might be more meaningful overall. Certainly within a league, wage budget is a far better measurement of relative squad strength than transfer value.
 
#31
Scott Brown is on about £30k pw and is worth about tuppence ha’penny and a packet of Johnnies.

Your argument is bonkers.
Wages is part of valuation, we are looking at the squads collectively not individuals, id say that their squad right now is probably worth more than ours right now as it stands. Can we agree on that?

It wont be like that for long but if we were to win the league with an inferior squad and budget it would be amazing and would cause them to implode imo
 
#36
I'd like to see that if anyone has it handy. I could maybe believe it's total total staff wages across the entire club, but 60m just on the first team squad?
Their report actually says 'total labour costs' but they have a myriad of companies and I think Celtic plc is the one that deals with player costs. Operating expenses are listed at around £87m. Here is the quote:

Total labour costs in 2018 increased by £7.1m, from £52.2m in 2017 to £59.3m (14%), largely due to increases in the football department

If you want to read in more detail feel free. Cleanse your eyeballs afterwards though.

http://cdn.celticfc.net/assets/down...PLC_June_2018_Stock_Exchange_Announcement.pdf

It was also reported in the media as a result of Sporting Intelligence's Annual Survey:

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/3543772/celtic-double-wages-rangers-salaries-survey/
 
Last edited:
#37
Their report actually says 'total labour costs' but they have a myriad of companies and I think Celtic plc is the one that deals with player costs. Here is the quote:

Total labour costs in 2018 increased by £7.1m, from £52.2m in 2017 to £59.3m (14%), largely due to increases in the football department

If you want to read in more detail feel free. Cleanse your eyeballs afterwards though.

http://cdn.celticfc.net/assets/down...PLC_June_2018_Stock_Exchange_Announcement.pdf
Total wages across the entire club then. Could that 'total labour cost' even include money paid to contractors who had carried out work during the year? As suspected, the first team wages will be nowhere near that figure, but they want their fans to think it is.
 
#38
Total wages across the entire club then. Could that 'total labour cost' even include money paid to contractors who had carried out work during the year? As suspected, the first team wages will be nowhere near that figure, but they want their fans to think it is.
See my later link to the survey by Sporting Intelligence mate. I think you are barking up the wrong tree. This is independent research not their own propaganda.

They have another 'umbrella' company that deals with contractors and the like.

If you want to download the actual survey - which covers hundreds of teams - you can do so here:

http://www.globalsportssalaries.com/
 
#39
See my later link to the survey by Sporting Intelligence mate.

They have another 'umbrella' company that deals with contractors and the like.

If you want to download the actual survey - which covers hundreds of teams - you can do so here:

http://www.globalsportssalaries.com/
Only mention of the 60m figure is in the following quote.

“Celtic can afford a total salary bill of nearly £60m".

Again, nothing specifically saying that Celtic are paying 60m purely on first team wages.
 
#40
Using the website Transfermarkt we break down the individual market value of the 22 teams in the top two divisions - (all values are GBP) - ranking them in order by lowest to highest. Click and scroll through the pages to discover where each clubs lie. FYI - Market value is determined by the estimated market worth of each player in every club’s squad:

Rangers - 2nd
Market Value - 40.68m

Celtic - 1st
Market Value - 82.31m

No laughing now:D:D:D:D:D:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
Well they do have about 60 players
 
#41
Only mention of the 60m figure is in the following quote.

“Celtic can afford a total salary bill of nearly £60m".

Again, nothing specifically saying that Celtic are paying 60m purely on first team wages.
Took you all of 4 minutes to download and read that report.:eek: On that basis I assume you've seen it before.

They, presumably, 'lift' the figure from the accounts produced by the Auditors. If you want to believe that covers their entire operation at the DhimDome then that's fine by me. I think you're wrong. They have at least 2 companies, Celtic FC Limited and Celtic plc - the former seems to deal with the 'playing' side of things. I'm not sure why you would be upset that their salary bill is so high. Personally I think its good news because when the CL gravy train stops they are f*cked. It was a policy that failed SDM and it will fail Liewell too.

Anyway, we've strayed a long, long way from the topic of the OP.:)
 
Last edited:
#45
Of course it does, why do you think we have signed new extended contracts, including higher wages, with the likes of Morelos and Tav?
Because it increases the value of the player and how much a buying club has to pay.
What they have to pay, not what they're willing to pay. A player is only worth what someone is willing to pay.
 
#47
Using the website Transfermarkt we break down the individual market value of the 22 teams in the top two divisions - (all values are GBP) - ranking them in order by lowest to highest. Click and scroll through the pages to discover where each clubs lie. FYI - Market value is determined by the estimated market worth of each player in every club’s squad:

Rangers - 2nd
Market Value - 40.68m

Celtic - 1st
Market Value - 82.31m

No laughing now:D:D:D:D:D:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
What value for Alfie & Tavi mate??
 
#48
What they have to pay, not what they're willing to pay. A player is only worth what someone is willing to pay.
That's true, but having players tied down on longer contracts undoubtedly gives the selling club a stronger position. To get valuable players, who attract interest, tied down you have to offer them better terms ie increasing wage bill.
 
Top